11 UTILITARISM TO DEONTOLOGY Sketch the main points in Smart 's version of utilitarianism. Compare with a deontological view of ethics and discuss deontological objections to utilitarianism. Number of words with footnotes: 3169 Utilitarism and deontology are two opposing ethical theories. On the one hand, J. J. C. Smart represents the utilitarian view of ethics, while on the other hand Charles Fried represents the deontological. Both point to fundamental features of their interpretations as well as some criticism of the other party. Like other ethical theories, both Smart and Fried have different views of ethics and definition of right and wrong. Utilitarianism has its basis in consequentialism, where actions are judged by the results or consequences …show more content…
The purpose of actionillitarianism is to choose the actions that lead to the best consequences, and then bring the best possible happiness. Actions that meet these requirements are interpreted as correct in actionillitarianism, and this is precisely what the action-utilitarist doctrine supports. Firstly, it is essential to understand the concept of happiness, and according to Smart, the idea of happiness satisfies and pleases. He emphasizes that a person must be satisfied with someone else 's state of mind, and then enjoy the thought of this condition. Nevertheless, it can be difficult to determine the term, as the definition of happiness varies for any person. At the very least, it requires that a person is average satisfied and indifferent in …show more content…
Unlike utilitarianism, deontology requires that you set certain boundaries to one 's actions. Fried describes that the deontological perception involves taking into account how to achieve its goals because the act has a moral significance. Unethical acts like lying, slavery, denying, and harmless innocence can not be justified, although it could lead to a lot of good in some cases. For example, a follower of deontology would not argue that a person is happy if this happiness was caused by the suffering of an innocent person. Utilitarism, on the other hand, believes it is permissible to inflict an innocent person harm if this causes more happiness as a consequence of the action. Unlike utilitarianism, the deontologist will appreciate the right actions, although this does not necessarily lead to the greatest
As a college student, I am always keeping myself updated with different new university policies because many policies are impacting my college life. Although many policies are impacting me in school, college tuition is the most important to me. The increase of college tuition at U.C and CSU will cause many problems for students. The school administration thinks that is the time to increase student tuition, but students will not benefit from the increase. Therefore, my paper will offer a utilitarian evaluation of the recent CSU and UC increase in tuition, it will show that said policy is unethical from a business and social standpoint.
The context of the paper is discussion of why utilitarianism is consistently appealing. As Foot
Deontology which is derived from the Greek words Deon (meaning obligation/duty) and logia (science/study) combined to be also known as duty or rule-based ethics or the study of duties or obligations. It is a branch of ethical theories that deals with ethics of conduct, which theories are based on the sort of actions people must perform. It is based on non-consequentialism where the ends do not justify the means and thus deontology is an approach to ethics in which a sense of duty or principle prescribes the ethical decision (Preston, 2007). Deontology affirms duties must be obeyed regardless of the consequences. The theory of Deontology has its flaws as well and this essay will present three criticisms of deontology namely that deontology relies on moral absolutes, allows acts that make the world a worse place, two permissible duties that are right can conflict with each other and will demonstrate these flaws with relevant case studies and dilemmas.
In healthcare, Utilitarian’s believe in everyone having equal healthcare, or moral proper care regardless of their issues. A few examples of this are smokers who have bad lungs because they smoke receive the same care as non-smokers with bad lungs, or who also receive the same care as a person with a genetic heart disease, or a killer receiving the same care as a non-killer. Consequentialism and non-consequentialism involve making judgements about a person’s moral actions and the reasons behind
It may be less problematic to examine an issue with utilitarianism views if it is a personal issue, like to choose a job from
Utilitarianism is the moral theory that the action that people should take it the one that provides the greatest utility. In this paper I intend to argue that utilitarianism is generally untenable because act and rule utilitarianism both have objections that prove they cannot fully provide the sure answer on how to make moral decisions and what will be the ultimate outcome. I intend to do this by defining the argument for act and rule utilitarianism, giving an example, presenting the objections to act and rule utilitarianism and proving that utilitarianism is untenable. Both act and rule utilitarianism attempt to argue that what is right or wrong can be proven by what morally increases the well being of people. Act utilitarianism argues that
Utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of an action. Deontological approaches focus on the morality of an action on an individual basis. Utilitarian approaches attempt to achieve the greatest good for the greatest amount of
Bernard Williams’ essay, A Critique of Utilitarianism, launches a rather scathing criticism of J. J. C. Smart’s, An Outline of a System of Utilitarian ethics. Even though Williams claims his essay is not a direct response to Smart’s paper, the manner in which he constantly refers to Smart’s work indicates that Smart’s version of Utilitarianism, referred to as act-Utilitarianism, is the main focus of Williams’ critique. Smart illustrates the distinction between act-Utilitarianism and rule-Utilitarianism early on in his work. He says that act-Utilitarianism is the idea that the rightness of an action depends on the total goodness of an action’s consequences.
Commonly, ethical systems are categorized into two major systems. The deontological approaches or normative ethical position which judges an action based on the adherence of the action to certain rules and the teleological approaches which judges primarily based on the consequences of an action (Hare, 1964). The Utilitarianism is assigned to the teleological approaches, as it does not evaluate an action by itself but by it’s
Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are two of the most notable philosophers in normative ethics. This branch of ethics is based on moral standards that determine what is considered morally right and wrong. This paper will focus on Immanuel Kant’s theory of deontology and J.S. Mill’s theory of utilitarianism. While Mill takes a consequentialist approach, focused on the belief that actions are right if they are for the benefit of a majority, Kant is solely concerned with the nature of duty and obligation, regardless of the outcome. This paper will also reveal that Kantian ethics, in my opinion, is a better moral law to follow compared to the utilitarian position.
Utilitarian suggest that we make our moral decisions from the position of a benevolent, disinterested spectator. Rather than thinking about
Introduction In this essay, I will be comparing Deontology to Utilitarianism. I will attempt to substantiate why I am justified in arguing that Deontology is a superior moral theory than Utilitarianism. A Discussion of the Main Elements of Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a moral theory developed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1947 – 1832) and refined by fellow countryman John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873).
Using someone as a means to an end is one the ethical complications that both theories deal very differently with. Utilitarianism states that it's fine to use someone as a means to an end if it produces the greatest good in the end, but deontological view disagrees. It states that a human being cannot be used as an end to someone else's means. For example, one man has the cure to HIV but in order to develop the cure, he must be killed in the process in order for the cure to made. A Utilitarian would choose to end the life of this man to save the life of millions affected by HIV producing the greatest amount of good.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethical theory based on the idea that an action is moral if it causes the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. The theory is concerned with predicted consequences or outcomes of a situation rather than focusing on what is done to get to the outcome. There are many forms of utilitarianism, having been introduced by Jeremy Bentham (act utilitarianism), and later being updated by scholars such as J.S. Mill (rule utilitarianism) and Peter Singer (preference utilitarianism). When referring to issues of business ethics, utilitarianism can allow companies to decide what to do in a given situation based on a simple calculation. Many people would agree that this idea of promoting goodness
The theory of deontology states we are morally obligated to act in accordance with obvious set of principles and rules regardless of results. Deontological ethics focuses on duties, and rights. The term deontological was coined by the utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who described it as “knowledge of what is right or proper” Bentham thought that deontology points in the direction of principle of utility. But contemporary philosophers use the term deontological to indicate a contrast with the utilitarian focus on the consequences of action. Instead of focusing on consequences, deontological ethics focus on duties and obligation: things we ought to do regardless of the consequences.