A634.2.4.RB - Theories of Ethics

A634.2.4.RB - Theories of Ethics

Mastin (2008) defined deontology as an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness and wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions (consequentialism) or to the character and habits of the actor.  Deontology (2007) defined it as focusing on how we ought to treat each other, given that we are rational and autonomous beings. Deontology zeros in on what is right and wrong of an actual situation and what people should do; it is not focusing in on the consequences of an individual’s actions. On the other side, consequentialism is explained by LaFollette (2007) as a claim that we are morally obligated to act in ways that produce the best consequence. In addition, (2007) he explained that consequentialist must explain (a) which consequences we should count (b) how much weight or consideration we should give those that don’t count and (c) how we should use these considerations when deliberating.

             

   How can we focus solely on the right and wrong of a situation and not view the consequences but at the same time how is it possible to only focus on the consequence without understanding the right and wrong in a situation? These two theories work great except they each look at one extreme or the other because in consequentialism the results are what matters more than the outcome but with deontology the focus remains on what is right and true. It is important to focus on the consequences of an action and not adhere to our ethics and morals alone; we must give way to what we believe because the outcome may not be in our desired best interest. Alternatively, is it best to focus on what is right and true and stick with what our ethical beliefs, regardless of the outcome?

LaFollette (2007) stated that despite the advantages, deontology faces its own problems; even if most people think consequences do not count for everything, they think consequences count for something morally. Therefore, there must be a balance between the two because we cannot completely disregard there are consequences for our actions, yet at the same time only focus on what is right and true. All outcomes should be weighed when reasoning through a decision and not rely on one moral principle over there other to determine our actions. In order to balance the two when making an ethical decision, if one cannot simply decide, Calculating Consequences (2014) stated that utilitarianism is a moral principal that holds that the morally right course of action in any situation is the one that produces the greatest balance of benefits over harms for everyone affected. In addition, (2014) stated that utilitarianism offers a relatively straightforward method for deciding the morally right course of action for any particular situation we may find ourselves in.

  

               

Calculating Consequences:The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics. (2014, August 1). Retrieved June 7,  2017, from Santa Clara University website: https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ 

     ethical-decision-making/calculating-consequences-the-utilitarian-approach/ 

deontology. (2007). In J. Pike, Political philosophy A-Z. Edinburg, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/login?url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/edinburghppaz/deontology/0?institutionId=951

LaFollette, H. (2007). The Practice of Ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Mastin, L. (2008). DEONTOLOGY. Retrieved June 7, 2017, from The Basics of Philosophy website: http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_deontology.html