Everyone has a duty to do what is morally correct and to avoid actions that are morally wrong, regardless of any consequences that may arise. According to deontology, actions are right or wrong independent of consequences and the production of good or happiness (62). Deontologists reject the utilitarian claims and approach morality in a formalistic way, considering the reasoning behind actions and what reason demands (63). “Deontological tradition holds that what makes an action right is not the sum of its consequences, but the fact that it conforms to the moral law,” (63).
To be moral is to be rational and to be in accordance with what reason demands. Therefore, to understand what it means to be moral it is necessary to analyze what it means to be rational (63). Reason demands moral actions be consistent and not self-contradictory. It also demands that morality be universal, as what is rational for one person should also be rational to everyone. A last demand of reason is that it is independent of experience, or a priori (64). According to the deontological view, if a person acts in accordance with what reason demands, he or she is acting morally (63).
When evaluating the morality of an action, the Categorical Imperative, the moral code formulated by Immanuel Kant, is used. The Categorical Imperative provides criteria against which people can test the morality of their actions and principles. It consists of three conditions that must be met in order for an action to be considered moral. To be moral an action must remain consistent when universalized, have respect for rational beings as ends in themselves, and be accepted by all rational beings as moral (64). These three principles were derived from the demands of reason and ...
... middle of paper ...
...on-makers would realize that they would not want the practice implemented if they were the worker. By universalizing the rule, jobs may be created, but the underlying reason they were created is only to save money. For this reason, it is likely that the wellbeing of the workers will not take precedent.
Deontological theory states that an action is right independent of its consequences and in accordance to the moral law. The moral law is formulated from the demands of reason and therefore, any rational being acts in accordance to it. The three tests of the Categorical Imperative provide a standard when judging the morality of any action or principle. This standard ensures consistent analysis of actions and decisions made in everyday life and the business world alike.
Works Cited
DeGeorge, Richard. Business Ethics. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson, 2010. Print.
There are two basic types of ethical judgments: deontological judgements that focus on duty and obligation and eudaimonist judgements that focus on human excellence and the nature of the good life. I contend that we must carefully distinguish these two types of judgement and not try to understand one as a special case of the other. Ethical theories may be usefully divided into two main kinds, deontological or eudaimonist, on the basis of whether they take one of the other of these types of judgement as primary. A second important contention, which this paper supports but does not attempt to justify fully, is that neither type of theory trumps the other, nor should we subsume them under some more encompassing ethical synthesis.
Deontological moral theory is a Non-Consequentialist moral theory. While consequentialists believe the ends always justify the means, deontologists assert that the rightness of an action is not simply dependent on maximizing the good, if that action goes against what is considered moral. It is the inherent nature of the act alone that determines its ethical standing. For example, imagine a situation where there are four critical condition patients in a hospital who each need a different organ in order to survive. Then, a healthy man comes to the doctor’s office for a routine check-up.
German philosopher Immanuel Kant popularized the philosophy of deontology, which is described as actions that are based on obligation rather than personal gain or happiness (Rich & Butts, 2014). While developing his theory, Kant deemed two qualities that are essential for an action to be deemed an ethical. First, he believed it was never acceptable to sacrifice freedom of others to achieve a desired goal. In other words, he believed in equal respect for all humans. Each human has a right for freedom and justice, and if an action takes away the freedom of another, it is no longer ethical or morally correct. Secondly, he held that good will is most important, and that what is good is not determined by the outcome of the situation but by the action made (Johnson, 2008). In short, he simply meant that the consequences of a situation do not matter, only the intention of an action. Kant also declared that for an act to be considered morally correct, the act must be driven by duty alone. By extension, there could be no other motivation such as lo...
The deontological view would be that we should act according to a set of rules, obligations, or duties that we must fulfil, unmindful of the consequences. Kant, a popular deontological philosopher of the 19th century, wrote in his “Foundations of Metaphysics of Morals”,
Categorical imperatives are the basis of morality because they provoke pure reasons for every human beings actions. By the end of his work, one will understand Kant’s beliefs on morality, but to explain this, he goes into depth on the difference between hypothetical imperatives and Categorical Imperative, two different formulations of the Categorical Imperative, and a few examples. According to Kant, there are two types on imperatives, categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. The Categorical Imperative is based on relation and not by means, which hypothetical imperatives are based on.
Kant argued that the Categorical Imperative (CI) was the test for morally permissible actions. The CI states: I must act in such a way that I can will that my maxim should become a universal law. Maxims which fail to pass the CI do so because they lead to a contradiction or impossibility. Kant believes this imperative stems from the rationality of the will itself, and thus it is necessary regardless of the particular ends of an individual; the CI is an innate constituent of being a rational individual. As a result, failure ...
In this assignment we are to determine the moral difference between Deontological moral theory and Utilitarianism with regard to the changing of lives on a chance twist of fate with the brakes blowing out of the Trolley excursion. To turn or not to turn that is the question. Weather it is nobler of the heart and mind to follow the path of one and not the other remains a personal choice.
Normative ethics is a central part of the philosophical exploration of ethical theories and is the study of what is right and wrong (Encyclopedia Britannica). Its study is a powerful tool in determining the basis and course of moral actions as it explores moral choices rather than the language or origins of morality; for this reason it falls under the category of applied ethics. While normative ethics is a broad term that encompasses many schools of thought, it is generally thought to be broken down into three categories: the school of virtue ethics, deontology and teleology (or consequentialism). Virtue ethics is exemplified by Aristotle’s view of ethics and can be briefly summarized as pointing to moral character and virtuous living as the right thing to do. This delineates it from the deontological schools (e.g.; Kant’s Categorical Imperative) which emphasize certain rules or obligations which are necessarily moral for reasons separated from people and consequences. Consequentialism focuses on the consequences of the actions to judge moral value; utilitarianism is an example of this school and states that the right thing to do is what maximizes overall utility (Hursthouse, Rosalind, Stanford Encylopedia). These different branches are often philosophically challenged in discourse and also in real life examples of moral dilemmas. Their distinct approaches to judging morality in our world make them mutually exclusive theories. However, in application, our world presents us with moral situations that are often so convoluted that strictly adhering to one of these theories can create serious moral dilemmas. An important case is how humans should approach the problem of global climate change. Evidence points to the majority ...
What is ethics? Ethics are the philosophical principles of good verses bad moral behavior. It is a guideline to help people make decisions or make a judgment calls. There are two main types of ethical principles that will be discussed in this paper, and how they are applied to the decision making process. They are Deontological and Utilitarian. Deontological ethics are based on the righteousness or wrongness of the action-taking place. It does not base itself on the bad or good consequences that come from the action. Immanuel Kant introduced deontological ethics in the 18th century. Kant believed that every decision or action made by a person had to be evaluated by his or her moral duty. He stated that humanity shouldn’t side on its
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.
Deontology is when an action is considered morally good because of the action itself not the product of the action ("Deontological Ethics"). When applying Kant’s theory one also has to take into account the two aspects in determining what exactly the right thing in any situation is. They include universality and respect for persons. Universality states that you must “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law”(Manias). Respect for person’s states that one must “act so that you treat humanity, weather in your own person or that of another; always as an end and never as a means only” (Manias). With this being said one must apply both of these to any option they are
In Section One and Section Two of his work. Kant explores his position on his fundamental principle of morality, or his “categorical imperative”, or his idea that all actions are moral and “good” if they are performed as a duty. Such an idea is exemplified when he says, “I should never act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law” (Kant 14). The philosopher uses examples such as suicide and helping others in distress to apply his principal to possible real life situation. Kant is successful in regards to both issues. As a result, it means that categorical imperative can plausibly be understood as the fundamental principle of all morality. Kant’s reasoning for his categorical imperative is written in a way that makes the theory out to be very plausible.
Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is a good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willing, i.e., it is good of itself”. A maxim is the generalized rule that characterizes the motives for a person’s actions. For Kant, a will that is good is one that is acting by the maxim of doing the right thing because it is right thing to do. The moral worth of an action is determined by whether or not it was acted upon out of respect for the moral law, or the Categorical Imperative. Imperatives in general imply something we ought to do however there is a distinction between categorical imperatives and hypothetical imperatives. Hypothetical imperatives are obligatory so long as we desire X. If we desire X we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Moral, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viablity of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.
Deontology, on the other hand, emphasizes on the moral intuitions that guide one’s conscience for or against certain actions (Curcă, 2013). Deontologists are the opposites of utilitarians because the essential judgment of taking or not taking a course of action is observed in its strictest sense. Apart from feelings and conditions, deontologists also consider the consequences of not following religious rules and natural laws of morality to guide every course of action. Thus, deontologists value three major principles of decision-making: intrinsic morality, the duty of care, and the moral consequences of an action.
A deontologist asserts that you should do your duty even if you or others suffer as a consequence. Deontology is seen as an obligation to protect regardless of the impact it has on others, whether it be people, animals, and/or the environment and so on. “Deontology focuses on the duties and obligations one has in carrying out actions rather than on the consequences of those actions” (Mosser, 2013). According to deontologist Immanuel Kant, when doing your duty as a deontologist there are “categorical imperatives” that should be followed. In other words there are exceptions for why one is not taking action. “All imperatives command either hypothetically or categorically” (Kant,