Compare And Contrast Utilitarian And Deontology

1364 Words6 Pages
Each of the theories from the second term of this class have pros and cons. I do not believe any theory is completely perfect, but there is one I felt that is superior. Between the utilitarian, the deontological, and the virtue theory; I believe the virtue theory has the most compelling arguments. The utilitarian and deontological theories have too many flaws they cannot argue against without changes to the theory itself. Aristotle’s virtue theory does not have many weaknesses that will cause it to fall flat. Because of this, the virtue theory remains strong against criticism, including Frankena’s. The strongest argument for utilitarianism would be in Nielsen’s reading. He provides an example of consequences with the fat man and the cave. This was the only selling point for me with utilitarianism. Killing the fat man to save six other innocent people makes sense, because you are saving more people.…show more content…
Kant, in his reading, goes into detail about the importance of intentions. But, like utilitarianism, this theory only supports one way of talking about goodness. Utilitarianism only believes in consequences, while deontology only finds prominence in intentions. Both theories lack in this debate for me, as both consequences an intentions factor into a person’s goodness. Besides deontology’s forgetfulness of consequences, it also has other unforgivable flaws. Kant clearly states that you can only be a good person if you do good actions strictly out of duty, and nothing else. I don’t believe this is true. While an individual may find happiness from doing a good action, it does not mean they are a bad person. In fact, I would say finding happiness from a good action would make a person better than if they were only doing the action for a duty and because they felt they had to. Besides this imperfection to the theory, there are many others that prove deontology is severely flawed and cannot be taken
Open Document