Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on environmental ethics
The role of justice in society
Deontology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: An essay on environmental ethics
Utilitarian faces the issue of deciding between objective or universal good. An objective good would be one that is not tied to a particular human interest. A universal good is for all people at any given moment. The theory of Utilitarianism continues with a division into two different parts the first is hedonistic utilitarianism, which is the focus on if something is universally pleasurable to determine if something is good. Then there is preference utilitarianism, which is to try and satisfy as many singular people as possible.
In today’s society utilitarianism is viewed as one of the standards ways for common thinking and common reasoning. When it applies to environmental ethics the utilitarian view requires that we take into consideration
…show more content…
Maxims, which this was called, on which we choose to act from free will. This principal in Kant’s view is the only thing that should be helping us make ethic decisions. We as people are ethical beings for the soul reason of being rational. When we act on any principal it doesn’t matter if it is a Maxims or not, people are still acting ethically.
Deontological thinking focuses on duties and rights. These duties and rights Is the primary value where we are expected to treat other people with respect, equality and freedom.
When looking at deontological ideas in the contemporary world we see that there is quite a lot of backlash claiming that there is no ethical basis to evaluate the choices made with this view. If someone wants an act badly enough they will start to justify their actions even if they aren’t truly justified but with no basis to evaluate them with there is no argument to say they are not justified. To use deontological logic for environmental politics and issues we could look at the use of constitutional protections of civil rights and civil liberties which can be viewed as respecting individual
Deontology diverges from consequentialism because deontology concentrates on the rightness or wrongness of the actions themselves instead of the consequences. There are different types of deontological theories. According to Kant, theoretical reasoning helps us discover what we should believe whereas the practical reasoning tells us what we should do. Morality falls under theoretical reasoning. In Kantian deontology, motives matter. Rather than consequences, it is the motive of an action makes that action morally right or wrong. Likewise, if an action intends to hurt someone, but eventually it benefits the other person, then it does not make that action morally right. All in all, deontology comes down to common-sense: whether it is a good action or a bad
Also, since deontologists place a high value on the individual, in some instances it is permissible not to maximize the good when it is detrimental to yourself. For example, one does not need to impoverish oneself to the point of worthlessness simply to satisfy one’s moral obligations. Deontology can be looked at as a generally flexible moral theory that allows for self-interpretation but like all others theories studied thus far, there are arguments one can make against its reasoning. One objection to deontological moral theory is that the theory yields only absolutes and cannot always justify its standpoints.
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”,
Analyzing human obligation pertaining to all that is not man made, apart from humans, we discover an assortment of concerns, some of which have been voiced by philosophers such as Tom Regan, Peter Singer and Aldo Leopold. Environmentally ethical ideals hold a broad spectrum of perspectives that, not only attempt to identify a problem, but also focus on how that problem is addressed through determining what is right and wrong.
Utilitarianism is based on equality and utility as well as on the hedonistic versions of utilitarianism that distribute pleasure and pain or happiness and unhappiness. In the paper, Savior of the Goobians, Alex Bokhart discusses how a utilitarian approach can resolve the environmental injustices that are being experienced by a particular population (Bokhart, 2016). For through a utilitarian approach one can determine the vulnerability and need elements for each different recipient of environmental justice through weighing the basic pros and cons of, in this case study, the implementation of the Keystone XL pipeline. While Utilitarianism worked well in that particular paper, Bokhart’s case study was analyzing environmental pollution on the whole human race of a planet. Therefore, the pros and cons were much simpler unlike our specialized case between two communities within the whole human race: Native Americans and other U.S. Citizens and
In order to discuss a system of environmental virtue ethics, it is necessary to determine what we mean when we speak of an ethical system. Ethics is a “branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human actions can be judged right or wrong.” (Britan...
Like Utilitarianism also has two parts to it, the two to parts to deontology are “The Good Will” and the “Categorical Imperative” are the main proponents to deontology. Immanuel Kant states that “The good will, is the only thing possessed of unconditional value: it is valuable it its own right, in every possible circumstance (The Ethical Life, Pg. 87). An example of “good will” is doing an action because you think it is good does not necessarily make that action that you are committing okay. My example would be killing somebody. If you kill someone in self-defense, you killed somebody in order to save your life that is an okay action on your part, but that still does not make killing
In my ethical perspective, the world fails to appreciate its relationship with the environment. I find myself falling into this typical category by not seen our environment for its face value. Many have analyzed a relationship as a form of the following: care, support, connection, and well-being between a person or thing. This view of a relationship does not exist when it comes to our environment. We drain it of its natural resources for personal gain and look pass the damage we cause as a result of connectivity. We cut down trees to build new shopping malls. We inject chemicals into the soil to produce larger fruits and vegetables. There new car being built yearly causing heavy air pollution. These elements are destroying our environment and why many people suffer health problems. I will not be hypocritical by listing thing that I do not overlook and conform to in a
One of the greatest strengths of deontology is that it fits with the intuitive knowledge of right and wrong that we all live by. How we determine our actions is further defined by two variations: act deontology
In light of the explanations above it can be argued that in utilitarian approach there are different kind of challenges which posing serious threat to utilitarianism in a direction to achieve greatest happiness principles. First of all, utilitarian approach is a problematic from point of demanding issue because theory contradicts within itself about motives of our actions and criterion about it. Second challenge about utilitarianism is that the approach missed the analyze the real world conditions about personal experiences and cultural differences about experience. Third questionable idea about utilitarian school is that it has consequentialist points of view which may damage societal welfare and overall happiness because of personal expediency issue.
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 the 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.
A human induced global ecological crisis is occurring, threatening the stability of this earth and its inhabitants. The best path to address environmental issues both effectively and morally is a dilemma that raises concerns over which political values are needed to stop the deterioration of the natural environment. Climate change; depletion of resources; overpopulation; rising sea levels; pollution; extinction of species is just to mention a few of the damages that are occurring. The variety of environmental issues and who and how they affect people and other species is varied, however the nature of environmental issues has the potential to cause great devastation. The ecological crisis we face has been caused through anthropocentric behavior that is advantageous to humans, but whether or not anthropocentric attitudes can solve environmental issues effectively is up for debate. Ecologism in theory claims that in order for the ecological crisis to be dealt with absolutely, value and equality has to be placed in the natural world as well as for humans. This is contrasting to many of the dominant principles people in the contemporary world hold, which are more suited to the standards of environmentalism and less radical approaches to conserving the earth. I will argue in this essay that whilst ecologism could most effectively tackle environmental problems, the moral code of ecologism has practical and ethical defects that threaten the values and progress of anthropocentricism and liberal democracy.
A nonconsequentialist act is the deontology theory. Deontology is a moral obligation or duty to act relating to a principle or rule. Deontology requires the act of humanity. It is never the treatment as a means to an end. A rule of deontology is that one should act in a manner that maxim the act intending to develop the act as a universal law. However, deontology can obligate someone to act in a way that seems wrong and unethical (Mossier, 2013). It is a rigid theory that fails to capture the complex issues that arise. Therefore, one would need to act as everyone would act in that specific situation. When applying the deontology theory, one should focus on the will of the person acting, the person’s intention of carrying out the act, and the rule according to which the act is carried out. Deontology can impact human life within society through the application to the principal in gender equality in areas of employment, health care, and the education system. The
Kant invented the categorical imperative, which is a tool that can be used to understand whether certain maxims are rational, or not. Kant formulated the categorical imperative two different ways: the humanity formula and the universal formula. “Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” This is Kant universal formula, which one should use and think about before performing a certain action. It means that one should perform an action only if he or she believes that this particular action could be used as universal law. In other words only if he or she believes that we can leave safely in a world where everyone could repeat that same action. Dr. Arnold used the example of promises. If Tim makes promises to Ben but does not intend on keeping his promises. He should think about how the world will be if everyone makes promises that they don’t intend on keeping, after a certain time no one will ever believe promises
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,