Deontology And Utilitarianism : Values And Society First Essay

“Deontology is a moral theory that emphasizes one’s duty to do a particular action just because the action, itself, is inherently right and not through any other sorts of calculations – such as the consequences of the action” (Boylan, 2009, p. 171). In many aspects deontology is contrasted with utilitarianism. Deontology is based upon principle and does not calculate the consequences (Boylan, 2009, p. 171). Deontology attracts those seeking a stronger moral attraction because it refers to commanding rather than commending and commanding is a stronger structure (Boylan, 2009, p. 172). The

Utilitarianism is the principle that the correct form of action be taken to benefit the greatest number of people. Deontology is defined as the area of ethics involving the responsibility, moral duty and commitment. Both utilitarianism and deontology deal with the ethics and consequences of one’s actions and behavior despite the outcome.

Decisions are judged by the conclusion of a consideration. Have you ever had to make a decision that would ultimately render the way you or others viewed you? The narrator, Matt Windsor of the University of Alabama Birmingham expresses a character test through the “Trolley Problem” in his article, “Will your self-driving car be programmed to kill you if it means saving more strangers?” It is normally easy to judge circumstances, however once the pressure stacks on, the judgment becomes more and more blurred. Windsor forces us, as interpreters, to understand that some decisions are more complex and need to be taken in for more consideration.

On the topic of the conception of right action, deontologists and utilitarian’s had opposing views on what makes an action just. I argue that Bentham’s view of determining right action, that an action is right if it has the tendency to maximize pleasure, is the optimal one because we are not able to determine the motivations of others with absolute certainty.

Utilitarianism vs. Deontology A better way to understand utilitarianism and deontology is to see it through a scenario with a moral dilemma. The scenario includes bombs, death, torture, and a moral dilemma. Utilitarianism is a theory in which decisions should be made in optimizing the greatest amount of pleasure over pain and the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people (Merriam-Webster). In the scenario a police chief desperately throws out the idea of torture of a crazy man who hid bombs all over the city and will not give them information. Following utilitarianism, the police officer would be making the most moral choice because he will possibly get the information he needs and help save thousands of lives.

(b) What is emotionism? What evidence is there in support of epistemic emotionism? Provide 2 examples and explain them. Is there evidence for metaphysical emotionism?

The Trolley Driver, Transplant and Bystander at the Switch are different situations to approach and analyze questions of morality. Firstly, what is the difference between letting something happen and directly affecting an outcome? And what does morality require or forbid in each situation? To answer these questions, I will be using Jeremy Bentham’s approach of utilitarianism.

Judith Jarvis Thomson presents an ethical dilemma entitled The Trolley Problem in The Monist. The problem describes a situation in which a trolley car is moving quickly and out of control on a train track towards five people who are tied to the tracks; you have the power to pull a lever, change the direction of the trolley car and save those five people – at the expense of the life of one person who is on the track the car was diverted to (Thomson 1397). The choice to be made is not just about whether or not one should pull the lever though. The problem dictates a choice about whether one would kill, in the case of choosing to pull the lever to kill the one person and save the five, or letting die, in which case nothing is done and the five are killed because of the lack of action taken (Thomson 1398). Thomson believes it would be incorrect to turn the trolley and willingly choose to kill one person, rather than allow the five to die, but the philosophies of Immanuel Kant and John Stewart Mill must be analyzed to determine whether they would agree with Thomson, or have a different view from Thomson as well as one another. When considering J.J. Thomson’s Trolley Problem, the philosophies of Kant and Mill must be fully analyzed and expressed to determine the most plausible perspective to be taken by both philosophers on the issue. There are strengths, weaknesses and criticisms of both ethical arguments, and these will be considered as well in the analysis.

In this paper, I will use a single example to compare deontology and utilitarianism. I will start off by providing a brief description of each ethical framework and then apply each of these ethical frameworks to an example in which a choice must be made. Through these comparisons, I will find and discuss their perspective strengths and weaknesses.

Utilitarianism is normative ethical theory from a school of thought that believes we must guide our actions always by the consequences that can from follow them. Utilitarian’s believe we ought to implement the actions that bring the most overall happiness. Deontologists believe in an ethical theory that is guided by maxims, which means the action you choose must be applied to all scenarios, for example even if lying is the best option in one particular situation, in most regular situations lying will cause more damage so we must follow that as a principle all the time. I’m going to go in depth on how both a Utilitarian and Deontologist would rationalize their duties to be charitable to the less fortunate and argue that

The trolley issue features a central pressure between two schools of good idea. The utilitarian point of view manages that most fitting activity is the one that accomplishes the best useful for the best number. In the meantime, the deontological point of view affirms that specific activities – like killing a blameless individual – are quite recently wrong, regardless of the possibility that they have great outcomes. In the two forms of the trolley issue over, utilitarian's say you should give up one to spare five, while deontologists say you ought not.

Kant’s theory of deontology and Mill’s theory of utilitarianism provide starkly different approaches to assigning moral value to ethical dilemmas, two modern dilemmas being commercial surrogacy and physician-assisted suicide. This essay will expound upon the process of deciding moral value within each ethical theory and then apply this decision process to the two ethical dilemmas. Arguments will be posited in support or in opposition to the proposed ethical dilemmas according to the ethical theories. The discussion will revolve around the theories as proposed by the specific authors mentioned above in their relevant works.

Describe the main principles of the two normative ethical theories of deontology and utilitarianism. Compare and contrast the two theories, bringing out any problems or limitations you see in each.

Throughout life, individuals are often faced with a multitude of moral dilemmas which can be difficult to assess given the factors of the situation and consequences, based on what is right and wrong. In this paper I will be assessing the Trolley Problem in relation to Utilitarianism and Deontology and will conclude which theory is the best way to behave given the situation. In the first paragraph, I will begin by discussing the Trolley Problem followed by the next paragraph’s which will explaining how Utilitarianism and Deontology would approach the situation. Furthermore, I will be discussing which theory I believe is right in regards to the best way to behaving in society, given the possible outcomes of the problem. Since the moral issue of killing and letting die are close in hand, Deontology is the only explainable way to behave because this theory approaches all situations in regard to what is fair and acceptable for all, while Utilitarianism takes an approach that degrades humanity and differs from person to person.

The trolley problem can be expanded to discuss a number of related ethical dilemmas, all referring to the conflicts inherent in utilitarianism and consequentialist ethics. The problem with the trolley driver scenario is that the driver is faced with a choice of whether to infringe on the rights of one man (the man on the tracks) or whether to allow the trolley to crash, thereby killing the five people on board. The driver is stuck between two equally unfortunate situations, and the issue calls into question whether it is more ethical to save five lives than it is to refrain from infringing on the life on an innocent man. Inherent to the problem is the fact that it is impossible to know whether the diversion of the trolley will in fact save the five lives.