Deontic Or Action-Based Ethical Systems

Deontology ethical framework is manifested by both moral theories and universal principles. This consists of conformity with a moral normality, good sense and judgment, fairness and the choices of what we ought to do. Even when moral action overrides the order, the ethical choice should be the chosen path.

Luke is in charge of ABC Company’s land development project in building an adult entertainment store on the land they recently purchased. Unfortunately, his brother, Owen, happens to live in the same area. Luke remembers Owen once told him he is thinking about selling his house, since he recently received a decent offer from a real estate firm. However, he is debating whether he should sell it or waits for the real estate to rise. Luke realizes with the appearance of adult entertainment in the near future, the values of Owen’s house and other houses in neighborhood are likely to drop significantly.

Deontological ethics are based on moral obligations, duties and rights. Rules are to guide decision making in deontological ethics. Deontological ethics have a more individualistic focus, as individuals are supposed to be treated with respect and dignity (Sexty, 2011, 7).

In terms of the deontological moral theory, deontological moral theory considers human actions as being morally good if the some part of the action is morally good regardless of whether the effect or end result of the action is good.

Reuschling approaches the moral formation of ethics by examining the three classic theories of ethics, deontology, teleology, and virtue ethics. Reuschling defines the term deontology as the study of duty or obligation. Teleology is “understood as the ascertaining and achievement of moral outcomes or ends by considering the consequences

| Regardless of consequences, certain moral principles are binding, focusing on duty rather than results or moral obligation over what the individual would prefer to do (Treviño & Nelson, 2007, Ch. 4).In ethics, deontological ethics, or deontology (Greek: deon meaning obligation or duty), is a theory holding that decisions should be made solely or primarily by considering one's duties and the rights of others. Some systems are based on biblical or tenets from sacred.

In the past few months I have been introduced to several different ethical theories, but three of those theories stood out in my mind, Deontological theory, Consequentialist ethics Rule Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics theory. Deontological theory a non-consequentialist theory that does not accept consequences as the basis of right and wrong, but focus instead on our duties and intentions of one’s action. On the other hand, Rule Utilitarianism, a consequentialist theory that defines a morally right rule or practice as one that promotes overall good. Virtue ethics believes that one has to have specific character traits like loyalty, compassion and generosity that have moral values in a person without any underline principles or actions guiding them.

Virtue ethics is a normative theory whose foundations were laid by Aristotle. This theory approaches normative ethics in substantially different ways than consequentialist and deontological theories. In this essay, I will contrast and compare virtue ethics to utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and Kantianism to demonstrate these differences. There is one fundamental aspect of virtue ethics that sets it apart from the other theories I will discuss. For the sake of brevity and to avoid redundancy, I will address it separately. This is the fundamental difference between acting ethically within utilitarianism, egoism, and Kantianism. And being ethical within virtue ethics. The other theories seek to define the ethics of actions while virtue ethics does not judge actions in any way. The other theories deal with how we should act, while virtue ethics determines how we should be.

When observing the different ethical theories one may believe that although their differences are unique there are similarities in them. One may state that a similarity between utilitarian and deontology is that they both require one to consider their duty something that should be done and considering the character of an individual is if it will be done. If an individual has morals and character he or she may consider it their duty to do what is morally correct.

Proponents of deontological ethics do not consider consequences as important when determining whether an individual is moral or immoral. Morality is based solely on the person’s action. Several ethical theories are deontological theories.

Virtue Ethics Theory Virtue Ethics is the ethical ideology that defines rightness or wrongness of an action, based on the underlying motivation of the person performing said action. According to Virtue Ethics, the essential nature of the action itself (or its resulting consequences) is irrelevant when considering whether the action is morally right or wrong. The motivation that inspired or prompted the action is what determines its morality – essentially, the only relevant moral characteristic of an action is its motivation. The quintessential moral individual, according to virtue theory, is one who has righteous motives and desires – apparent by morally valuable traits (i.e. honesty, gentleness, integrity, and discernment).

Learning Activity 1 Virtue Ethics is an individual’s character traits versus their actions. I believe it is how an individual chose to display their inner behavior instead of relying on worldly customs. I think that virtue ethics is a character based ethical theory. Character based Ethical theory is based off reasoning being driven by virtues (Virtue Ethics, 2016). Virtue Ethics is more about the character of the person making the decision instead of the outcome or happiness of others.

The ethical issue of whether the annihilation of followers of a religion that proclaim their holy writings and their god demand the destruction of all who will not succumb to the will of their god, their teachings, and their laws are correct, justified, and sanctioned for the greater good of all mankind. The issue is further exacerbated by requiring the United States to be the leading force in the destruction of those adhering to the perversion of a religion that is oft quoted as a religion of peace. Are these followers a band of holy zealots directed by their god to subdue the earth or a threat to the entire world? Is their god the wrong god and therefore it is not religious intolerance when they are destroyed? Can an ethical justification be found to destroy the lives of religious fanatics, because the nations of the world reject their ideology? Is annihilation the only means to curtail their terrorism for the greater good? Is it ethically permissible to determine whether the beliefs of a religious group are correct or pose a danger to others? The means of achieving the greater good would appear to be dependent upon the viewpoint of the examiner, which is hypocritical.

“Brad is a production engineer at a bicycle company and part of his job includes inspecting broken bikes and drafting the design repairs for their repair” (Bartlett). Brad is considering replacing a broken brake cable with a more durable material, even though the customer did not request it in their order and specifically requested that “No aesthetic changes be made to the bike” (Bartlett). Brad’s manager suggests that his considered actions would go against the company’s policy of “The customer is always right.” Should Brad disobey the manager and the customer to possibly lose his job or go along with

Ø Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that moral requirements are based on a standard of rationality he dubbed the