Utilitarianism, Duty Theory And Virtue Theory

Utilitarianism, in the contrary, is based on the principle of utility or usefulness. Utility is what encourages an agent to act in a particular way (Tuckett, 1998). Utility can be explained as maximizing the good like pleasure and happiness and minimizing the bad like pain and evil, all leading to the greater good for all parties involved. It weights the consequences of the actions equally between the ones involved, and the ethical solution would be to follow the greater good for most if not all the parties involved.

When talking about ethics it is hard to distinguish between ethics and morality. It is also hard to distinguish exactly what realm of ethics contributes to my everyday decisions. Ethics can be defined as “well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues [and] ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards” (Andre, Shanks, & Velasquez, 2010, para. 8-9). According to Psychology Today (2013) morality is, “ethics, evil, greed, sin, and conscience” (para. 1). “Morals can vary from person to person and culture

Utilitarianism: “The idea that an action is right, as long as it promotes happiness, and that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct (Oxford Dictionaries).” This theory was thought up as far back as the 17th century, but didn’t become well known until late into the 18th century when Jeremy Bentham a legal and social reformer gave a powerful presentation of the idea. “Create all the happiness you are able to create; remove all the misery you are able to remove. Every day will allow you, will invite you to add something to the pleasure of others, or to diminish something of their pains (Jeremey Bentham).” Deontology: “An ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether

Deontology is an ethical theory concerned with duties and rights. The founder of deontological ethics was a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. Kant’s deontological perspective implies people are sensitive to moral duties that require or prohibit certain behaviors, irrespective of the consequences (Tanner, Medin, & Iliev, 2008). The main focus of deontology is duty: deontology is derived from the Greek word deon, meaning duty. A duty is morally mandated action, for instance, the duty never to lie and always to keep your word. Based on Kant, even when individuals do not want to act on duty they are ethically obligated to do so (Rich, 2008).

"(i) Duty Based Theories (or Deontological Theories): Theories that claim that what determines whether an act is morally right or wrong is the kind of act it is."(1)

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.

Ethics is the moral criteria that we as human beings have. They are the rules of the game that are supposed to guide us through our decision making in life and how to behave to one another as part of a society. However, there are different perspectives on how this criteria should be used, and when and whom they apply to. I will focus on the three most influential moral theories: virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism. Although there are many great names of philosophers that fall in those theories, I will be discussing Aristotle, Kant, and Mill’s perspective, respectively.

Duty ethics or deontology assesses all actions based on a series of rules. This concept views the morality of any action from one angle, the respect of rules. On other words, duty ethics is the set of rules governing a group, the conduct of those who form it based on the rights and obligations defined by law or fundamental texts. This type of ethics, called also non-consequential ethics, presents a clear way to behave within a society. However, it limits initiative and creativity, and in other cases, it could create conflict with moral values. A good example is the situation of a prisoner of war who lies to protect professional secret by. In sum, duty ethics is more concerned about rules

In contrasts, Deontology, or the “Kantian Duty Based ethics”, is based on duty or principals

Duty-based ethics are based on duty or obligation. Kant argues that there are higher principles that are good in no matter the time, situation, or culture. Therefore, when faced with

After filling out the Ethical Inventory again I found that Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics are the two areas that made the most persuasive thinking for me. Utilitarianism looks at the consequences and weighs the positives to see if it is going to bring happiness to the greater number. Every situation is looked at from a pros and cons point of view and a decision is made from there. One statement that is on the inventory sheet says, “When I am trying to decide what the right thing to do is, I look at the consequences of the various alternatives open to me.” In this example for myself I usually don’t think about consequences and react on emotions. After reacting from emotions I think about the consequences and realize most of the time it wasn’t the right thing to do. There are many times that I react and then realize I could’ve done things differently in that situation. I think about my own self interest before I think about the effects of the greater number. I see myself now looking at the situation and seeing both sides of it. I look at the positives and negatives before I react on emotions. By learning more about utilitarianism and changing my thought process I see my virtue ethics in a different perspective compared to what I did before this class. All the virtues that are stated in the book are virtues I hold very deeply in myself. These virtues are courage, generosity, honesty, loyalty to friends and family. Courage was one I had a hard time with because I don’t always

“I would rather be a good man than a great king” said the character Thor in Thor: The Dark World. In these words we find a frightening tension. Almost everyone agrees that it is good to be ethical; this is an easy affirmation. It is much more difficult, though, when ethics is in direct opposition to success. This dichotomy- between ethics and success- will no doubt confront an engineer during a professional career of any substantial length. Can you say that you would rather be a good man than rich? Or popular? Or a successful engineer? What should happen when an engineer faces this question? One real world example that can shed some light on this problem is what is known as bid shopping. This essay will provide a thorough definition of the problem of bid shopping and the ethical dilemma surrounding it. It will then apply the ethical theories of Duty Ethics and Virtue Ethics to the question. And seek to show that bid shopping is unethical according to both ethical theories.

The theory of Utilitarianism states that actions should be judged as right or wrong depending on whether they cause more happiness or unhappiness. It weighs the rightness and wrongness of an action based on consequences of that action.

In this essay, I will be discussing an article about a woman who starved her two horses. I will address the issue about whether or not the woman’s action was ethical. I will use the two ethical theories of utilitarianism and Kantian ethics to support my argument. I will also suggest a different course of action the woman could have taken to be justified, through both ethical theories.

Numerous moral theories have surfaced in the past years. They have been widely debated by philosophers and social reformers. It is important to understand what these theories are because of their influential tendencies in the way people act, especially in making morally right or wrong decisions. Utilitarianism is one of these many moral theories. Upon further analysis, problems with utilitarian thoughts are revealed. It has been widely debated by many philosophers, including G.E. Moore and Immanuel Kant. Like these two philosophers, I argue that utilitarianism is inadequate because of its contradictory nature as a moral theory. It highlights the principle of utility in seeking the greatest pleasure, allowing egotistic and hedonistic actions to be considered moral.