The goodness of the intention then reflects the balance of the good and evil of

The goodness of the intention then reflects the

This preview shows page 4 - 6 out of 20 pages.

consequences. The goodness of the intention then reflects the balance of the good and evil of these consequences, with no limits imposed upon it by the nature of the act itself — even if it be, say, the breaking of a promise or the execution of an innocent man. Utilitarianism, in answering this charge, must show either that what is apparently immoral is not really so or that, if it really is so, then closer examination of the consequences will bring this fact to light. Ideal utilitarianism (G.E. Moore and Hastings Rashdall) tries to meet the difficulty by advocating a plurality of ends and including among them the attainment of virtue itself, which, as John Stuart Mill affirmed, "may be felt a good in itself, and desired as such with as great intensity as any other good."
Image of page 4
Deontological ethics or deontology – bases the morality of an action on how closely it conforms to the established rule of the law (from Greek δέον, deon , "obligation, duty") Example : An extremely religious person who takes religious writings to be the rule of law and judges all moral acts against that law. (It doesn’t have to be a religious law but whatever law the observing person believes as correct) Example : A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of potential good that might come from lying. Deontologists look at rules and duties. It is sometimes described as "duty" or "obligation" or "rule" based ethics, because rules "bind you to your duty". Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted with consecquentialist or teleological ethical theories, according to which the rightness of an action is determined by its consequences. However, there is a difference between deontological ethics and moral absolutism. Deontologists who are also moral absolutists believe that some actions are wrong no matter what consequences follow from them. Immanuel Kant, for example, argued that the only absolutely good thing is a good will, and so the single determining factor of whether an action is morally right is the will, or motive of the person doing it. If they are acting on a bad maxim, e.g. "I will lie", then their action is wrong, even if some good consequences come of it. Non-absolutist deontologists, such as W. D. Ross, hold that the consequences of an action such as lying may sometimes make lying the right thing to do. Kantian ethics philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). (influenced modern Deontological theory) According to Kant, the concept of “ motive ” is the most important factor in determining what is ethical – it does NOT give much credence to the consequences of actions, focusing instead on the motivations for actions to determine whether or not they are moral. In other words – why you acted is much more important than the end result of those actions, and if an action is not right for everyone, then it is not right for anyone. More specifically, Kant argued that a moral action is one that is performed out of a “sense of duty.” For Kant, a moral action is not based upon feelings or pity. Nor is it is not based on the possibility of reward. Instead, a moral action is one based on a sense of “This is what I ought to do.”
Image of page 5
Image of page 6

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 20 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture