...INTRODUCTION In ethics, consequentialism is explain that an action should be judged right or wrong on the basis of their consequences. Consequentialism theory is also known teleological moral theories. Which teleological word is from Greek ” Telos”,means “end” and ” logos” means “science”. This theory of morality derives duty or moral obligation from what is good or desirable as an end to be achieved. This general approach can be applied at different levels to different normative properties of different kinds of things, but the most prominent example is consequentialism about the moral rightness of acts, which holds that whether an act is morally right depends only on the consequences of that act or of something related to that act, such as the motive behind the act or a general rule requiring acts of the same kind. ( www. plato.stanford.edu) Consequentialist, have two major theories that is ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Both these theories agree that human beings ought to behave in ways that will bring about good consequences. They differ, however, in that they disagree on who should benefit from these consequences. The ethical egoist essentially says that human beings ought to act in the interest of all concerned. ( Jacques P. Thiroux , Keith W. Krasemann) The rough idea behind ethical egoism is that the right thing to do is to look out for own self-interest. That’s mean we are morally required only to make ourselves as happy as possible and have...
Words: 1570 - Pages: 7
...Consequentialism According to consequentialism theory, the morally right action one should take is the one that will result in the best overall consequences (Leroch 2014). In this case, helping Puerto Rican children be healthier and live longer is the stated moral good, therefore, to Consequentialists, any actions that promote such a consequence are considered morally or ethically correct. Critics consider it unfair to fine poor parents who do not or are not able to help their obese children eat healthier, exercise more and lose weight (The Guardian 2015). However, plain consequentialism does not take fairness or unfairness into consideration, with achieving the desired goal or consequence of obese children losing weight as the only important...
Words: 807 - Pages: 4
...Now that we have reviewed act utilitarian and how it applies to the Jim’s example, lets proceed to the second moral theory for this paper. Rule consequentialism may be seen similar to act utilitarian, because it has the same principle of selecting the action that its consequence provides the most pleasure over pain. However, main difference between the two moral theories is that rule consequentialism has one more qualification for any action to be morally good, instead of just judging the pure result of the consequence as act utilitarian does. The second qualification to rule consequentialism is that the action must not be against any of the rules in the society where the action is been placed. For example, if action A will result in a high...
Words: 371 - Pages: 2
...Consequentialism or Justice An important role in defining justice is the concept of right. Hooker (2011), " A consequentialist theory that presupposes both that justice is constituted by such-and-such and that justice is one of the things to be promoted does not explain why the components of justice are important.” (para. 12). This paper is a reflection of Team’s D thoughts about Chapter 5, “Consequentialism or Justice.” The consequentialism theory is a decision of an individual who will cause a greater good for all. An individual should take the complete relating information and consider every possible option that will provide a decision that will provide every person with greater good. The decision should not affect just one person, or a small group, but each client. At a sleepover party, a rule of not playing with fire should not be set for just one child. The rule should be set for every child in the house because fire is harmful. Every child will benefit from the rule. Distributive justice is the assistance that every human has an equal chance. It provides an ability to help make sure every person has goods equal to others, for the greater good. The goods are not meant to be materialistic, they are meant to be for safety and health for healthy living. The theory intersects with Tamara’s personal value because where Tamara lives, she sees a community that lives by social justice. Many in the neighborhood make informal contracts among each other and use the...
Words: 1517 - Pages: 7
...each person, but as a personal definition for me this big word means integrity, respect, principles and values. There are three theories in regard ethic they are; virtue theory, utilitarianism theory and deontology theory. They have similarities for example one of them is do the right thing in any circumstance and of course depending of the person’s viewpoint. The definition of virtue theory, utilitarianism and deontology is the following; “Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics. It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach which emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that which emphasizes the consequences of actions (consequentialism). Suppose it is obvious that someone in need should be helped. A utilitarian will point to the fact that the consequences of doing so will maximize well-being, a deontologist to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and a virtue ethicist to the fact that helping the person would be charitable or benevolent.” (Hursthouse R, 2012) Virtue theory looks for the good, the excellence and could be classified as the character of the person. Utilitarianism theory emphasizes more in the action that produces more utility for a group than an individual’s interests “the greatest good for the greatest number.” Boylan, M. (2009). The last theory is Deontology...
Words: 469 - Pages: 2
...Some Ethical Theories: Consequentialism: Acts are right if they have good consequences, wrong if they have bad consequences. Hedonistic Consequentialism: [Bentham] Consequences are to be judged according to the amount of pleasure and pain they include. The more pleasure (and the less pain), the better. Ethical Egoism: Consequences are to be judged according to the amount of benefit they afford to the actor. The more beneficial, the better. Each person's sole obligation is to do what will be best for herself. Consequentialist theories generally have three parts: 1)Theory of the right: an act is right iff it maximizes good. 2)Theory of what's good: Pleasure, happiness, excellence of character, wealth, power... 3) Whose good matters? Everyones (universalist). Only the actors [only mine] (egoist). Utilitarianism: (Mill) Consequentialist theory of right: actions are right if they produce the best consequences. Theory of the Good: What makes consequences good is that they include more happiness and less misery. Egalitarian Distribution: Every creature capable of experiencing happiness and misery counts equally. ' Act Utilitarianism: Acts are right iff they produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Rule Utilitarianism: Acts are right iff they are consistent with rules which, if followed by everyone, would produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Deontological Theories: (Kant) Duty-centered theories, which hold that a person's 'duty'...
Words: 991 - Pages: 4
...Ethical egoism contrasts with ethical altruism, which holds that moral agents have an obligation to help others. Egoism and altruism both contrast with ethical utilitarianism, which holds that a moral agent should treat one's self with no higher regard than one has for others as egoism does, by elevating self-interests and the self to a status not granted to others, but that one also should not as altruism does sacrifice one's own interests to help others' interests, so long as one's own interests (i.e. one's own desires or well-being) are substantially equivalent to the others' interests and well-being. Egoism, utilitarianism, and altruism are all forms of consequentialism, but egoism and altruism contrast with utilitarianism, in that egoism and altruism are both agent-focused forms of consequentialism (i.e. subject-focused or subjective), but utilitarianism is called agent-neutral (i.e. objective and impartial) as it does not treat the subject's (i.e. the self's, i.e. the moral "agent's") own interests as being more or less important than the interests, desires, or well-being of others. Ethical egoism has two flaws which can be seen. The first is that it does not consider moral duties or any prima facie goods beyond personal happiness. Without consideration of moral duties there is no moral framework to stop one from killing others...
Words: 433 - Pages: 2
...something everyone must have to go about making decisions in every day life. One’s moral values dictate his or her choices and ultimately control how the person lives. Of the numerous ethical theories that exist, utilitarianism is one of the most interesting and difficult to understand. While a utilitarian way of living may seem like an attractive existence to some, I believe it has some major flaws. Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that a decision or action is only morally right if it conforms to the standard of utility. This means that the utilitarian will do something if and only if it produces more pleasure or less pain for all persons affected, than any other choice. This definition is essentially the same as the one for consequentialism, but utilitarianism also includes the theories of hedonism and eudaimonism. These two theories differ in that hedonism holds that pleasure and the avoidance of pain are the only things with intrinsic value, while eudaimonism states that only happiness has intrinsic value, and that happiness is more than just pleasure. Though some of the aspects of utilitarianism are certainly attractive, there is one main flaw to this moral theory. This belief states that the only important factor to be considered when making a decision, is the outcome. Utilitarianism fails to consider the action or motive involved in the choice. These two factors are of the utmost importance in the decision making process of most, but are completely ignored by the...
Words: 727 - Pages: 3
...depends on a universally accepted morality approach. It also makes the philosopher study both sides of a situation without compromising the outcomes. WEAKNESS OF DENTOLOGY: Deontology: One of the key criticisms in healthcare is that applying a strictly deontological approach to healthcare can lead to conflicts of interest between equally entitled individuals which can be difficult or even seemingly impossible to resolve. Moreover it is mainly concerned with the term “Duty”. But duty is not the only principle on which equity or allocation of resources is based. Deontology describes the duty to act with ‘good’ intentions with regards to the individual. This is as opposed to acting with a preoccupation with outcomes (as seen in consequentialism). Therefore an inherent weakness with this approach...
Words: 611 - Pages: 3
...Project Part 3 In this section I will be discussing how my personal code of ethics addresses consequentialism and non-consequentialism, self interest and other interestedness, and the issues of act of rule. First of all, my personal code of ethics addresses consequentialism by 2 major consequentialists ethical theories which are ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Both of these theories believe that humans should behave in ways that will bring out good consequences. The difference between the two are that they disagree on who should benefit from these consequences. Ethical egoism says that human beings should act in their own self-interest, where utilitarians basically say that human beings should act in interest of all concerned. Now deep into the ethical egoism my code would more address universal ethical egoism because like most other theories it’s universal. An ethical theory that applies to all human beings. This theory does not state only what the individual should do, rather it concerning itself with all human beings should do if they want to be moral. They should act in their own self-interest. On the other hand with utilitarianism is addressed by stating that everyone should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good over bad for everyone affected by the act. The belief is to not believe in setting up rules for action because they feel that each situation and each person are different. Each individual must assess the situation they are...
Words: 814 - Pages: 4
...utilitarianism 1. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which states that the consequences of any action are the only standard of right and wrong. This view can be contrasted or combined with virtue ethics which holds virtue as a moral good. Some believe that one's intentions are also ethically important. Singer did account for if bob would have saved the boy then there would be no car yes, but I also think there would have been a way for bob to save the boy as well as save the car as well. 2. Utilitarianism is distinctly different from other forms of consequentialism such as egoism as it considers all interests equally. Proponents of utilitarianism have been split about whether individual acts should conform to utility or whether agents should conform to ethical rules. Utilitarian’s additionally remain split about whether utility should be calculated as an aggregate (total utilitarianism) or an average (average utilitarianism). 3. Utilitarian moral theories purport to be in favor of maximizing the well-being of all concerned. In accordance with this principle, several of an agent’s values must receive protection while practicing any form of utilitarianism, considering protection of human rights to be conducive to human well-being. Autonomy would seem to be one such value. In utilitarian theory, however, autonomy appears to have its value only in its existence as a means to the greater end of well-being. This observance raises the question of whether or not a utilitarian...
Words: 376 - Pages: 2
...individual sovereignty) Act/Rule Utilitarianism Preference Utilitarianism (Hare, Singer) and other advances Evaluate the theory: Strengths Makes the world a better place (Bentham/Mill were reformers who made positive changes) Practical and useful (this is the way lottery money is distributed or hospital budgets are spent) and easy to use Flexible – allows for the fact that people find happiness in different ways in other societies Overcomes problems inherent in deontological ethics (what do you do if two rules clash?) Easy to apply, and intuitive – if it upsets people, don’t do it, but why is it wrong if no one gets hurt? Fair – treats everyone’s pleasure as equal, challenging elitism and any form of favouritism Weaknesses Consequentialism is inherently flawed – it is easy to think of examples of wrong actions that happen to lead to good consequences by chance Hedonism is wrong – just because someone enjoys an activity (e.g. looking at paedophile pornography) this doesn’t make it right, even if no-one else was affected ...
Words: 394 - Pages: 2
...Chase Vanzant Phil201 August 16, 2013 To Torture or Not??? According to the Utilitarianism perspective, “the utilitarian is concerned with maximizing the benefits for the maximum number of people” (Holmes, Pg. 43), which invokes an appropriate theoretic principle for the probability of diminishing the resolve of the prisoner through torture. These efforts of torture would also be associated with consequentialism, which is results oriented; driven to achieve the best results by any means necessary and doing whatever is needed to get the job done by allowing the ends to justify the means. Obtaining the needed information by means of torture for the benefit of saving human lives would be the underlying principle of achieving the greatest good for the greater number of individuals involved. Kantian duty-based ethics states, “we must act out of regard for duty and respect for moral law, (…) always treat persons as ends and not just as means” (Holmes, Pg. 63), which would be associated with deontology that is ruled based. As an American being threatened with terrorist attacks, which would cause massive loss of life, a duty to America and its citizens would be to obtain any and all necessary intelligence that would aid in preventing such an act. Acting on a moral and civic duty to country and person(s) as well as a respect for life, deontologists would not necessarily be against...
Words: 448 - Pages: 2
...correct without weighing the consequences. One recent example of a company that has been criticized for potentially making a very irrational decision is Facebook. CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced that he is buying WhatsApp for 16 Billion in cash and stock, along with another 3 over a couple years, making it a 19 Billion dollar deal for the company. WhatsApp is a leading chat app that has grown quickly in the last few years. It allows people to send video, photos, and text messages. It is more popular in many countries outside of the United States. The app will also not promote any ads for users. The deal’s enormous price tag brings a lot of question into Zuckerberg’s rationale behind his decision and if the pros outweigh the cons. Consequentialism is focused on the basic consequences that come with decisions and determining net balance between the good consequences and the bad ones. Zuckerberg’s decision to buy WhatsApp is consistent with his goal of connecting the entire world, especially developing countries, through technology. The app has over 450 million users. There almost as many messages sent using the app as there are text messages sent in the entire world per year. It allows Facebook to improve the app and help people from all over the world to share information quickly and efficiently. Utilitarian ethics revolves around maximizing net benefits for all parties involved with the decision, which brings the question, is the 19 billion dollar cost for the acquisition...
Words: 717 - Pages: 3
...To Treat or Not To Treat To treat or not to treat, that is the question? What would you do? How does the subject of cancer treatment apply to the moral theories of Egoism and Utilitarianism? Which theory best addresses this problem? I would assert Egoism best handles the dilemmas undressed by this ethical scenario. Egoism is a normative ethical theory that contends we act morally when in any given situation the right thing to do will be whatever maximally promotes long term self-interest. It does not describe how people behave; rather, it describes how people "ought" to behave. (Class notes February 23) This is a key element of all normative theories. Another key element of egoism lies in “long term”. Simply stated, an ethical egoist would typically not endorse running up credit card debt. While it might fulfill one's interests in the moment, it would undermine one's long term self-interest. James Rachels says it best; "Ethical egoism endorses selfishness, but it doesn't endorse foolishness.” Rachels also suggests each of us possess the ability to know what is in our own best interest, therefore to attempt to provide charity to another would directly disregard that ability. In essences, to give a man a fish would suggest they do not have the same ability you possess to acquire their own fish. Based on principles outlined by James Rachels and others, Thomas Hobbes may be viewed to be an ethical egoist, although he argued that if everyone follows their own long term...
Words: 1145 - Pages: 5
