Ethical Theories: Deontology and Teleology Chapter Three Ethical Theories: Deontology and Teleology Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Deontology From the Greek word “Deos,” meaning duty. Deontological theories focus on duties and principles. Emphasis is placed on doing what is right, based on ethical principles, regardless of the outcome. Best known is Emmanuel Kant’s “categorical imperative.” Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Kantian Ethics Emmanuel Kant Kant’s four propositions: It is our intentions, or will, that makes us morally good. Our will must be motivated by duty. Duty means respecting moral law. The basis of moral law is the categorical imperative: “Act only according to that maxim which you can at the same time will that it should be a universal moral law.” Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Determining Whether an Action Conforms to the Categorical Imperative Four questions to answer: What is my motive for doing this? What is the general principle involved? What is the universal form of this principle? Can this universal principle be made a moral law without defeating its intent? Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Applying Kantian Ethics Should you lie to a parent or partner about where you are going so they will not worry? I do not want him/her to be worried. I will lie in order to save those who care about me from worrying. Everyone should always lie if the truth would cause their loved ones to worry. No. If this were a universal principle, people would know they would not be told the truth and therefore would always worry, whether there was a reason to or not. (Continued) Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Applying Kantian Ethics Think of a behaviour you consider morally questionable. Apply Kant’s four questions to it. What is my motive? What is the general principle? What is the universal principle? Can the universal principle be made a moral law? What is your conclusion? (Continued) Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Applying Kantian Ethics Another way of considering the categorical imperative is: “Act so that you treat humanity always as an end and never as a means only.” What are some ways we treat others as a means to something we want? How should we treat them in order to show respect for them as an end in themselves? Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Proponents’ and Critics’ View of Kantian Ethics What are some arguments that someone who believed in Kantian ethics would give to support this ethical framework? What are some arguments that someone who did not agree with Kantian ethics would make to criticize this ethical framework? Do you think Kantian ethics is closer to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development or Gilligan’s? Why? Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Teleology From the Greek word “Telos,” meaning end or goal. Teleological theories focus on the possible outcomes of an action. Emphasis is placed on doing what will maximize benefits and minimize harm to individuals and to society as a whole. Best known is John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism. Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Utilitarian Ethics Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill “The greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number.” Happiness: the presence of pleasure and well-being and the absence of pain or deprivation. Higher order pleasures (i.e. intellectual and aesthetic pleasures, concern for others) are preferable to lower order pleasures (i.e. the gratification of physical appetites). Long-term consequences are more important than short-term consequences. The good of society as a whole is more important than the pleasure of one or a few individuals. Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Analyzing Consequences Predicting the outcome of an action for those involved and society as a whole requires research and sensitivity. The following must be considered: The immediate consequences for everyone involved. The amount and comparative value of the pleasure or harm for everyone involved. The indirect and far-reaching results for society as a whole. Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Act-Utilitarianism Considers the immediate, foreseeable consequences to the individuals involved. Assigns a numbering system to measure the quantity and quality of pleasure/pain for each person. Whichever action has the higher total outcome of happiness is the right choice. (Continued) Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Act-Utilitarianism 13 −15 −5 +5 (×3) Course of action You Your Friend Example: You want to go to a movie with a friend instead of preparing your contribution for your study group Course of action You Your Friend Study Group (3 people) Total Go to movie +8 enjoy show +5 likes you −5 (×3) (more work for them) 13 −15 = −2 Prepare for study group −5 (Won’t feel guilty) (go with someone else) +5 (×3) (less work for them) −10 +15 = +5 Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Rule-Utilitarianism Formulates rules based on long-range consequences to society, rather than to individuals. Example: People must honour their agreed-upon obligations (i.e., to study group) because otherwise people could not trust each other and they could not work together. Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Proponents’ and Critics’ View of Utilitarian Ethics What are some arguments that someone who believed in utilitarian ethics would give to support this ethical framework? What are some arguments that someone who did not agree with utilitarian ethics would make to criticize this ethical framework? Do you think this theory is closer to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development or Gilligan’s? Why? Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Combining Ethical Approaches Ethics of Purpose Ethics of Principles Ethics of Consequences These can be combined in the following ways, to make ethical decisions: 1. We should pursue our purpose unless it treats persons only as means or unless the consequences cause more harm than good. (Continued) Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan

Combining Ethical Approaches 2. We should act on principle unless it will cause more harm than good or unless it contradicts our purpose. 3. We should do what causes the most good and least harm for all concerned unless it means treating some persons only as means and committing acts which cannot be universalized or unless it destroys our potential to achieve our purpose. Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan