Consequentialism and Deontology are two different concepts
when it comes to ethics and ethical decisions. Consequentialism as defined by
LaFollete (2007) is the concept of making a decision based off choosing the
right consequences that follow, whereas, Deontology is our actions being
influenced by moral rules and rights which drift away from consequences. We as
leaders go through this process without even knowing these terms exist.
I could remember in reference to consequentialism on some of
the decisions I was making, I ensured that I was aware of the action(s) after
the fact were visible for me to see and understand. If I was to make a decision
I would have to understand that their will first, second, and third order of
effects if the situation was complex in the decision making process. Sreekumar
(2012) stated “Conforming our actions to certain rules that are themselves
justified by the fact that our conforming to them will tend to bring about, all
told, the best consequences in the sum total of situations in which we find
ourselves.” (p. 283) what I take from this is we so long we use the guidelines of
policies and rules emplaced we should always see the right decision being made.
However, sometimes we have veer off from those rules and policies because the
best consequence won’t be in line or in sync with each other. Like when I want
to buy a car, questions are always thought, “what is the resale value ten years
from now? Is this car going to last me a long time? If I go with the cheaper
one, I save money but might break down on me later. These types of questions
ultimately will be the foundation of ensuring the best consequence is met. In
reference to ethics, consequentialism does not have to all consequences looked
at or considered equally and morally obligated to produce the best
consequences. (LaFollete, 2007)
Deontology is the concept of following moral rules,
Lafollete (2007) stated “Deontologists content there are strict moral limits on
what we can do to others. Consequentialist do not.” (p.390) the only issue with
Deontology is that although they follow moral rules, their concepts share some similarities
with consequentialism with reference to weighing the different moral values. Like
when someone calls you out to fight, the moral thing to do is walk away and tell
the other person no. However, what happens when he approaches you and lays a
hand on you? Is morally okay to defend yourself? Those are the weighing options
to include if you fight back to defend yourself, is there a possibility you too
will be arrested? Even if you were in the right (in most people’s eyes) to
defend yourself? Liu (2010) stated “morality should not be based solely on the
consequences of an action and that there are immutable rights and duties that
everyone must follow.” (p. 16)
The concepts of these two ideas (Deontology and Consequentialism)
all derive on the belief of moral rules and consequences weighing each other
out. What I mean from that is we should be able to understand in the
consequence view which is the best decision moving forward. Which consequence provides
the best results, Deontology is the weighing of the moral view, on which is the
best moral decision to make when a situation presents itself such as the
example I provided above.
Reference:
LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA:
Blackwell.
Liu, B. S. (2010). What moral dilemma? the use of
deontology and consequentialism to justify moral intuitions (Order No.
1474539). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(305185678). Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/305185678?accountid=27203
Sreekumar, S. (2012). An analysis of consequentialism and
deontology in the normative ethics of the bhagavadgita. Journal of Indian Philosophy,
40(3), 277-315.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s10781-012-9154-3
No comments:
Post a Comment