Deontology Flashcards
what is deontology?
it identifies those actions that are wrong even if they produce good consequences
what are the 2 forms of deontology?
rights - an action is morally right if it respects the rights which all humans have which is liberationism - people free to act as they wish as long as their actions do not infringe the rights of others
contractualism - an action is morally right if it is in agreement with the rules that rational moral agents would accept in a social contract
divine command ethics - an action is morally right if it agrees with the rules and duties established by God
what are deontological constraints?
restraining from actions known to be wrong, obedience to these constraints are inflexible and deontologists maintain that we are not able to violate a rule even if serious harm will occur, what is most important is the preservation of the virtue
why isn’t the deontologist required to consider the consequences of an act?
because they can say in advance whether an action is right or wrong
often why do deontologists think certain actions are right? and what do people think about it?
rooted in christian tradition
many think this is outdated and harsh with so much scope for interpretation we can’t know by intuition what absolute morals are
what does the fact that it is very legalistic mean for the theory?
that it is based on refraining from breaking rules and means we are not obliged to do any thing other than oblige its law and if there is a loophole there is no reason not to take advantage of it, it reduces morality to a set of requirements
Who says the reason for performing an action is that it is morally obligatory to do so but simply following the correct rules is not sufficient we must also have the correct motivation and correct duties must be determined objectively or they are just personal preferences
deontology is judging morality by examining the will of agents rather than goals achieved because cannot control consequences
he maintained since all men possess reason and a conscience, it would be possible for all people to arrive at an understanding of moral truths independent of experience. morality is a priori and because reason is universal, moral reasoning leads to the same results over and over again, other guides of morality are mistaken.
kant
what is a categorical imperative and hypothetical imperative?
categorical - what is true is true in all circumstances
hypothetical - need experience to satisfy a dilemma in given circumstances
what did kant argue about personal preferences?
that while they are not necessarily wrong they could not be trusted as a reliable guide to what is morally right, it we act according to our duty we will act rightly
what is the principle of universability that Kant proposed ? and give an example
the idea that humans should ‘act in such a way that their actions might become a universal law’
if a rule can’t be universalised it is not orally acceptable and if you cannot will that everyone will follow the same rule, it is not a moral rule
‘be fair to your customers so they will come back to your shop’ is not a universal principle as it seeks to achieve an end but ‘be fair to your customers’ could apply to all shopkeepers
who maintained that an act must ensure human beings are valued as ends in themselves and not as the means to an end, their intrinsic values rather than their potential instrumental value and argues deontology is the distinction between actions performed to achieve desired ends and morally obligatory actions which apply to all rational beings irrespective of their desires
he argues the evil man does his duty only so long as it corresponds with his interests while the good person when faced with conflict chooses to do his duty
Kant
What does Ross argue about prima facie duties and what does he say these are?
he argued how we act is affected by previous things like having a privileged relationship with someone
a conflict between 2 prima facie duties is resolved not by discarding one but by deciding which one is more important in a particular situation
how does bentham criticise deontology?
he says it is an intellectualised version of popular morality - the unchanging principles attributed to natural law are really a matter of subjective opinion
how does mill criticise deontology?
they fail to specify which principles should take precedence when rights and duties conflict so deontology cannot offer complete moral guidance
who notes that under deontology individuals are bound by constraints and are also given options which can lead to a decrease of moral goodness while utilitarianism always requires to individual to maximise the good
kagan
