Utilitarian Ethics

OPTION A Write a contrast raise dealing with the major(ip) distinction between useful and deontological reasoning. Make extension ph unity to only relevant aspects of the 2 positions including the act and rule versions along with pertinent object lessons that clarify your answer. The major distinction between Emmanual Kants deontological reasoning and Mills utilitarian reasonsing is that deontological reasoning refers to duty, which is usually determined without regard to circumstances or consequences where as utilitarian reasoning invariably considers circumstances and consequences.A good case john be made that classic deontological theories, like Kant mo nonone imperative, be adept utilitarian theories very well disguised. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is an ethical system that is well-nigh frequently attributed to philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism turn overs that the most ethical affaire to do is to maximize the happiness with in a society. Utilitarians believe that actions have calculable outcomes and that ethical choices have outcomes which lead to the most happiness to the most members of a society.Utilitarianism is often considered a consequentialist philosophic brain because it both believes that outcomes can be predicted and because it judges actions establish on their outcomes. Thus, utilitarianism is often associated with the phrase the ends discharge the means. Deontology Deontology is an alternative ethical system that is usually attributed to the philosophical tradition of Immanuel Kant. Whereas utilitarianism focuses on the outcomes, or ends, of actions, deontology demands that the actions, or means, themselves must be ethical.Deontologists deal that there argon transcendent ethical norms and truths that are universally applicable to all mass. Deontology holds that some actions are immoral regardless of their outcomes these actions are haywire in and of themselves. Kant gives a categori cal imperative to act morally at all times. The categorical imperative demands that humans act in a way that their actions can be universalized into a general rule of nature. Kant believes that all people come to moral conclusions about right and awry(p) based on rational thought.Deontology is roughly associated with the maxim the means must justify the ends. The conflict illustrated A classic example illustrates the conflict between these two ethical systems. Suppose an evil villain holds you and ten some other people at gunpoint and tells you that she will land all ten of your fop prisoners unless you kill one of them yourself. You have no doubts about the veracity of the villains threats you believe fully that she will do as she give voices she will. Therefore, you have two options.The stolon option is to kill one of the ten people to save the lives of the other nine. The other option is to do nothing and watch the villain kill all ten people. Utilitarians would most likel y conclude that you should kill the one person because it has the most beneficial outcome. Deontologists would most likely conclude that you should not kill the one person because killing another person is wrong as a universal moral truth. Utilitarianisms answers to deontology Utilitarianisms first answer to deontology is to say that there are no universal moral truths. Such truths are difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain. On the other hand, the benefits and disadvantages of actions are much more intimately calculated. Thus, rather than relying on amorphous, vague moral truths to guide action we should require to more concrete ways of determining the ethics of a event act. Also, utilitarianism would argue that deontology leads to morally untenable outcomes, such as in the example above. Utilitarians would argue that the outcome of ten deaths is much less desirable than one.Thus, we should always look to the ends rather than the means to determine whether an act is ethical o r not. Deontologys answers to utilitarianism Deontologys first answer to utilitarianism is to say that the ends are illusory. That is, it is impossible to predict the outcomes of ones actions with positive certainty. The only thing one can be sure of is whether his or her actions are ethical or not based on the categorical imperative. Additionally, deontologists believe that we can only be trustworthy for our own actions and not the ctions of others. Thus, in the example above you are only responsible for your close whether to kill the prisoner or not the villain is the one reservation the unethical choice to kill the rest of the prisoners. One is only responsible for following the categorical imperative. Finally, deontologists argue that utilitarianism devolves into dangerous moral relativism where human beings are allowed to justify heinous acts on the grounds that their outcomes are beneficial.