• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A) Clarify the key features of a deontological theory of ethics

Extracts from this document...


Karen Ingleby - Deontology A) Clarify the key features of a deontological theory of ethics The deontological theory of ethics I shall be looking at is the theory of Kantian deontology. Immanuel Kant was born in 1724 in Kļæ½nigsberg where he spent the majority of his life lecturing on science and mathematics before expanding and teaching most areas of philosophy. Kant was dissatisfied with the Utilitarian stance on ethics and held that morality and happiness should be separated. He also disagreed with the use of consequences as a moral guide. He maintained that the correct motive of an action is duty - this fundamental difference is highlighted in the term deontology, deon being the Greek word for duty. This eliminates the motive of self interest in decision making and also rules out natural inclinations and makes Kantian deontology an absolute approach to ethics. In his book 'Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals' Kant argued if you act according to what is dutiful, according to Kant you would be exercising your good will which is the only intrinsic good, 'A good will is not good because of what it accomplishes...it is good through its willingness alone, Good will shines forth like a precious jewel.' Kant claimed that if you follow your duty, a good act in itself, then it would seem probable that good actions should follow. ...read more.


If you are willing to reject getting fitter then there is no moral necessity for you to carry out the exercise. Analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of deontology To determine whether or not Kant's theory of deontology is effective and practical enough to use as an everyday working guide, I will assess the strengths and weaknesses and come to an educated conclusion. The first strength of Kantian deontology is that it rises above the most prominent flaw of relative theories; such as utilitarianism and situation ethics, it does not require a prediction of an actions consequence it determining its morality. As the theory is based upon the moral absolute of doing your duty it makes decision-making clearer and should lead everyone to the same conclusion without the need for lengthy calculations. One can even use their reason to decide their action ahead of time. However, there are those who will argue that there can never be moral absolutes. If the theory were to become universalised then different cultures and opinions will not be taken into account and new laws would be forced upon them, for example there are cultures where human sacrifice takes place. Kant would believe that to sacrifice human life would be to breach the duty of preserving life, but who are we to try and change the culture of those who have been living in the same way for thousands of years? ...read more.


As such 'never steal' is a prima facie duty, something you must not do unless it is outweighed by another prima facie duty, like your duty to preserve life. Ross separates duties into six categories such as 'do not harm others', 'to repay our benefactors' and 'to treat people as well as they deserve to be treated' but left them open to an individual's interpretation of importance, unfortunately this also leaves them open to manipulation and one can arrange the duties so that their preference is the action they take. To conclude deontology in principle seems to be a useful method of making moral decisions, its certainly manages to overcome a few of the criticisms of utilitarianism. However, deontology still carries its own flaws. Kant tells us to do our duty, always, just because it is our duty and this will not be enough to convince the majority to change the way they act. The lack of human emotion also plays a major factor in my dismissal of deontology as a practical working theory of ethics in everyday society. But perhaps the main reason that deontology fails in my opinion is that Kant offers no advice for how to act when duties collide. W.D Ross's contributions also fail to some degree; he does not outline what exactly is a prima facie duty nor places any value of importance on his unfinished list of duties so as mentioned above can be used to justify an action in the same way as the swine ethic in utilitarianism. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Practical Questions section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Practical Questions essays

  1. The key difference between someone using counselling skills and a qualified and trained counsellor ...

    the Counsellor maintains adherence to BACP guidelines and the Ethical Framework failure to do so may result in a negligence case. It is also worth noting that Counsellors may be subject to 'suing' in Civil Court proceedings should a client believe that they have been harmed by the counsellors negligence,

  2. Utilitarianism VS Kantian Deontological Ethics

    Utilitarianism looks intuitively attractive because the right thing to do is what will do the most good, promoting others' happiness and well being, and preventing suffering. Happiness is concieved of as the ultimate good; we may wonder what we want money or fame for, but not what happiness is for.

  1. Kant's theory of Ethics

    Suppose a shopkeeper is trying to decide whether to cheat her customers. She may decide to cheat them whenever she can get away with it. This, we instinctively know, is morally wrong. Suppose however, that the shopkeeper decides not to cheat her customers because if she gets caught, then she will make no more money.

  2. What are the Main Features of Utilitarianism as an Ethical Theory?

    Socrates dissatisfied than a fool and satisfied" (I.e., ignorance is not bliss and that we would rather intellectually higher with pain than have base desires). Utilitarianism is, in some respects a very good theory to use in modern day as in broadly fits in with common sense towards morality.

  1. Examine the key features of situation ethics, and the main criticisms of it, and ...

    suggest means whereby the Christian position may be effectively presented to the various sections of the community." They wanted to convey "a sane and responsible attitude towards love and marriage in the face of the misleading suggestions conveyed by much popular literature, entertainment and advertising."

  2. Analyse and explain the strengths and weaknesses of deontology

    Would there be worth in a theory that placed no value on the pragmatism of actions or their effect on society? Common sense suggests not; after all ethics is essentially for the good of society and it would be illogical to implement a system that did not benefit us in some way.

  1. Examine the key features of utilitarianism and its strengths and weaknesses of utilitarianism

    Mill believed that there was a more positive role for laws in society, unlike Bentham who thought that laws were secondary. There are principles that work as a general means or securing the greater good. A good example would be lying, while there may be a good reason for lying

  2. Examine the key features of Virtue Ethics

    Reason is the executive, deciding when to act upon emotions through a balanced appetite. There are three fragments of the soul, the calculative, the desiderative and the vegetative and if the soul uses all these parts well and properly, then it is truly functional.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work