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

Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the teleological, deontological and hybrid systems of ethics for use in 21st century decision making.

Extracts from this document...


Emily Duffy Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the teleological, deontological and hybrid systems of ethics for use in 21st century decision making. (30 A02) The deontological, teleological and hybrid systems of ethics have both strengths and weaknesses for use in 21st century decision making. As hybrid systems are a combination of both deontological and teleological it is arguable that the hybrid systems acquire the main strengths of the deontological and teleological, and as deontological and teleological systems are complete opposites, their strengths and weaknesses are complete contrasts to each other making it difficult to use either for 21st century decision making. The use of the teleological system for 21st century decision making has many strengths and weaknesses, for example this system tends to be more flexible than other systems, allowing it to be easier to apply for complex situations in the 21st century. Fletcher's 4 presumptions from Situation Ethics can be used as an example here to support this point. For example, when focussing on the presumption of pragmatism, the system is practical as it allows us to look at the situation and weigh up the action which would be most loving, the consequence of this action, and the motivation behind the action. ...read more.


Another weakness of this system is that it can allow immoral actions to take place as it is more concerned with loving consequences. For example, many would argue that the cloning of ebryos is immoral as it is murder and goes against God, however this system allows one to murder the embryos if doing so results in the most loving consequence, which it may if it helps infertile couples start a family. It is also arguable whether the system is perhaps too flexible, and is therefore a weakness. One may argue that humans need some rules and moral in order the make decision making easier, otherwise too many aspects must be taken into account and making the decision could be prolonged for too long, causing distress for families and patients, for example whether or not to turn off life support in order the free a bed for another patient. As it may cause distress for the people involved, it is not loving. The Deontological system also has any strengths and weaknesses for use in the 21st century decision making, mainly evolving around the fact that this system is far less flexible and has rules and morals to follow. ...read more.


This could create huge tension between doctors and patients, as some patients from particular religious backgrounds may refuse treatment which goes against their religion, and thus making the process of being cured even more difficult as the doctor would not personally find a way to negotiate with the patient as the system is not individualistic, and could end in the patient not being cured. This also stems to the next weakness, that this system does not consider consequences at all, and bases its decisions on the action being morally right. However, an action could be morally right but the consequence can be seen as unloving, for example not turning off life support, as one may see it as murder so it is morally right to keep the patient on life support, however if life support was turned off the money saved could benefit the majority and save more lives. However, this system would not consider this outcome, and would only be concerned with whether the action is morally right, therefore the act can be good but with a morally wrong consequence. The Hybrid system acquires mainly many strengths, and one major weakness. As the hybrid theory combines both teleological and deontological strengths, its is arguable that using this system in a 21st century decision allows us the best of both systems. ...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 Philosophy 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 Philosophy essays

  1. Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is an unfair system of ethics which could not work in the ...

    His theory can be seen in three parts. The motivation of human beings, the principle of utility and the hedonic calculus (which has already been mentioned).

  2. Compare Two Deontological Theories

    and the theory states that every action must work to fulfil its purpose; every action against it is immoral. According to the theory natural law is accessible through the natural order of the world and is unchanging. It is arguable that part of the theory is teleological as it is

  1. Analyse the key strengths for the arguments of the existence of God based on ...

    asserting a religious emotion to the existence of a transcendent being who is the object of that emotion is logically flawed. Further criticism of this goes on to say that experience of X only "indicates" the reality - not proven, Vardy uses the example of if someone said they experienced a UFO would you believe it was real?

  2. Give an account of Kant(TM)s theory of ethics

    An example of this is lying; it is immoral, for if everyone else lied, it would lead to a world where you couldn't trust anyone. The second principle is, do not treat humans as a means to an end. So in other words, never use humans for another purpose, or don't exploit them.

  1. Examine the main strengths and weakness of the Cosmological argument for the existence of ...

    can never be infinite, otherwise there would be no such series to begin with as contingent beings cannot cause themselves to, in the example of the dominos, fall. To strengthen the idea of the need for a first, necessary cause further, advocators refer to modern science which has also identified

  2. outline situation ethics

    He believed that something could be determined as good or evil, depending on whether or not love had been fully served. Fletcher made four presuppositions before setting out his theory: i) Pragmatisim - the course of action must work towards an end, where love is that end.

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