3.1 Deontological Ethics: Duty-Based Morality

Deontological ethics focuses on moral duties and rules, judging actions based on their adherence to these principles rather than their consequences. This approach, championed by Kant, emphasizes the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions and the importance of treating people as ends in themselves.

Deontology contrasts with consequentialist theories like utilitarianism. While it provides clear moral guidelines, critics argue it can be inflexible in complex situations. Understanding deontology is crucial for grasping the broader landscape of ethical theories and their practical applications.

Deontological Ethics and Moral Duties

Defining Deontological Ethics

Top images from around the web for Defining Deontological Ethics

• 

  Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Ethics | Introduction to Ethics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Defining Deontological Ethics

• 

  Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Types of Ethics | Introduction to Ethics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The three moral codes of behaviour | Clamor World View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Deontology is a normative ethical theory that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to rules or duties
• Deontologists believe that there are certain inviolable moral rules that must be followed regardless of the consequences
• Moral duties are determined by reason, and actions are considered right if they conform to these duties
• Deontological theories focus on the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions

Kantian Ethics and the Categorical Imperative

• The most well-known deontological theory is Kantian ethics, which emphasizes the categorical imperative and the inherent dignity of persons
• Kant's categorical imperative states that one should "act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law"
• This principle requires that the moral rules we follow could be universally adopted without contradiction or absurdity
• Kant also argued that we have a moral duty to respect the inherent dignity of all persons and to treat them as ends in themselves, never merely as means to an end

Moral Absolutism in Deontology

The Concept of Moral Absolutism

• Moral absolutism is the view that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are right or wrong regardless of the context or consequences
• Deontological theories often embrace moral absolutism, asserting that there are certain moral rules or duties that are universally and eternally valid
• Moral absolutists argue that there are clear, objective moral truths that apply in all situations, and that it is never permissible to violate these fundamental moral principles

Critiques of Moral Absolutism

• Critics of moral absolutism argue that it fails to account for the complexity of moral decision-making and the need to consider contextual factors and competing moral principles
• They contend that moral absolutism can lead to inflexible and dogmatic thinking, and that it may not provide adequate guidance in situations where moral duties conflict
• Some argue that moral absolutism can be used to justify intolerance and the imposition of one's moral views on others, without considering alternative perspectives or cultural differences

Intentions and Motives in Morality

The Significance of Intentions in Deontology

• Deontological theories place significant emphasis on the intentions and motives behind an action, rather than solely on the consequences of the action
• According to Kant, the moral worth of an action lies in the motive or maxim behind it, and an action is only truly moral if it is performed out of a sense of duty and respect for the moral law
• Actions performed solely for self-interested reasons or out of inclination, even if they happen to conform to moral rules, lack moral worth in Kant's view

The Doctrine of Double Effect

• The doctrine of double effect, which is often invoked in deontological reasoning, distinguishes between intended and foreseen consequences of an action
• It holds that it may be permissible to cause harm as a side effect of promoting a good end, but not to intend harm as a means to a good end
• For example, administering high doses of pain medication to a terminally ill patient may be morally permissible, even if it hastens death, as long as the intention is to relieve suffering and not to cause death
• Critics argue that the doctrine of double effect can be used to rationalize morally questionable actions and that it is often difficult to clearly distinguish between intended and merely foreseen consequences

Critiques of Intention-Based Morality

• Critics argue that judging the morality of actions solely based on intentions is insufficient, as it fails to account for the actual impact of our actions on others
• They contend that we have a moral responsibility to consider the foreseeable consequences of our actions, even if they are unintended
• Some argue that an excessive focus on intentions can lead to moral self-absorption and a failure to engage with the real-world effects of our choices

Deontology vs Consequentialism

Contrasting Moral Frameworks

• Consequentialist theories, such as utilitarianism, hold that the morality of an action depends solely on its consequences, whereas deontological theories focus on the intrinsic rightness or wrongness of actions based on moral rules or duties
• Deontologists believe that certain actions, such as lying or murder, are inherently wrong regardless of their consequences, while consequentialists would judge the morality of these actions based on their overall impact on human well-being
• Consequentialists argue that it is the ends that justify the means, while deontologists assert that the means must be justified in and of themselves, and that it is never acceptable to use immoral means to achieve moral ends

Critiques and Limitations

• Deontological theories are often criticized for their inflexibility and for failing to provide clear guidance in situations where moral duties conflict (lying to protect an innocent person from harm)
• Consequentialist theories are criticized for their potential to justify the violation of individual rights in the name of the greater good (sacrificing an innocent person to save a larger number of lives)
• Both frameworks have difficulty dealing with moral dilemmas and trade-offs, where the right course of action may be unclear or where competing moral principles come into conflict

Mixed Theories and Moral Particularism

• Some philosophers, such as W.D. Ross, have proposed mixed theories that incorporate both deontological and consequentialist elements, recognizing prima facie duties but allowing for the weighing of consequences in cases of conflict between duties
• Moral particularists argue that the morality of an action cannot be determined by abstract rules or principles, but must be judged on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific context and details of the situation
• These approaches attempt to combine the strengths of deontology and consequentialism while addressing their respective limitations, but they also face challenges in providing clear and consistent moral guidance