Deontologists At the nucleus of deontology we find obligation to bind us to rules wither they are rules we like or dislike. The word deontology steams from the Greek word for duty (deon) and science (or study) of (logos). (www.britannica.com) The logos in Greek referees to the principle of order and knowledge. Truly I am in a conquest of seeking knowledge and how the knowing can give me an edge in my personal, physical, mental and spiritual life. I have always patterned myself as a seeker. The normative theory of deontology enamors me to want more of logos.
Consequentialism stats that when you make a decision you truly do not know the consequences until after the action has ended. Which is only partial to the outcome of our action. A deontologist knows that all means have a consequence and in reasoning you can know what some of those consequences are before even making that action. Such an example would be that a consequentialist jumps of a cliff in hopes that he can fly only to find that his actions did not pan out and he is splat on a ground. A deontologist argues that if he would jump off a cliff he would not fly because of the pressure he feels whenever he picks something up off the ground. Neither has studied physics but, the deontologist knows that all actions have a reaction because of rationality or a drawing of logical inferences.
A deontologist will base a right or wrong action on the duty to do something or not do something, one’s own intentions and a list of established rules. So a deontologist stats that all people who cheat on their taxes are criminals, which is a principle but, a consequentialist would argue that cheating on my taxes is only wrong if the outcome is negative.
So in both consequentialists and in deontology we find that there are many differences and abilities to have opinions and stick with the core of the theory. But Kant stats that we don’t own any direct obligations as a deontologist to anybody who isn’t a rational being. And in the rational thinking moral agents are also moral patients but, all moral patients are also moral agents as well. In the categorical sense treating all individuals with some level of respect in our city would be to treat them in the way they have treated others. But in doing so we know the action of the how they are treated by how they have treated others may invertible cause an action that is un-universal in action. So we have to rationalize the maxim in that action based on the present but, also weighting the future tense not wanting to affect the globalization.
A foreign exchange student comes to our school and after studying the individual we rational make a decision that he likes to burp the alphabet after each meal. So we attempt to copy our foreign exchange student but, in attempts to befriend him we cause a local shortage of leather that makes the footballs used in our town. Because our foreign exchange student is actually the heir of a foreign dignitary and we insulted them. But we remember that the threshold of a deontologist, may still determine a right action even in areas governed by an agent relative obligations, once the level of a misjudged consequence was produced. So in theory a deontologist can claim to know the content of deontological morality by direct intuition.
The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our actions. Our inner balance, and even our very existence depends on it. Only morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to our lives. (Albert Einstein)