...1. Suppose that you had been one of the MBA applicants who stumbled across an opportunity to learn your results early. What would you have done, and why? Would you have considered it a moral decision? If so, on what basis would you have made it? If I were in the same situation as the other applicants, I definitely would have checked my status. Getting into Harvard is probably one of the biggest accomplishments one can make in their professional career before completing business school. Upon graduation, a graduate’s door is blown open to exclusive networking mixers, job assistance searches, and invaluable connections made with peers. Therefore, if I had to wait another month, I probably would have made the same mistake the other 119 students did and attempt to check my application status. However, I would (probably like most people) justify my actions by shifting the blame of the unethical behavior to the shoulders of Harvard and ApplyYourself because “it was too easy to check.” With that said, I would consider the action unethical, and when being rejected along with the other 119 students, I then would probably reflect on my actions and accept I had made a mistake. I would have made this decision by weighting the non-Kantian form of non-consequentialist’s first rule – moral decision making involved the weighing of different moral factors and considerations. I would say that it was more immoral to check my status rather than waiting to find out Harvard’s decision. 2....
Words: 2072 - Pages: 9
...are talking about when they refer to 'the principle of the thing'. Duty-based ethics teaches that some acts are right or wrong because of the sorts of things they are, and people have a duty to act accordingly, regardless of the good or bad consequences that may be produced. Some kinds of action are wrong or right in themselves, regardless of the consequences. Deontologists live in a universe of moral rules, such as: It is wrong to kill innocent people It is wrong to steal It is wrong to tell lies It is right to keep promises Someone who follows Duty-based ethics should do the right thing, even if that produces more harm (or less good) than doing the wrong thing: People have a duty to do the right thing, even if it produces a bad result. So, for example, the philosopher Kant thought that it would be wrong to tell a lie in order to save a friend from a murderer. If we compare Deontologists with Consequentialists we can see that Consequentialists begin by considering what things are good, and identify 'right' actions as the ones that produce the maximum of those good things. Deontologists appear to do it the other way around; they first consider what actions are 'right' and proceed from there. (Actually this is what they do in practice, but it isn't really the starting point of deontological thinking.) So a person is doing something good if they are doing a morally right action. Top Good and bad points Good points of duty-based ethics emphasises...
Words: 5289 - Pages: 22
...most members of a society. Utilitarianism is thus often considered a 'consequentialist' philosophical outlook because it both believes that outcomes can be predicted and because it judges actions based on their outcomes. Thus, utilitarianism is often associated with the phrase 'the ends justify 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 argue that there are transcendent ethical norms and truths that are universally applicable to all people. Deontology holds that some actions are immoral regardless of their outcomes; these actions are wrong in and of themselves. Kant gives a 'categorical imperative' to act morally at all times. The categorical imperative, in its most widely used formulation, demands that humans act as though their actions would be universalized into a general rule of nature. Kant believes that all people come to moral conclusions about right and wrong 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 other people at gunpoint and tells you that she will kill all ten of your fellow prisoners unless you kill...
Words: 666 - Pages: 3
...which means duty or obligation) is that deciding upon what is right or not for any situation should be based on a preconceived set of rules and our duty to follow them, disregarding any possible consequences. Many of us abide to a set of regulations which we try not to betray, like for example “do not lie.” However, this maxim is often twisted by the moral agent to fit the current situation. A deontologist would not do that. If I were to subscribe to the deontological doctrine, my rule (in this case “do not lie”) would be constant and invariable, applying it by the letter in every context. It is easy to see that this view on morality is absolutist, leaving no space for exceptions, and it is this feature that makes this theory as old as human history: “when the word of the chief, or the king, or God, was given unconditionally and without invitation to appeal on the basis of consequences”1). But deontology is not a one-way-only approach to moral obligations. The theory is actually commonly divided in two subsections: Act deontology and rule deontology. Act Deontology Act deontologists believe that there is no such thing as a global set of rules by which we should guide our actions. Instead, they speculate that for each situation there are many possible outcomes that would be favorable. Such idea comes from...
Words: 1500 - Pages: 6
...the truth of their newly developed cigarettes, he would be right or wrong. In the case with his company, he will be considered doing wrong. If Fred were a Utilitarian he would want to bring good to the society as a whole by letting the public know that the cigarettes in production is actually more addictive and has a higher chance of developing cancer in smokers. He would disregard the repercussions that would affect his family and career even when he is financially secure. His moral beliefs would tell him that his actions are for the greater good and so much more important than himself and the circumstances he is in. 2. If Fred were a Deontologist (Kant), what would he do? Deontology is the ethics of duty and is a non-consequentialist theory. The ethics of deontology is that people have an obligation and are bound to their duty. Kant believed that to act morally in the right way, people must act from duty. He also argued that it was not the consequences...
Words: 588 - Pages: 3
...century philosopher Immanuel Kant, And utilitarianism which is the brainchild of philosophers John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. As a result, the essay has been organised as follow. Firstly, I will show the merger differences between utilitarianism and deontology. Secondly, I will show the similarities between these ethical systems. Thirdly, I will show the strengths and weaknesses of deontology. Lastly, I will show the strengths and weaknesses of utilitarianism and conclude. There are differences that are considered from these moral systems because of different values that moral scholars have about actions and behaviour of individuals. Deontological reasoning refers to duty, which is usually determined without regard to circumstances or consequences. Utilitarian reasoning always considers circumstances and consequences. Utilitarianism it believes that outcomes as a result of an action have a greater value compared to the latter.” It also states that ast so as to produce the greatest possible happiness for the greatest number of people”. As a result, utilitarianism depends on consequentiality. Meanwhile, deontology is another moral theory that is dependent on the Scriptures—which may refer to rules, and moral laws.it is the study of duty and law. Deontology advocates that both the actions and outcomes must be ethical. It points out that the action’s morality is of greater weight and the result of a wrong action does not make its outcome the same. Kant puts it in this way: “act...
Words: 1068 - Pages: 5
...Module 1: Lying We generally think of lying as negative, and lying is sometimes referred to as fraud or cheating and might lead to severe punishment. However, is it possible for lies to be justified? In module one, a lie in military and a lie in business were presented. In the military case ‘Operation Fortitude’, the Allies fooled the Nazis by creating fake invasion signals. In the business case, Harold provided fake documents to the bank to get a loan in order to pay salaries in his business. Are these two lies justified? In the following content, I would analyze the ‘Operation Fortitude’ and the fake document for loan from a utilitarian point of view and a deontological point of view. Then I would give my own opinion on whether I think it is ethical to lie in these two cases. From a Utilitarian point of view, an ethical action is an action that maximizes utility. In the example of three grandchildren taking care of their grandmother, despite the three children having different motives, it is considered ethical in a utilitarian point of view as long as the children show up and take care of the grandmother. Another example raised in class is whether to give a waiter tips in a restaurant that you will not likely visit in the future. In a utilitarian point of view, as long as the result is the waiter receiving the tips, which generates utility to him, no matter what the motives of giving the tip is, the customer is ethical. The deception of...
Words: 941 - Pages: 4
...justify your own views with reasons – don’t just state your opinions without arguing for them in terms of moral values. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/#DeoTheKan http://www.slideshare.net/kljonz/individual-ethics-essay-1 There are two major ethics theories that attempt to specify and justify moral rules and principles; these are utilitarianism and deontological ethics. Utilitarianism (also known as consequentialism) is a moral theory developed and refined in the modern world in the writings of Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873).(1) Deontology is a ??? theory developed from the eighteenth century philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). The theory utilitarianism is the morality of an act that is judged by it’s utility. The greatest utility that is has for the most people; the greatest usefulness an act has for the most people. Utilitarianism states morality is not based in the act itself but in the consequences of the act. The utilitarian approach to morality implies that no moral act or rule is intrinsically right or wrong; it is the rightness or wrongness of an act or rule that is solely a matter of the overall nonmoral good (pleasure, happiness, health, knowledge, or...
Words: 1646 - Pages: 7
...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...
Words: 625 - Pages: 3
...ought to live our lives. Deontology and utilitarianism are the two philosophies that I shall be evaluating and applying throughout this essay. These are two time-honoured philosophical positions that apply to a wide variety of topics. Deontology is an ethical system that is attributed to the philosophical tradition of Immanuel Kant. Deontology demands that the actions, or means themselves must be ethical. This philosophy is based upon principles of duty and obligation, we have the freedom to act morally (right) or otherwise (wrong) based on General Universal Laws. To respect life means that you must not kill, to respect others is not to steal these moral laws are black and white as you must do what is right and do not do what is wrong regardless of circumstance or outcome. Deontologists argue that there are transcendent ethical norms and truths that are universally applicable to all people. Deontology holds that some actions are immoral regardless of their consequence; these actions are wrong in and of themselves. We should not act out of feeling, inclination, love or compassion, but out of our moral duty according to the universal moral laws. Kant gives a ‘categorical imperative’ to act morally at all times. The categorical imperative has three main principles and helps us to know which actions are obligatory and which are forbidden. Moral statements are categorical in that they prescribe actions irrespective of the result. These principles are: 1. The Universal Law – Universal...
Words: 3773 - Pages: 16
...Rhonda Dudley Take home test 1 Question |A situation arises in which it is possible (though not a guaranteed outcome) that using coercive and violent means to extract | | |information from a person in the state's custody may yield information that may save the lives of dozens or even hundreds of | | |citizens. | | |Should the state employ torture as a method of obtaining information for the sake of protecting its citizens? | | Immanuel Kant’s philosophy is driven by his passion and concern for the dignity of the individual autonomous will. He believed that autonomous will has worth in itself because it is an end in itself. (Otteson,2009) If one is a Kantian, the use of torture to obtain information from a human being would not be an option. A true Kantian believes that all humanity should be treated with respect both in themselves and in others but never as a means to an end. In addition, one is never permitted to abuse someone’s humanity. The violent act of torturing another human being for any given reason is not moral. Further, to apply universal morality to this act the state would have to enforce the same treatment for everyone they need to obtain the truth from. Moral laws are universal principles of which all human beings are subject to. There are no excuses for breaking the...
Words: 1294 - Pages: 6
...Immanuel Kant argued that morality must be derived from practical principles. It is based on the premise that some behaviors are morally obligatory or prohibited regardless of the benefits that may be achieved by doing or not doing them. Deontologists prohibit active or passive killing and thus euthanasia. It preaches the importance of respecting an individual’s rationality and humanity as an end to itself. He distinguished between perfect or obligatory duties that can never be breached and imperfect duties that aim at a specific outcome. Kantian ethicists believe that the intention of the act is more important than the act itself. Kant would view Euthanasia as a formula of an end in itself and an imperfect duty. He stressed that it is important to act out of a sense of duty in order to achieve the best outcome (Sober, 2005). Kant asserted that people must be treated as an end in themselves and not as means to accomplish a task. Kant’s first formulation of categorical imperative portrays man as a rational being who must act in accordance with the universal law. He also asserts that we must not act in a way that distresses other human beings in order to accomplish our task. By denying Ms. Rodriguez her appeal to take her life and in keeping with both the universal and constitutional law the court acted in accordance with the Kantian principles of morality. Kant would agree with the court’s decision to dismiss Sue Rodriguez’s...
Words: 1433 - Pages: 6
...the other theories of ethics. Scholars have frequently contrasted this theory to Consequentialism. Immanuel Kant based Kantianism on deontology as he argued that in order to act morally, individuals should act from duty. Individual's should not pull the plug when their lives are endangered as deontology will judge the morality of such decisions based on the rule's actions. The application of deontology is better brought out by the absolute deontologists who support the belief that action are either right or wrong; pulling the plug is therefore either right or wrong, no in-betweens. The best way to view this act is to focus neither on the intentions nor consequences of the act but rather the act itself. This is what absolute deontologists uphold. The first step of the analysis is to determine what pulling the plug entails. When one ends the life of another it is considered as murder. If they end the life of many it is manslaughter. If an individual ends their lives then they are considered to have committed suicide. If they try to commit suicide and they fail they are said to have attempted suicide and are in a retribution state tried in a court of law. These illustrate that terminating life is stereotypically considered a vice in the society. Vices are wrong deeds. Pulling the plug is wrong and not right. Basing our argument on the practices of absolute deontologists we can conclude that pulling the plug is not an ethical practice. This supports my thesis in week 1 discussion...
Words: 741 - Pages: 3
... In The Evil of Lying, Fried argues that lying is always wrong even when it may have good results. Fired believes that lying is intentional and morally wrong even when the lie you have told turns out to be true. Lying, under any circumstance, is wrong as it fails to respect someone by not telling him or her the truth. A deontologist would be against lying because they believe that it is our sense of duty to not lie and always tell the truth. In order to be ethical, one must operate according to categorical imperatives. This means that lying is something that you are willing to universalize for example, if you lie then you must accept that everyone around you lies. Deontologists would also fid this difficult because although no one should lie, we cannot always refrain from lying all the time. “I do not necessarily do you harm at all by deed or word if I induce you to believe what is not in fact the case; I may even do you good, possibly by way, for example, of consolation or flattery.” This quote by G. J. Warnock is something that deontologists would not agree with because even though flattery may do someone good it is still considered lying. Deontologists believe that it is our duty to tell the truth regardless of whether it is doing someone good or harm. Consequentialists would be in favor of lying if it produced a good outcome. Consequentialists believe that ‘the ends justify the means” meaning that it doesn’t matter what you do as long as you have a good outcome and sometimes...
Words: 468 - Pages: 2
...Aristotle and Kant were both brilliant philosophers, who each strongly supported and believed in their own arguments. They were similar in their approach to ethics; they both admire reason and rationality. The basic beliefs of Aristotle contrasted with the modern ideas of Immanuel Kant which offered a great match for an interesting view of human good and good will. However, after a thorough inspection of each philosopher's theories, I found that after initially leaning toward Aristotle’s theories I discovered that Kant's idea of good was found to be more captivating than Aristotle's, in that Kant's view addressed good in a complete sense through categorical obligations of man. Aristotle was a Greek philosopher and was passionate about the virtue ethics, as were a lot of the early philosophers in Greece. He was a student of Plato and wrote on a variety of topics. “Aristotle set the tone of the virtue ethics approach with his observation that in exploring the moral dimension of experience, he said we are discussing no small matter, but how we ought to live. A sentiment that echoed Socrates’ commitment to moral action.” (Chaffee, 2013, p. 482). Aristotle believed virtue ethics was the cultivation of a virtuous person to be the goal of ethics. He believed that genuinely virtuous people would act in a moral way, as a reflection of their moral goodness. Aristotle’s main piece of work in this category is called The Nicomachean Ethics. In his book Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle...
Words: 1880 - Pages: 8
