Week 30, 2021 — Issue #162Photo by Christina @ wocintechchat.com on UnsplashEach week: three ideas on and about the future of work. This week: three ideas on morality and ethics. Show
As is about to become apparent, I never took philosophy in school. I never studied ethics. But I still find it to be a fascinating topic. So much so that I’d like to devote this issue to the practical means with which organizations can determine the moral course of action. Let’s dig in. 1. Deontological EthicsThe action is good if it follows the rules Deontological Ethics (aka Duty Ethics) focuses on actions; it holds that actions are moral if they abide by rules laid down by an external source, regardless of what the outcomes might be. This is good in the sense that it underscores equality and human rights (e.g., we’re all equal under the law). But it’s problematic in the sense that it can create tensions if and when people abide by different rules. 2. Utilitarian EthicsThe action is good if the consequences are good Utilitarian Ethics (aka Consequentialism) is outcome-focused; it holds that actions are moral if they maximize the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is good in that it holds the actor accountable for the outcome of their action. But it’s problematic in the sense that it’s often hard to predict beforehand what that outcome will be. 3. Virtue EthicsThe action is good if it’s what a virtuous person would do. Last but not least: Virtue Ethics is teleological in nature; it holds that actions are moral if they abide by virtues that help to maximize the wellbeing and fulfillment of the individual. This is good in that it’s holistic, focusing not on one action but on the actor’s life as a whole. But it’s problematic in that it assumes one person’s ‘good life’ benefits all. Hopefully, I’ve managed to stay out of trouble so far. But that’s about to change. Up next: an attempt to connect ethics and morality with decision making and organizational design:
That puts core values in a rather different light, does it not? Few organizations bother to define core values, must less connect them to wellbeing and fulfillment. But maybe the old Greeks were on to something? Maybe it’s time that we reconsider our use and disuse of core values? Food for thought. Disclaimer: any and all errors found in the above are mine and mine alone. Such errors should under no circumstance tarnish the 2,000+ years of human thought that came before. The primary difference between deontology and utilitarianism, two competing systems of ethics, is that the former system is concerned with whether an act is intrinsically right or wrong, while the latter system believes that only the consequences of an act are important. Deontology deals with intentions and motives. Utilitarianism focuses only on results. Advocates of utilitarianism believe that all actions must seek to produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. This applies even if an act harms an innocent person. For example, if a surgeon has the chance to save three lives by harvesting the organs of a healthy person, utilitarian theory suggests that harming the healthy person is acceptable to save a greater number of lives. By contrast, deontology focuses on the moral aspects of any action, not its consequences. This philosophy believes that some acts are always wrong, regardless of the consequences. Deontologists find lying to be unacceptable, for example, even when someone lies in order to bring about a desirable result. Both of these systems have weaknesses. For instance, critics charge that utilitarianism justifies enslaving a small group of people in order to help a larger group. Critics of deontology point out that its rigidity does not allow for exceptional cases where a morally dubious action avoids causing harm to others. MORE FROM REFERENCE.COM What is the difference between deontological ethics and utilitarian ethics?In practical ethics, two arms of thoughts exist in decision-making: Utilitarian and deontological. In utilitarian ethics, outcomes justify the means or ways to achieve it, whereas in deontological ethics, duties/obligations are of prime importance (i.e., end/outcomes may not justify the means).
What are the differences between utilitarianism and deontology quizlet?How does Utilitarian's morality differ from that of a Deontologist? Utilitarian tries to produce the most happiness for the most people, as deontologist decide what's right to do by the law and rule.
What is the difference between the deontological theory of Kant and the utilitarian theory of Bentham mill?Both of these theories were introduced during the 18th century. However, these two diverge in their focus. Accordingly, the main difference between Kantianism and Utilitarianism is that Kantianism is a deontological moral theory whereas utilitarianism is a teleological moral theory.
What is the similarity between deontology and utilitarianism?The two are similar in the sense that they are both concerned with attempting to make out what human actions are right and what actions are wrong. However, beyond that, there are no similarities. They are polar opposites in how they approach understanding what is good and bad.
|
What is the difference between the deontological and utilitarian ethical theories?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 de.ketajaman Inc.
