Philosophy Normative Ethics Questions Medium
Consequentialism and deontological ethics are two contrasting approaches within the field of normative ethics. While both aim to provide guidance on how individuals should act morally, they differ in their fundamental principles and focus.
Consequentialism, also known as teleological ethics, is an ethical theory that evaluates the morality of an action based on its consequences or outcomes. According to consequentialism, the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined solely by the overall balance of its consequences. The most well-known form of consequentialism is utilitarianism, which holds that the morally right action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or utility for the greatest number of people. In other words, the end justifies the means in consequentialism, as long as the outcome produces the greatest overall good.
On the other hand, deontological ethics, also known as non-consequentialism, focuses on the inherent nature of the action itself rather than its consequences. Deontologists argue that certain actions are inherently right or wrong, regardless of their outcomes. This ethical theory is based on the idea of duty or obligation, where individuals have a set of moral rules or principles that they must follow. Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative is a prominent example of deontological ethics, which states that individuals should act according to principles that could be universally applied without contradiction. In deontological ethics, the means matter as much as, if not more than, the ends.
To summarize, the main difference between consequentialism and deontological ethics lies in their focus. Consequentialism emphasizes the consequences or outcomes of an action, while deontological ethics focuses on the inherent nature of the action itself and the moral principles guiding it. Consequentialism prioritizes the greatest overall good, whereas deontological ethics emphasizes duty and universal moral rules.