Skip to main content

Consequentialism vs Deontology

 

Consequentialism vs Deontology

Is it a glass half-empty or a glass half-full? It appears to me that what separates consequentialism and deontology is perspective. LaFollette (2007) writes that consequentialists must explain which consequences we should count, how much weight or consideration we should give those that do count, and how we should use these considerations when deliberating (p. 25). However, deontology is usually regarded as a foil to consequentialism (Heinzelmann, 2018, p. 5201). What I find as the takeaway from this situation is that consequentialism isn’t necessarily grounded in morality, whereas deontology finds itself in a set of negative rules. As LaFollette points out with consequentialism, we must look at and use several dimensions to understand and consider what are the consequences of a situation. Deontology doesn’t require this additional gate check, but instead relies on our experience learning right and wrong from the negative perspective. Much like a game of keep away, we’re taught at an early age to stay away from things, not to touch things, not to look at things, not to put ourselves in bad situations and to remember the negative fate. Philosophers, political theorists, and cognitive scientists have applied the traditional distinction between deontology and consequentialism to determine ethical responsibilities (Milkoreit, 2015, p. 397). What I’ve found from primary research is that both consequentialism and deontology elicit a response built through repetition. Consequentialism takes its form from internal judgements predicated on how a person deliberates the moral issue. These judgements are usually rooted in implicit bias, as each person forms their own analysis of a situation from their experiences, deliberates the issue and responds. Deontology is more straightforward and predictable due to the nature of how each person developed their own thoughts about a situation. The social norms created through deontology are generally acceptable because it focuses on the repetitive negative rules I’ve already mentioned. We’ve all heard these from adolescence to adulthood and each of us could probably provide numerous examples.

How I lean – Consequentialism or Deontology?

Its difficult to know which way I lean with these subjects, because I’m only now becoming familiar with them. I understood the basics of both consequentialism and deontology but didn’t know the internal framework or how they were constructed prior to this point in my life. I enjoy aspects of both but would guess I’ve tended to lean towards deontology. I feel that this makes my thinking a more basic form, rather than intuitive or thoughtful. Deontology takes much of the guesswork out of equation of know what is right or wrong. Deontology is a careful reminder of my mother standing over and scolding me about something I should not have done. Placing negative connotations on actions usually reminds us more not to do that again. See the glass half-empty. If you’ve even been caught shoplifting as a child, you’ll never forget the whooping, screaming or occasional dust up with the law to remind you that you shouldn’t have done it.

However, I feel like consequentialism plays a larger role in my life than I once thought. As I approach certain situations, specifically those that have longer lasting impacts like business decisions at work, financial decisions at home or picking the right school for my children, it seems I lean away from deontology. Consequentialism appears to be the more cognitive approach to weighing some consequences and deontology has the quicker outcomes. But as we’ve heard from LaFollette, deontology isn’t as simple as it seems. Obviously, any combination of decision making can be weighted differently, and deontology is not excluded from this fact. The problem is knowing which (moral rules) is weightier and by how much (LaFollette, 2007, p. 31). I still have a lot more to learn, but it is exciting to see how these take shape in our lives.

References

Heinzelmann, N. (2018). Deontology defended. Synthese, 195(12), 5197-5216. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s11229-018-1762-3

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. In The practice of ethics (pp. 8-21). Malden, MA:

Blackwell Pub.

Milkoreit, M. (2015). Hot deontology and cold consequentialism - an empirical exploration of ethical reasoning among climate change negotiators. Climatic Change, 130(3), 397-409. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s10584-014-1170-8

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How I make choosing easier

In Sheena Iyengar’s TEDx video (2011), she describes four techniques you can use to improve choosing or decision-making. These techniques included cut, concretize, categorize and condition. Each technique is unique, and I have used these at one point or another in my life. As Iyengar describes it, she says to “be choosy about choosing” (Iyengar, 2011) which is a brilliant statement that summarizes her video about making choices. Whether you’re a child or an adult, everyone goes through each day having to make many decisions. All too often, we over complicate scenarios in which we could have used these techniques to improve our decision-making. The two techniques I’d like to discuss are cut and categorize. Cut or cutting, involves reducing or outright eliminating choices from the decision matrix. In order to make choosing easier, we must reduce the number of choices. Iyengar (2011) points out the choice overload problem, where as consumers, we are overloaded with far too many choice...
Post a Comment
Read more

My Strengths and Weaknesses

  My Distinctive Strengths I feel like a lot of what I do I do really well. When I put my mind to it, I believe I can do whatever I want. I know that I’m well organized, I’m a great communicator, I’m someone that recognizes strengths in other people and I’m also great at building people up. My Potential Strengths I know I can do better in some areas, but certain things prevent me from accomplishing them. Namely, if I don’t already have work in my queue, I’m really not that interested in adding it. This also adds to a lack of focus, which is something I know I should do better. Also, I think I could do a better job at remembering things if I applied myself more to the situation. Dispositions That Support Me My positivity is at the top of the list for me that I don’t want to change. I get so much of my mojo from being and staying positive that I can’t see myself changing this. I also think that my faith is something that I wouldn’t change, unless I did it for myself. That i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Guns, Guns, Guns

  Guns Do we have a right to bear arms? According to LaFollette (2007), this is a moral question, not a constitutional one (p. 180). The United States Constitution certainly says we do. Millions of citizens would also say we do, as well. Hundreds of years ago, the founding fathers of this country decided that people should be able own firearms. It wasn’t simply owning the weapons that they were intent on stating, but that it was a right of every person. A right means that no one can take it away from you for any reason. Just like freedom of speech, everyone has the right to own a gun. However, there are concerns, rightfully so, from people who wish to create a more sensible approach to this right. Gun control advocates have long considered accidents involving guns a major reason for introducing greater regulation of firearms, including such measures as mandated training for gun purchases, firearm safety locks, and strict limitations on the ownership of handguns ( Utter & Spi...
Post a Comment
Read more