Immanuel Kant's Deontological Ethics Or Action-Based Theories
Deontological ethics or action-based theories mainly focus on the actions people implement. This allows people to break their bad habits and truly get rid of all the anger and hatred they contain. Deontologist believe that you should always do the right thing even if it results in pain rather than doing the wrong thing, it is your duty. One of history's’ greatest philosophers, Immanuel Kant, was also a great believe of doing the right thing. His overall perspective within was that if you commit a good deed the context must also be good. An example of this would be , someone has lost their wallet you help them look for it out of the kindness of your heart. Now if you help look for it in hopes of getting some sort of money or reward in return then it does not apply to these ethics. To him, ‘a
…show more content…
good will’ is a good action no matter the consequences.To determine this he used Categorical Imperative which were followed by two simple rules.
One was that moral roles must be universalisable and the other, moral rules must respect human beings. Overall, these rules express that it should apply to everyone and allow people to feel as if they are valuable nothing less.
As usual with an approach comes many different aspects, whether they consists of drawbacks and/or benefits. Beginning on a positive note, deontological ethics allows everyone to feel treated and respected equally.That is one of the most important concepts because as humans if we don’t support each other we do not only weaken the value of others but our self value. If others aren’t aware of their equality, how can you be so sure you are truly aware of your own? That’s what it all comes down to, equal respect. Now, going back to Kant, it supports a positive aspect because it simply expresses doing good for the good
of it, not for a result. But, one thing that gets people second guessing the positive is that if a wrong act was not intended then it can be an exception, sounding a bit contradicting. This breaks the moral rule in which everyone should be treated equally because now you are giving some people “exceptions” to an act while others may feel it was intended or that they feel they should be allowed exception also. Along with benefits follows drawbacks of deontological ethics. Furthering into drawbacks,due to the fact that it is not based on an outcome, bad results can lead to very unhappy people, decreasing the satisfaction and joy amongst people. Since duty-based ethics are used to dealing with good deeds and positive actions, when it comes to controversy there is very little chance in diminishing the problem. Once again, leading to very unhappy people, which defeats the purpose of their approach. Although there were drawbacks, the benefits outweighed them and simply had more significance it attempting to better the lives of humans as humans, along with respect and equality of one another. Solely, meeting the standard of the approach and contributing to its rules.
good will’ is a good action no matter the consequences.To determine this he used Categorical Imperative which were followed by two simple rules.
One was that moral roles must be universalisable and the other, moral rules must respect human beings. Overall, these rules express that it should apply to everyone and allow people to feel as if they are valuable nothing less.
As usual with an approach comes many different aspects, whether they consists of drawbacks and/or benefits. Beginning on a positive note, deontological ethics allows everyone to feel treated and respected equally.That is one of the most important concepts because as humans if we don’t support each other we do not only weaken the value of others but our self value. If others aren’t aware of their equality, how can you be so sure you are truly aware of your own? That’s what it all comes down to, equal respect. Now, going back to Kant, it supports a positive aspect because it simply expresses doing good for the good
of it, not for a result. But, one thing that gets people second guessing the positive is that if a wrong act was not intended then it can be an exception, sounding a bit contradicting. This breaks the moral rule in which everyone should be treated equally because now you are giving some people “exceptions” to an act while others may feel it was intended or that they feel they should be allowed exception also. Along with benefits follows drawbacks of deontological ethics. Furthering into drawbacks,due to the fact that it is not based on an outcome, bad results can lead to very unhappy people, decreasing the satisfaction and joy amongst people. Since duty-based ethics are used to dealing with good deeds and positive actions, when it comes to controversy there is very little chance in diminishing the problem. Once again, leading to very unhappy people, which defeats the purpose of their approach. Although there were drawbacks, the benefits outweighed them and simply had more significance it attempting to better the lives of humans as humans, along with respect and equality of one another. Solely, meeting the standard of the approach and contributing to its rules.