Question: 4. How could the utilitarians look at making a false promise? How can the Kantians look at making a false promise? Do you think that utilitarianism is better than Kantian ethics? Introduction: A False promise means “a promise that is made with no intention of carrying it out and esp. that is made with intent to deceive or defraud”. Nowadays‚ making false promises has become ubiquitous in our daily life. Is it a right action or not? Based on Kantian ethic and Utilitarianism‚ there
Premium Ethics Immanuel Kant Morality
good for the greatest number” (pp. 12-1). Deontology is defined by the moral obligation of rules and duties. The rules and duties are based on the correctness or principle of an action without regard to consequences. This compares to utilitarianism where the right action is determined by how the action brings about the greatest utility to the group as a whole (Boylan‚ 2009). Both theories disregard the consequences of that action. Deontology ignores the all consequences‚ where utilitarianism
Premium Ethics Virtue ethics Morality
Introduction Explores the ethical works of Hannah Arendt What Guides Ethical Decision Making A processor manufacturing company who are currently facing financial troubles completed an order about three months ago for newly designed high-powered processors that are smaller than and four times as powerful as its predecessor. These processors are to be placed into cutting edge cellular phones by a leading cellular phone manufacturer whose release date is a mere month away. A design inconsistency was
Premium Ethics Decision making Morality
ninety Indians living and one dying versus all of them dying. In utilitarianism an action is good even if it involves killing a man as long as more people are happy than sad. Even if Jim has to live with blood on his hands the rest of his live a utilitarian would say that it would be selfish to only think about how you’re going to feel and not the ninety Indians and their
Premium Immanuel Kant Deontological ethics Morality
This essay will attempt to determine at which point deceit‚ larceny‚ and breaking a promise will be considered morally wrong according to three moral philosophies‚ with Kantian Deontology providing the clearest answer. The two other philosophies chosen are Utilitarianism and Virtue ethics. To begin with‚ Kantian Deontology will discuss the nature of ones duty towards always telling the truth as well as how a promise is considered ’good’ in accord with duty will be discussed‚ followed by a disassembly
Premium Morality Ethics Utilitarianism
dilemma can also be examined by using the utilitarian‚ deontological‚ and virtue ethics frameworks. FRAMEWORK: UTILITARIAN The utilitarian framework originates from John Stuart Mill and can also be known as the consequentialist framework. These frameworks can be identified by these two names because they both focus on the final consequences of a decision as well as maximizing the utility (benefits) to society. When I was placed in an ethical dilemma‚ the utilitarian framework involved identifying all
Premium Ethics Virtue ethics Virtue
greatest good for the greatest number of people. In contrast‚ deontology looks at the duty that faces the person responsible for the action or decision. Deontology denies the utilitarian belief that the ends do justify the means. It holds that there are some things that we should or should not do regardless of the consequences. When these frameworks are applied to the situation at McWane‚ it is easy to conclude that the utilitarian approach has been more prominent than the deontological approach
Premium Ethics Occupational safety and health
view is referred to as utilitarianism‚ and a non-consequentialist view can be known as deontology. In line with utilitarianism‚ an action’s morality depends upon its final result or consequences. This policy holds that morally appropriate actions are those that provide essentially the most benefit to essentially the most men and women. When the hindrance of deforestation is examined via the eyes of a utilitarian‚ we are obligated to avoid deforestation considering the fact that this may benefit the
Premium Utilitarianism Ethics Peter Singer
Assessment. We will then evaluate the four types of ethical perspectives. Which include character/virtue‚ obligation/deontology‚ results/utilitarianism‚ and lastly‚ equity/relativism. Then we will conclude with a brief discussion on issues one is likely to encounter dealing with ethical dilemmas at Bank of America. The four ethical perspectives include character/virtue‚ obligation/deontology‚ results/utilitarianism‚ and equity/relativism; thus‚ making up CORE. These different ethical perspectives help
Premium Ethics Morality
What this case has to offer This case allows the students to apply the ethical theories of utilitarianism‚ deontology and virtue ethics to a real situation‚ although the names have been altered so not as to bias any discussion in class. On March 14‚ 2007 Chiquita Brands International entered into a plea agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice. Chiquita agreed to pay a $25 million fine after it admitted that it made payments to a terrorist organization for protection of its operations in Columbia
Premium Ethics United Fruit Company Virtue ethics