Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism

Consequentialism and Non-Consequentialism Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism In ethics two of the most common forms of thinking are consequentialism and non-consequentialism. Consequentialism is focusing on acts that will produce the greatest outcome for everyone. This is achieved by looking at what occurred and the effects it will have on different stakeholders. Non-consequentialism believes that the most appropriate course of action is not a matter of the lasting consequences. Instead, there is an emphasis on looking at the way it treats people during the course of reaching specific objectives.

These insights are important, as they are illustrating the focus of each theory and the impact they will have on everyone. (Burgh, 2006) (Thiroux, 2012) As far as food insecurity is concerned, there are different views as to why this is occurring and how to address the problem. To fully understand what is taking place, requires using these theories in conjunction with the practice of public administration. Together, these insights will show the overall scope of problem, the contrasting views about various solutions and how they are impacting stakeholders. Consequentialism vs.

Nonconsequentialism and Food Insecurity Consequentialists will argue that that many programs focused on food insecurity are utilizing the wrong approach. This is because there is a lack of accountability in providing for those who are most in need of them. Instead, many programs will allow recipients to buy unhealthy products and to have a lack of accountability. The combination of these factors, means that they do not learn the most healthy ways to live and what foods they should be consuming.

When this happens, they will have trouble receiving the proper amounts of nutrition. It is this point, when disparities will contribute to high amounts of fat and cholesterol. While at the same time, they do not receive the most essential vitamins and nutrients to live healthy lifestyles. (Kaplan, 2012) For instance, Thompson (2013) found that this will impact the quality of life for lower income demographics. This is occurring through not having programs to encourage them to buy the foods that will help them to achieve these objectives.

Over the course of time, this creates inconsistent amounts of nutrition, by not giving these individuals and their families what is required to be healthy. (Thompson, 2013) Moreover, Thagard (2010) found that the disproportionate numbers of families are impacted from many programs by taking a one size fits all approach with no oversight. This hurts their ability to understand the effects it is having on them through not providing enough resources to address their needs.

If more customized solutions were introduced, families could receive the support they require through creating a strategy that will meet these goals. (Thagard, 2010) These insights are showing how more consequentialist objectives need to focus on creating programs that will increase the total amounts of nutrition and healthy lifestyles. If this can take place, it will result in more people realizing the greatest benefit from these shifts. In the future, this will address these disparities within the lower segments of society.

When this happens, the total amounts of stress will be reduced. (Kaplan, 2012) Non-consequentialists will argue that the most appropriate course of action is to look at the way food insecurity is impacting various individuals. This is achieved through studying the impact of the food stamp programs on various families. For instance, Heinze (2006) found that the lack of resources is having a direct effect upon their ability to sustain themselves.

This is taking place with parents being unable to provide for their children and facing added amounts of expenses in the process. Over the course of time, this creates a perpetual cycle that keeps specific segments of the population in this group. (Heinze, 2006) Furthermore, Holland (2007) determined that the inability to understand the needs of families makes it difficult for them to become independent. This is because food insecurity will lead to issues of depression and a lack of motivation.

It is at this point, when a never ending cycle will develop from failing to provide them with the resources, support or guidance in solving these problems. From a non-consequentialist perspective, these sources are showing how looking at the impact on specific families and offering them support that will address their needs is how to deal with the problem. When this happens, everyone will be able to provide for their families and can reduce the severity of these challenges. (Holland, 2007) The Means for Public Administration Today and Into the Future.

The different resources are showing how there are conflicting views about how to deal with food insecurity. This is because some will argue that creating programs which promote healthy lifestyle choices will have the greatest impact on everyone. As families will ensure that their children receive the right amounts of support to deal with these challenges. Once this takes place, is the point they will deal with the root causes of the problem, by changing the focus of the program.

In the future, they argue that this will decrease the number of families which are not receiving enough nutrition on a regular basis. (Sanyal, 2009) While non-consequentialists will argue that a program must focus on how this effects each family and provides them with those resources which are holding them back. When this happens, they will be more productive and can change their perceptions of themselves. In the future, these rates.