Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics Essay: The Similarities

Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics

Ethics essay: The similarities and differences between utilitarianism, deontological ethics, and virtue ethics

Utilitarianism is the philosophy that all ethical decisions must strive to do 'the greatest good for the greatest number of people.' In this ethical system, the ethical actor functions as a moral observer, dispassionately making decisions without regard to him or herself or his or her personal investment in the decision. Utilitarianism is a system of consequence-based ethics. It evaluates ethics solely upon the outcomes of decisions, not whether the decisions are keeping with moral laws. Depending on the situation, different ethical actions may be required. "The greatest number" is said to include all who are "affected by the action in question with each to count as one, and no one as more than one" (Kay, 1997, Notes on utilitarianism).

However, an obvious problem with utilitarianism is that defining what the 'greatest good' is in a universal sense can be problematic. Also, actions may have unintended consequences and affect others in unexpected ways. Finally, utilitarianism does not allow for the concept of minority rights on a societal level, which makes it problematic to apply to decisions involving human rights. Still, on an intuitive level both individuals and governments often apply a utilitarian calculus in making decisions as they weigh the costs and benefits of various courses of actions.

In contrast, deontological ethics stresses the need to make decisions based upon moral rules and guidelines. A deontologist believes that the ethical decision-maker should make choices as if he or she were setting an ethical precedent 'for all time' and treat each law as absolute. Projected consequences should not enter into the decision-making, given that the future is unpredictable, while the steadfast need for morality is not. All ethical actions should be determined based upon the intention of the doer, rather than upon the end result. Someone might have a good intention and, even though he or she does ill, that does not negate the good of the original thought. An obvious problem with deontology is that the moral actor can be placed in a situation where following a rule (like 'lying is bad') can have immoral consequences (such as revealing that people hiding from the Nazis are hiding upstairs). "Unlike the proportionality that comes out of the utility principle, the categorical imperative yields only absolutes. Actions either pass or fail with no allowance for a 'gray area.' Moreover, the rigid lines are often drawn in unlikely places. For example, lying is always wrong -- even the 'polite lie" (Kay, 1997, Notes on deontology).

Virtue ethics places an emphasis on cultivating a good character when making ethical decisions. For virtue ethicists, like utilitarians, the needs of ethical situations may change and thus using the unbending laws of deontology may not always suit specific situations. But rather than a moral calculus, virtue ethicists instead emphasize the need to cultivate a good moral character. Virtue ethicists agree with deontologists that certain aspects of ethics are transcendent, cross-culturally, but for them such ethical ideals pertain to character, like patience, virtue, and honor, rather than actions.