William Shaw and Thomas Nagle

William Shaw and Thomas Nagle

Over the years, there have been a number of different ethical theories introduced, that have challenged the way society will view, the most appropriate activities of the individual. As the underlying behavior and the thought process itself, are examined to determine if the individual is following the most appropriate standards. In the case of consequentialism, the overall ethical viewpoints are based upon doing the greatest amount of good. This is important, because various deontological views, will determine how the individual will act in society. Yet, there have been times that its general ethical theories have been augmented, to provide a better understanding of how to interact on a social basis. In the case of consequentialism, a number of ethical theories have been developed that further explain these ideas. To fully understand the different theories requires: examining deontological constraints over authority, how much authority these constraints have over everyone and the times these constraints can be overridden. Together these different elements will provide the greatest insights, as to how consquentialism is having an impact on deontological theory.

Deontological constraints do have authority over us. The reason why we should accept them is because they will define the most appropriate ways to interact with someone in a particular environment. This places constraints on us, by prohibiting certain activities that may not be considered to be appropriate. This is designed to limit those actions that are deemed as unacceptable. In consequentialism you want to accept these views, due to the fact that the underlying actions of right or wrong will be utilized, to gauge the morality of an individual. Where, society will look favorably upon those individuals who will take selfless actions for the benefit of group. Those who are embracing various deontological constraints are accepting the morals of society. Therefore, those who accept / obey them are agreeing with the principals of obtaining the most positive results possible. (Shaw)

In most cases, deontological constraints can have an impact upon the actions of the individual on a daily basis. Where, they will often shape how someone will react to various social situations. For example, when someone is a part of group, they will follow the various ethical standards more closely. This is because they do not want to be seen as an outsider, who is unethical (in the collective mind of the group). As a result, this will cause the individual to follow these various constraints on a consistent basis. (Shaw)

The absolute authority that deontological constraints have over us is limited. The reason why is because, consquentialism views what is happening based upon right and wrong. Someone who is murdering innocent people would have to be stopped, to prevent future injuries. As a result, this would justify the killing or harming of this person, with such actions having the greatest benefit for society (Shaw)

During times of emergency, the survival of the group is more than likely to be at stake. In these situations, the deontological constraints must be overridden. When these kinds of situations are occurring, society must be able to overlook the various deontological restrictions, so that this objective can be achieved. Given the fact that you will be dealing with people who will not share the same values, means that you must be prepared to go to the same level as them (especially during times of emergency). In this aspect, breaking the various constraints is justified as it is creating the most positive benefit for the group. (Nagel 168 -- 188)

The different constraints are not considered to be an illusion. This is because the authority that an entity will have over society; will depend upon if there is an emergency that is being faced. During times when this is occurring, these constraints will shift, as they must adjust to the different realities. Once the objective of achieving the greatest amount of good has been accomplished, is when the previous constraints will become standard values in society. Where, the underlying nature of the threat has been mitigated. (Shaw)