Theories of Ethics

Paper Summary:

This paper begins by distinguishing between the two theories: Deontological approaches have, as the overarching "one" a norm or norms by which we live. Consequentialist ethics, in judging acts, rests on a controlling factor, such as agape love, the greatest good for the greatest number or increasing the total pleasure of man. Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses such as the danger of "I was just following the rules" in the deontological approach and consequentialism's main weaknesses of measurement; something such as love being indefinable Though they are different, they both lack from being isolated from the other and the more existential and community based ethical systems.

From the Paper:

"A deontological approach to ethics is self-justified and intrinsically grounded. Its reference point is a norm or authority or being against which or who there is no argument (Gill P.5). In contrast, the consequentialist approach looks at the end product of a rule or act. The consequences are measured against a certain standard or goal in order to determine if they are desirable. For instance murder is wrong because society would break down if it weren't treated that way (P.7). They both have certain deficiencies that outweigh their strengths if they are used in isolation. They need to be informed by one another and by a third dimension, which could be called the existentialist. Only then do they make a useful organic whole."

More papers on Theories of Ethics:

• Essay # 93245 : "The Theories of Jurgen Habermas"
• Term Paper # 120315 : "Philosophy of Ethics"
• Analytical Essay # 135714 : "Harman's Observational Theory of Ethics"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: