Deontology

For A2 students studying Philosophy & Ethics - Deontology

10 cards | Total Attempts: 188 | Created by kamillefijalkowski | Last updated: Jan 18, 2016 | Total Attempts: 188

- +

An Introduction Deontologists Are Not Only Obliged To Perform Actions Which Are Good In Themselves, They Must Also Refrain From Performing Those Ations Which Are Known To Be Wrong - This Is Referred To As Deontological Constraints. A Deontologists Cannot Break These Constraints Regardless Of The Conseuqences Which Is Why They Are Often Equated With Moral Absolutism - Infexible Standards By Which All Human Actions Should Be Judged Against.These Standards Of Morality Are Sourced From Human Nature, Reason, The Universe Or A Divine Lawgiver And Remain Unchanging Irrespective Of Culture And Beliefs Of The Society They Govern. Deontology Focusses On Negative Laws, Informing Humanity What They Must Not Do, Not What They Can. Out These Obligatory Actions Comes Positive Laws In The Form Of Duties. The Argument Is A Priori As Deontologist Do Not Need Experience To Decern Right From Wrong- It Comes From Intuition Which Is Given And Governed By God. The Ethical Theory Is Also Legalistic As It Follows A Set Of Strict Rules.

Cards In This Set

Front	Back
An Introduction Deontologists are not only obliged to perform actions which are good in themselves, they must also refrain from performing those ations which are known to be wrong - this is referred to as deontological constraints. A deontologists cannot break these constraints regardless of the conseuqences which is why they are often equated with moral absolutism - infexible standards by which all human actions should be judged against. These standards of morality are sourced from human nature, reason, the universe or a divine lawgiver and remain unchanging irrespective of culture and beliefs of the society they govern. Deontology focusses on negative laws, informing humanity what they must not do, not what they can. Out these obligatory actions comes positive laws in the form of duties. The argument is a priori as deontologist do not need experience to decern right from wrong- it comes from intuition which is given and governed by God. The ethical theory is also legalistic as it follows a set of strict rules.	Different forms of Deontology Libertarianism - an action is morally right if it accepts the rights which all humans have. An individual can pursue an act if it does not infringe on the rights of others. Contractualism- An action is morally right if it is in agreement with the rules that rational moral agents would accept into a social relationship or contract. Divine Command Ethics - An action is morally right if it is in agreement with rules and duties established by God. Monoistic Deontology - An action is morally right if it agrees with a single deontological principle whch guides all other principles .i.e. the golden rule. Duty- An action is morally right if it coheres to a set of agreed duties and obligations.
Where Morality is Sourced Intuition alone may serve to identify the moral value of an action. Although this may appear rather subjective many actions that are deemed as right or wrong are rooted in juedo christianity. This, however, still does not give deontology weight, for these individuals to claim there are actions within this world that are inheriantly wrong or right their knowledge must come from an unquestionable source of authroity - that source is God. One criticism of the deontology is that it is too legalitstic, obedience to deontological obligations may lead to failing recognise what may be greater moral obligations. Letter-of-the-law deontology reduces morality to a set of requirments and constraints limting our behaviour. Putting little values on human membership of the moral community (You no longer have the inclination to promote the wellbeing of others instead you simply try to avoid causing them harm).	Immanuel Kant Kant believed the reason behind performing any action was because one was morally obliged to do so. This involves a level of participation through motivation therefore one is not alienated from their morality but involved. In exceptional circumstances this may allow someone who has broken a moral rule not to be regarded as immoral for they were trying to adhere to a moral duty. One must note at this point that duties are determined objectivley and absolutley not subjectivley otherwise it would simply be a matter of personal preference. Kant wished to judge an action by its nature and its agent as oppose to its consequences the reason behind this, according to Kant, was because the consequences we cannot forsee or control, our actions we can.
A Universal Ethic Morality is a priori not a posteriori and due to reason being universal, moral reasoning would reach the same results over and over again. Kant maintained that God was necessary within this universe in order to make it just and to ensure a moral balance (the good rewarded, the bad punished). The philosopher wished for mankind to gravitate away from heteronomy or 'other law' such as his natural inclination which could result in using others as a means to an end, for example a man to satisfy his lust may aqquire the service of a prostitute, however, in doing so he is treating the female as an object and not a human something which Kant greatly dissaproved of.	Kant's Categorical Imperative It differs from a hyperthetical imperative which focusses on achieving the desired outcome. If this was to govern our morality, it would be entirely subjective as the imperative would change according to ones likes, dislikes, abilities opportunities ect... Instead the categorical imperative is not a means to an end but an end in itself. It requires us act without condition and pursure our duties. Kant promoted the good will, cultivated through reason and the ridding of tendencies that make rational decision making imposssible. Such tendencies include the hyperthetical imperative one does not act a priori but consequntially. Kant maintianed that other personal preferences aren't necessarily bad they could not be trusted as a guide to being morally right. If we act in the name of duty, Kant believed we could not go wrong as it supersedes personal preferences an dunworthy motives. Virtue, Kant believed was a being who pursued good will which in turn lead to the fulfillment of duty.
The Principle of Universability - CI Illustrated in the 'Law of Nature' which stated humans should act in such a way as to wish their action to become a univeral ethic for mankind. If it cannot be universalised it cannot be a moral action - for example if I tried to universalise stealing in doing so I would eradicate the very concept for if everyone stole private ownership would no longer exist. The maxim 'be loving to your parents' can be universalised however, 'be kind to your parents so they will buy you lots of presents' cannot be as it becomes to specific and there is no guarantee of more gifts through the act of kindness. In order for morality to be universal it has to be an end in itself and not a means to an end.	Kant's Formula of Kingdom Ends- CI Kant believed every action should be undertaken as if the individual were a law maker in the kingdom of ends. This put weight on individual decisions and in turn pressure to act in a way which will benefit mankind. Kant's Formula of an End in itself Human beings should be viewed as ends in themselves and not means to an end, giving us intrinsic rather than instrumental value. One of the strengths of deontology is its enforcement of human rights and justice. Kant's Formula of Autonomy Kant maintained a genuine moral maxim be the will of a free moral agent so although it may be argued his ethic is rather rigid it still is down to the individual whether to abide by their God ascribed duties or not.
The Greatest Perfection of Human-Beings Morally obligatory actions enforced upon the whole of humanity carry far greater weight than those pursued by ones desires. A good person faced with a conflict between his self interest and obligation will choose his duty every time. One does not need a justification for acting moral and if questioned 'because its moral' will be an answer sufficient enough.	Kant & Heaven Kant did not believe divine reward should act as motivation for acting morally. Rewards and punishment may provide addition reasoning but they cannot constitute for the entire reason otherwise one would be warping the catagorical into the hyperthetical.
W.D.Ross Believed morality should not be determined solely by the consequences but other things had to be taken into account to for example if you owe a debt of gratitude to another it is your duty to ensure you repay. Prima Facie Duties allow us to repay debts of gratitude or those who are dependent on us. Ross listed seven altogether, they are as follows: fidelity (keeping promises), gratitude, justice, non-maleficence, beneficence, reparation and self improvement. The duties are not placed in a hierarchy and if a conflict occurs it is not about which surpasses the other but to things in conflict which do matter. The only way we can determine the right thing to do in such a situation is by applying moral knowledge a knowledge that is gained through moral experience (we can only learn which of the duties should be prusued in which circumstances through past cases). The colisillision then establishment of duties is referred to as duty proper or the latin 'duty sans phrase'. Kant believes if it is a conflict between beneficience and fidelity or gratitude the former should triumph as it is promoting the greatest good. Although Ross offers greater flexibility many argue it is to subjective as the individual is left to determine which duty outweighs which this in turn could lead to the infrignment of others rights. The only way in which W.D.Ross moral ethic can be denied is if we deny duties altogether and adopting individualism but in doing so one is also opting for antinomianism which remains unappealing to many.	Critiques - Jeremy Bentham Argued deontology was nothing more than an intellectulised view of popular morality. The absolute ethical maxims were subjective opinion. John Stuart Mill a fellow Utilitarian argued there was no clear guidance on which duties and rights should take precedent if they conflict therefore it is not a complete moral guidance.
Criticisms - Shelly Kagan Argued the combination of deontological constraints and positive laws (duties) can lead to the alienation of one from their morality particuarly if they are being dutiful for duties sake, their actions are not even entering their thought process. If ones morality becomes habitally it is likeley to deviate from the rightful path and because the indvidual isn't keeping a watchful eye who knows where they will end up!	Criticisms - Elizabeth Anscombe The principle of universability can only functioned if we take a very broad perspective on concepts such as lying. If we were to be more specific such as telling white lies the universal application of this would not lead to the eradication of lying altogether.
Criticisms - David Hume in his works "Treaties of Human Nature" "Morals excite passion, and produce or prevent actions. Reason of itself is utterly impotent in this perticular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conlcusions of reason."	Ctiticisms- Elizabeth Anscombe "Ethical codes which lay stress on moral absolutes and laws are anachronistic in a society which has effectively abandoned God." Anscombe is an advocate of virtue ethics as it is a morality based on human flourishing.
Criticisms - Humans are not Generic but Individual Kant's ethic works if humanity was generic, if every being worked towards the same ends and attatched the same worth to moral maxims. The truth is we are all very different. An extreme would be the example of sadist, although you and I would wish to bring happiness to humanity, sadist do not instead they wish to inflict pain upon themselves and others. The laws in which they would universalise would be very different to the ones which we would. To make the infliction of pain a universal law, to sadist would be appealing for although they may suffer as a result out of their suffering comes pleasure.	Criticisms - The Moral Worth of Universibility The principle of universibility does not put moral weight upon an action. For example if I were to universalise the wearing of blue socks in doing so I would not add greater moral worth to the wearing of blue socks.
Criticism - Parasitic Parasitic means Kant's ethic was based upon the precept that we already have ideas of what is right and what is wrong. The only way in which we can determine what is right or wrong is through moral knowledge gained through moral experience, however, this suggests knowledge aquired a posteriori the very thing in which Kant was trying to trumph.	In turn Kants theory fails its inital aim which was to create a universal, a posteriori ethic.