Question 1: In Your Own Words, Describe The Primary Differen
Question 1 In Your Own Words Describe The Primary Difference Between
1. In your own words, describe the primary difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist approaches to ethics.
2. Choose one of the major theories associated with consequentialism: what objections might be made to this theory?
3. Choose one of the major theories associated with non-consequentialism: what objections might be made to this theory?
Paper For Above instruction
The primary difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist approaches to ethics lies in the basis on which moral judgments are made. Consequentialist ethics judge actions based on their outcomes or results, emphasizing the importance of producing the greatest good or maximizing overall happiness. The most prominent form of consequentialism is Utilitarianism, which maintains that an action is morally right if it results in the maximum happiness for the greatest number of people. Conversely, non-consequentialist ethics focus on the intrinsic nature of actions or adherence to moral duties, regardless of the consequences. These approaches emphasize principles, rights, or duties that must be upheld, such as Kantian deontology, which asserts that actions are morally right if they are done out of duty and adhere to universal moral laws.
An objection to consequentialism, particularly Utilitarianism, involves its potential to justify morally questionable actions if they result in favorable outcomes. For example, it could justify sacrificing an innocent individual if doing so would produce greater overall happiness, raising concerns about justice and individual rights. Critics argue that consequentialism can overlook the importance of moral rules and individual dignity.
On the other hand, a significant objection to non-consequentialist theories like Kantian ethics pertains to their rigidity and sometimes impractical demands. Kantian morality requires adherence to strict moral duties and universal principles, which can lead to conflicts when duties clash or when following a moral rule results in undesirable outcomes. Critics assert that such theories may ignore the context or consequences of actions, potentially leading to morally counterintuitive results in complex scenarios.