Compare virtue ethics consequentialist nonconsequentialist approaches to morality

Closely related is eudaimonic consequentialism, according to which a full, flourishing life, which may or may not be the same as enjoying a great deal of pleasure, is the ultimate aim.

Then, if deception causes false beliefs, deception is instrumentally bad, and agents ought not to lie without a good reason, even when lying causes no pain or loss of pleasure. This outlines one of several problems with virtue theory — conflicting virtues that demand different actions.

Note that using force in retaliation for other force, like police do to a criminal, is fundamentally different from initiation.

Moral Theory: A Non-Consequentialist Approach

This objection rests on a misinterpretation. She selects her study partners according to their ambition and ability in the class, rather than their need for help. Then they hold what can be called public acceptance rule consequentialism: Unfortunately, however, hedonism is not as simple as they assume, because hedonists count both pleasures and pains.

Another way of distinguishing consequentialism and deontology, as done by Shelly Kaganis to note that, under deontology, individuals are bound by constraints such as the requirement, not to killbut are also given options such as the right not to give money to charity, if they do not wish to.

Virtue, Vice, and Value, New York: This line of reasoning will not convince opponents who remain unsatisfied by consequentialist responses to objections. Similar distinctions apply in other normative realms. Or is it all humans except the agent.

Consequential or Non-Consequential Consequentialist vs. I will describe all of them briefly, then describe each one of them in more detail, pointing out their defining features and major variants.

As with material wealth, rational interests in relationships involve acceptance of causality and the preconditions that make such relationships possible. Although Aristotle believed we are all aiming at excellence, it cannot be said that all of us reach it.

One final variation still causes trouble. They are not themselves theories for one very important reason -- they don't specify what goals or consequences ought to guide moral judgments and actions. Other philosophers prefer a broader definition that does not require a moral theory to be agent-neutral in order to be consequentialist Bennett ; Broome5—6; and Skorupski In place of genuine confidence, healthy ego and control of his life, he puts on a false air of confidence, a fake ego egomania and he covers up his insecurity with belligerence.


Pleasure and the Good Life: Roughly speaking, a consequentialist says that you should do certain things, because those actions produce good consequences.

For Don to feed the rotten meat to his sister is, therefore, morally wrong if likely consequences are what matter, but not morally wrong if what matter are foreseen or foreseeable or intended consequences. If so, then it means little to label a theory as consequentialist.

Thus, Objectivism breaks rationality down into six component virtues: Such consequentialists do not just add up values; they look at patterns.

According to satisficing consequentialism, it is not morally wrong to fail to contribute to a charity if one contributes enough to other charities and if the money or time that one could contribute does create enough good, so it is not just wasted.

If we want to know what one person prefers, we can ask what that person would choose in conflicts. This kind of case leads some consequentialists to introduce agent-relativity into their theory of value SenBroomePortmoreThe state that is the combination of the virtues under auspicious conditions.

Or I might prefer to die merely because I am clinically depressed. Utilitarians who adopt this theory of value can then claim that an agent morally ought to do an act if and only if that act maximizes desire satisfaction or preference fulfillment, regardless of whether the act causes sensations of pleasure.

He has the power to have people executed at his word. If that claim is dropped, the theory ceases to be consequentialist. Principles, Human Nature, and Morality Objectivist epistemology holds that, in order to successfully predict the future not exactly, but within certain parameters human beings must observe the world with their senses and develop principles by reasoning on the basis of those observations.

Rule consequentialism exists in the forms of rule utilitarianism and rule egoism. So this makes his ethical system a sort of combination of deontology and consequentialism: This can be called the Non-Initiation of Force Principle.

So if two men love the same woman, it is in both of their rational interests that she spend more time with her better match. Since it does not seem irrational to refuse to hook oneself up to this machine, hedonism seems inadequate. Basically, a virtue ethicist says that you should do certain things, because they are examples of good character.

From the start, the hedonism in classic utilitarianism was treated with contempt. Compare Virtue Ethics Consequentialist Nonconsequentialist Approaches To Morality San Joaquin Valley College Different Approaches to Virtue By Martin P.

Aguayo Philosophy 1 C May 13, Virtue Ethics The Greeks though of virtue as excellence, but the biggest part of being virtuous is being human. The ethical approach of consequentialism depends on the notion of producing morally good consequences. But the consequentialist approach, by itself, does not answer the question of what the moral good is.

So specific consequentialist theories are partly defined by what they believe to. May 18,  · Ethics and Action. 2 Basic Concepts in Moral Theory I. Introduction. The Good.

Nonconsequentialist Theories: Do Your Duty

Virtue. Rights and Duties. Rights and Contracts. Rights and Consequentialism.

Ethics: A self-paced, online course from Propero

Collision of Rights. provides a welcome alternative to current debates dominated by the consequentialist approach" Paperback.

Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.

Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence.

Kant’s ethics focuses on the metaphysics of morals, that is, beyond the physical. By this he determines the only way in which one can acknowledge them is to make assumptions.

Since they are beyond the physical realm, they will not be seen or heard, therefore certain aspects need to be assumed. Week 4 Discussion Q1: Compare virtue ethics to both consequentialist and nonconsequentialist approaches. Of the three, which is best and why?

Virtue ethics according to Aristotle describes it as being more commonsense based. That every human has the capacity to be good and virtuous.

Compare virtue ethics consequentialist nonconsequentialist approaches to morality
Rated 0/5 based on 82 review
Ethics Text page