One group is right, or called ought, duty; another group was known as the good and value. A deontological system must either insist that the right moral action in this context is the one that ends up bringing about a horrific result or else provide for a means of resolving conflicts between different imperatives. I know that sounds unsophisticated but my opinion is no system can solve moral contradictions succesfully, therefore “love your neighbour as yourself”. ( Log Out /  Change ), You are commenting using your Google account. Many people don’t know the difference between these two areas. Because “good” and “right” are independent, they should not be used as the same. But what we need is a clear distinction between the two theories. The deontology consider “right” and “duty” as the basic concepts, they believe that other moral concepts can be defined by them. For example, What if I held a red expo marker in my hand. As a result, the deontology will possibly cuts off moral and real life, and induce the moral standards arid, empty and stiff. ( Log Out /  Another criticism that has been leveled at consequentialism is that it appear only to be useful when judging actions after they have already been performed and the results are in, rather than as a means of dictating what the right action is that a person ought to perform. According to John. The reference lies on the hypothesis that all peopleare rational, that is the human behaviors can always bring other people advantageous. The difference between deontology and consequentialism also relates to the set of concepts. Change ), Lessons on Leadership from Captain Phillips. The standard of Utilitarianists’ behavior is not the his own greatest happiness, but the greatest happiness of the major people. Now can you guess which of the two philosophies I prefer? To begin with , it is not possible to claim that the difference between Virtue Ethics on the one hand and Kantian Ethics and Consequentialism on the other is that … Some behaviors, such as altruistic motives’ lying, helps poor person’s burglary, safeguards most people benefit to small number of people right infringement, can be adopted by the consequentialism as moral, but actually cannot be adopted by the deontology as moral. Conversely, an action performed with sinister intentions is deemed morally right when it brings about positive results. The main representative of consequentialism is called utilitarianism, and deontology is derived from Kant. Difference Between Deontology and Consequentialism Definition Deontology is an ethical theory that states it is possible to determine the rightness or wrongness of actions by examining actions themselves, without focusing on their consequences whereas consequentialism is an ethical theory that states it is possible to determine the rightness or wrongness of actions by examining its consequences. One of the most well known forms of consequentialism is utilitarianism which was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and his mentee J.S… So in this case, the color-blind man could also argue that the marker he is seeing is a different color. Consequentialism — The morality of an action is determined by the specific results of that action. In fact, it is asserted by some, you discover when you peel the layers that these systems are actually resolving conflicts on a consequential basis, and are as such nothing more than consequentialism in disguise. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. They clash because each offers a different approach to determining “right” from “wrong.” Deontology — The morality of an action is determined by duty; adherence to given rules. In this way, we can take conclusion that the deontology displays more strict in moral standards and pure honor, it emphasis morals lofty to a fault, and there is possibility that the value which person need would be neglected. The deontology constituted obviously is more stricter limit to people’s behaviors compared to a consequentialism. Consequentialism focuses on the consequences or results of an action. Fact, as definite and concise it appears to be is not so concerete in regards to perception. Modern ethics is often divided into meta-ethics and normative ethics, and within normative ethics, the main differences is between deontology theories and consequentialism theories. ( Log Out /  Consequentialism — The morality of an action is determined by the specific results of that action. ( Log Out /  We definitely may suspect that a higher level existence will always think that everything is imperfect, because the world is what it is. A major criticism of consequentialism, on the other hand, is that it is not concerned with motivations or intentions. If a noble man is labeled noble, the only reason is that he always consider happiness of other people first. You can easily imagine a scenario in which following a moral imperative brings about negative consequences. You’ll find out tomorrow when I defend that system. The difference between deontology and consequentialism also relates to the set of concepts. Consequentialism consider “value” and “good” as the basic concept, they believe that the concept of obligatory must be defined by them, while moral should be judged by the purpose or consequence arising from actions. When evaluate one action is moral or not, the consequentialism and the deontology don’t share the same standards. What if I were to say that a man who is color-blind would see the same red as I am currently seeing? If we truly feel bad doing an ill deed, do we in some sense acknowledge and condition our selves not to do it again? A deontologist will condemn a thief on the basis that he has broken the moral imperative that commands one not to steal.