A set of guiding principles – morality – focuses on the core of what allows people to live in unified communities. In addition, morality sets what society considers acceptable and right. However, it is not a universally established principle. What one might think is acceptable in their culture could be prohibited in another’s. Geographical locations, religion, family, and life situations all have an impact on morals. Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, used the term deontology to describe an ethical system. He believes whether an activity is right or bad is judged by whether it meets our obligation, not by its results. As he named it, the Categorical Imperative is said to be a transcendent moral principle. A categorical imperative differs from other imperatives in that it tells a person what to do regardless of the outcome or goal they are pursuing.
According to deontological theory, the categorical imperative is a fundamental law of morality. Considering the fundamental principle of morality to be a categorical imperative indicates that moral considerations take precedence over other considerations. People have a moral obligation to act in accordance with the following principles and rules, regardless of the outcome. However, there is a drawback in the application of the theory, such as people might be doing the right action even though it causes more harm than doing the wrong thing. For instance, when a stranger asks about personal life, the right thing to do is, to tell the truth even though it may cause harm to a person while lying is an unethical act that may preserve one’s intimate secrets. Deontology implies that people obey the laws and carry out their responsibilities. This approach corresponds to our innate instincts on what is and is not ethical. Deontology, in general, ignores certain facets of human behavior and considers them as planned events that can be manipulated and governed using social and moral laws.
On the other hand, John Stuart Mill introduced utilitarianism, which is a philosophy that decides the moral rightness or wrongness of actions based on their outcomes. He claims that actions are morally right if they result in pleasure and wrong if they result in suffering. In simplified words, the theory suggests that the end always justifies the means. Everyone in society seeks to find satisfaction and joy in their actions, and the effects of this search often attract the unintended consequences of pain and suffering. Consequently, in the instance of a bad result occurring, it is deemed wrong.
In contrast, if a positive result occurs, it is considered right. For example, if a person lied to a robber to get away, the action is considered morally right. Even if the person lied, the result is that the individual saved his or her life, which is a positive outcome. In utilitarianism, the ultimate goal of morality in society is to improve people’s lives by increasing the number of positive results like happiness and satisfaction. At the same time, it is necessary to reduce the number of negative consequences like misery and pain that trigger human suffering.
In virtue ethics, instead of focusing on following rules, one should focus on fixing themselves to be a virtuous person. The focus of this moral theory lies within the maintenance of good character and nurturing personal values as opposed to accomplishing duties and acting for a good consequence. In essence, a virtuous person is inherently good and demonstrates this quality in every possible scenario throughout their lifetime due to it being their nature. They will not be considered virtuous because of the desire to get anything out of their actions or because it is said to be their duty.
Virtue ethics differs from other ethical theories significantly since deontology and consequentialism focus on the right action, while virtue ethics is focused on the good life and what type of individual one should be. They are inherently different in the main question the individual should ask themselves. In practice, the difference lies between the questions “What is the right action?” and “What kind of person should one be?”. The first question is primarily used to help deal with specific dilemmas, whereas the second helps navigate through life. Thus, virtue ethics pays close attention to the type of character that needs to be achieved for righteous behavior at all times. It is important to note that while being virtuous, a person must always remain at the mean. The right response to every situation should never be too much or too little and one will respond differently to different situations.
In my opinion, it is beneficial to approach moral dilemmas with utilitarianism in consideration of modern civilization. The theory stands out for me as the end justifies the means. Although, this theory should be applied to the general lifestyle that does not involve violence. Violence is the most significant issue, in my opinion, as reducing negative consequences may involve applying violence. As an example, it is possible to consider the war in Afghanistan or Vietnam. War was necessary to resolve numerous conflicts, but the consequences could hardly be justified. Simultaneously, the application of such an approach for general means, such as social relationships where a lie may save someone’s life or improve a relationship, is the most appropriate application of utilitarianism. In spite of that application, I consider this theory to be the most prominent for me.