Question

In three or more sentences what response would you give each statement below? I need a response for each statement . Any correction or add to the statements?

1)The primary difference between consequential and non-consequential approaches towards ethics is that consequential approaches focuses more on the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the consequences that action has. A non-consequential theory focuses on the rightness or wrongness of an action based on properties intrinsics to the action, not on its consequences (Everett, Faber, Savulescu, & Crockett, 2018). A major consequentialism theory that has many objections would be lying. Conseuentialism says if lying would help save someones life then it's the right thing to do. However, objections to this theory would include that lying can never be acceptable such as humans should never lie and should always tell the truth. An example of a non-consequentialist major theory includes how lying should never be permitted because it's not "morally" right no matter the consequences.  Objections to this theory would include that in some instances lying may be necessary to save ones life.

2)

A consequentialist approach is one who thinks of the rightness or wrongness of their actions due to the possible consequences of the action. Where as non-consequentialist is a approach is one who thinks more of the rightness and wrongness of the action instead of the consequences.

One of the major theories associated with consequentialism is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is when someone does something for the good and pleasure for the greatest amount of people. A potential objection could be too much sacrifice by an individual. A major theory for non-consequentialism is deontology, which is to do what is morally right, follow the rules, and do what is right. An objection to this theory may be stealing. Yes stealing is wrong, but maybe someone was stealing food in order to feed their children/family.

Answer 1

1) Consequentialism is a theory of normative ethics. It holds that an act is only moral or ethical if it results in a good conclusion. Consequentialism is a slippery theory and has led to a great many arguments about the specifics. After all, a person can aim his actions with the intent of causing a specific result, but the outcome is out of his hands, for the most part. Non- consequential actions are based on a set of well defined laws, principles and concepts that we have learned. We do not consider the consequences of our actions, instead we simply act out of the understanding that what we are doing is right. Not everyone has the same instincts and in a community, if we are all doing what seems right or feels good, non- consequential action could easily harm another and also cause chaos.

2) Utilitarianism believes in the concept of the ‘end justifies the means’. It is interesting to note that according to utilitarianism, utility is all about the result of an action. Hence, the followers of utilitarianism school of morality give more value to the outcome of an action. Thus, consequentiality becomes very important in this school of thought. Deontology is exactly the opposite of utilitarianism when it comes to the explanations of its concepts. Deontology does not believe in the concept of ‘the end justifies the means’. On the other hand, it says ‘the end does not justify the means.’ This is the main difference between utilitarianism and deontology. Another important difference between the two schools of thought regarding ethical behavior is that, utilitarianism is more consequence-oriented in character. On the other hand, deontology is not consequence-oriented in nature. It is totally dependent on scriptures.