Consequentialism Vs Deontology

Consequentialism is first to be considered when attempting to explain the issue of concern for this analysis. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill were famous philosophers who advocated this theory in their own works. Consequentialism is grounded on the theory that rightness is based on the consequences of an act and not the act itself. This theory is in contrast to deontology, which focuses on acts and duties an individual strove to fulfill as determinates of rightness. For further explanation of the differences but consequentialism and deontology, it is important to understand that deontology may deem an act right even if the consequences are bad. With these differences in mind, it is understandable that consequentialism, also known …show more content…
This is where a criminal record began to be considered a “mark,” much like a shadow that follows an individual at every opportunity they have at bettering their lives. Her study found that employers are not only discriminatory against applicants with a criminal record, but they are also subconsciously discriminatory against blacks (Pager, 2004). Blacks are less likely to receive consideration by employers than whites, and white applicants with a criminal record fared better than black applicants with a criminal record. Peck and Theodore (2008) also discovered that the mark of a criminal record made almost an entire socioracial group unemployable. Blacks are less likely to find work post-release from prison, which influences criminal behavior in their own communities (Peck & Theodore, 2008). From these facts, it would appear that consequentialism does not work in favor of ex-offenders nor black males, especially if the individual is a black male with a criminal …show more content…
Therefore, a perpetuating cycle of offending is created because the act and duties are not accepted. Whether employers are aware or not, they are playing a huge part in the future of these ex-offenders, who unfortunately are mostly black males. As Peck & Theodore (2008) touched on, when an individual is socially barred from becoming a productive member of society, they often return to their old routines of offending within their neighborhoods (Peck & Theodore, 2008). These neighborhoods are then deemed “receiving communities,” which occurs because employers have no desire or incentive to reach out to the community of ex-offenders for employment. This creates a vicious cycle in the transformation of these communities into “bad neighborhoods” that only house criminals (Peck & Theodore,