Deontological Theories: The Kantian Moral Theory And Golden Rule

1076 Words 5 Pages
I think that consequences are not the only things that matter when deciding if an action is morally right or wrong. There are many factors that should be considered when determining the morality of an action. For example, it’s important to consider how the action could affect you or the people around you. Consequences are important, but not every action that produces a good consequence is morally right. Consequences are only the results of our actions, and although they have some say in the morality of an action, they do not totally justify the action. In the world, there are universal moral rules that most people base their everyday decisions on. The most commonly known one would most likely be the Golden Rule, which states, “do unto others …show more content…
The Kantian Moral Theory and Golden Rule are examples of Deontological Theories. Deontological Theories are duty based theories that share a similar general idea that there are universal moral rules in which some actions are always wrong, despite the consequences. Deontological Theories also suggest that consequences matter, but they’re not the only thing that matters. These universal moral rules also play a large part in determining the morality of the action. These theories can be applied to two different versions of a trolley case. In version one, a trolley is headed towards a family of five, but can be redirected by pulling a lever to instead hit one man. In version two, the trolley is headed for the family of five, but this time the man can be pushed off a bridge to stop the trolley before it hits the family. Based off the two versions of the Trolley Cases and the Deontological Theories, we can determine that in Trolley Case one, it is okay to pull the lever. However, in Trolley Case two, it is not okay to push the man in front of the trolley. One argument for this would be that it’s morally different to pull a lever to …show more content…
Consequentialism is a results based ethical theory. Many consequentialists would argue that an action is right if and only if the consequences are at least as good as consequences of any alternative action that could be performed. The general idea behind consequentialism is that the rightness or wrongness of an action can be determined exclusively by the consequences caused by that action (6). By this logic, no action is inherently wrong. This is noticeably the opposite of the Deontological Theories which not only consider consequences, but also universal moral rules, and fully states that not all moral obligations are relevant to consequences. A consequentialist might argue that the Deontological way of thinking is flawed in that it doesn’t involve the process of considering alternative actions to produce the best consequences. However, this process of considering alternative actions based on their consequences doesn’t ensure that the action itself is morally right. For example, based on the idea of consequentialism, murder isn’t inherently wrong. The good consequence produced may be the best option for the person committing murder, however we know that killing someone, no matter the reason, isn’t morally right. We know this because it’s a universal moral rule. Another consequentialist may argue that the Deontological Theories are flawed in that they don’t include utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a

Related Documents