Deontology: A Superior Ethical Theory for Professional Practice

Running head: Ethics
Ethics
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1Ethics
Introduction: Utilitarianism, Deontology and Virtue Theory:
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory consider the best action as the one which can
maximize the utility or well being of sentient entities, where utility can be understood as the
aggregate pleasures from an action minus the suffering caused by the action (Patrick &
Werkhoven, 2017).
Deontology on the other hand judges the morality of an action based upon the
obligations, duties or rules, and focuses on the actions instead of its consequences. It
considers the best action as the one that abides by the duties, rules and obligations of the
person taking the action (Mandal et al., 2016).
Virtue theory focuses on the virtues of the mind and character of the individual taking
an action. Here virtue is considered as a character trait, and the theory assumes that good
virtue can make its possessor a good and ethical human being (Sosa, 2015).
Which Theory is superior?
The word Deontology is derived from two Greek words, ‘deon’ (or duty) and ‘logos’
(or study). It is one of the normative theory that focuses of choices that are morally,
forbidden, permitted or required, and thus deals with how we assess out choices regarding
actions we should or shouldn’t take. It judges the morality of the choices and considered as
separate from the consequences of those choices (Holyoak & Powell, 2016). This helps to
focus on the morality of the actions or choices instead of the morality of the consequences of
those choices or actions, while the morality of the choice and actions are imbibed within the
duty of the person. The theory also proposes that a moral wound not make certain erroneous
choices, because even if a moral agent makes a certain erroneous choices, repetition of that
erroneous choices would be minimized by other moral agents, thus showing that they would

2Ethics
‘learn’ from other’s mistakes. Actions or choices that are in alignment with the moral codes
and norms would be considered the right ones, and thus be followed by all moral agents. On
such accounts, what is considered as ‘right’ takes precedence over what is ‘good’, implying
that no matter how good the possible outcomes might be, if the action or choices that produce
it is not right, it should never be taken (Chan et al., 2016).
How deontology is better to utilitarianism:
Utilitarianism implies that no act, choice or rule is intrinsically right or wrong, instead
the rightness or wrongness of an action, choice or rule is entirely a matter of the overall
rightness or wrongness of the consequences of that action, choice or rule. In other words, it
implies that the ‘end justifies the means’, and that the moral duty plays an instrumental role
but not an end in itself, unlike the assumption in case of deontology (whose central idea is the
‘means justifies the end’) (Barrow, 2015). The problem with utilitarianism is that it supports
or justifies actions, choices or rules which can clearly be immoral or unethical such as
punishing someone who is innocent or stealing as long as it is considered to have good
consequences. However the acts or choices or rules in themselves are immoral, regardless of
how ‘good’ the consequence they might bring for the larger crowd. In contrast deontological
theory has three important considerations, the first is that only for the sake of duty a duty
should be done, and the rightness or wrongness of the action depends on the moral factors
that are intrinsic to the action or duty. Thus under such consideration, acts such as lying,
stealing, cheating, murdering or breaking a promise are wrong intrinsically and moral beings
have a duty not to engage in such activities. The second important consideration is that
humans should not be considered as the means to an end but as ends in themselves and thus
as objects with intrinsic values of morals. The third consideration is that moral principle is
applicable for every moral agent in similar situations. Thus it supports moral statements in
the form of commands or imperatives regarding the all the possible actions or choices made