Consequentialism is a theory of normative ethics.
Jeremy Benthambest known for his advocacy of utilitarianism Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do.
On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the other the chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in all we say, in all we think Historically, hedonistic utilitarianism is the paradigmatic example of a consequentialist moral theory.
This form of utilitarianism holds that what matters is the aggregate happiness; the happiness of everyone and not the happiness of any particular person.
John Stuart Millin his exposition of hedonistic utilitarianism, proposed a hierarchy of pleasures, meaning that the pursuit of certain kinds of pleasure is more highly valued than the pursuit of other pleasures.
Other contemporary forms of utilitarianism mirror the forms of consequentialism outlined below. Ethical egoism Ethical egoism can be understood as Ethical decision making from a consequentialist consequentialist theory according to which the consequences for the individual agent are taken to matter more than any other result.
Thus, egoism will prescribe actions that may be beneficial, detrimental, or neutral to the welfare of others. Some, like Henry Sidgwickargue that a certain degree of egoism promotes the general welfare of society for two reasons: Altruism ethics Ethical altruism can be seen as a consequentialist ethic which prescribes that an individual take actions that have the best consequences for everyone except for himself.
Rule utilitarianism In general, consequentialist theories focus on actions. However, this need not be the case. Rule consequentialism is a theory that is sometimes seen as an attempt to reconcile deontology and consequentialism—and in some cases, this is stated as a criticism of rule consequentialism.
However, rule consequentialism chooses rules based on the consequences that the selection of those rules has. Rule consequentialism exists in the forms of rule utilitarianism and rule egoism.
Various theorists are split as to whether the rules are the only determinant of moral behavior or not. For example, Robert Nozick holds that a certain set of minimal rules, which he calls "side-constraints", are necessary to ensure appropriate actions.
Thus, while Nozick's side-constraints are absolute restrictions on behavior, Amartya Sen proposes a theory that recognizes the importance of certain rules, but these rules are not absolute. One of the most common objections to rule-consequentialism is that it is incoherent, because it is based on the consequentialist principle that what we should be concerned with is maximizing the good, but then it tells us not to act to maximize the good, but to follow rules even in cases where we know that breaking the rule could produce better results.
Sep 25, · And because individuals can shortcut their moral decision-making they are much more likely to make decisions in a quick and timely way Bad points of rule consequentialism Less flexible. Other versions of consequentialism may be generated by making small changes in this theory, as we shall see, so long as the new theory stays faithful to the broad idea that morality is all about producing the right kinds of overall consequences. The usual Consequentialist view is that a 50% chance of a certain good outcome is half as good. Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action.
Brad Hooker avoided this objection by not basing his form of rule-consequentialism on the ideal of maximizing the good. The best argument for rule-consequentialism is that it does a better job than its rivals of matching and tying together our moral convictions, as well as offering us help with our moral disagreements and uncertainties.
In practice, this equates to adhering to rule consequentialism when one can only reason on an intuitive level, and to act consequentialism when in a position to stand back and reason on a more critical level.
This version gives relevance to the motive of an act and links it to its consequences. An act can therefore not be wrong if the decision to act was based on a right motive. A possible inference is, that one can not be blamed for mistaken judgments if the motivation was to do good.
However, negative utilitarianism lays out a consequentialist theory that focuses solely on minimizing bad consequences.
One major difference between these two approaches is the agent's responsibility. Positive consequentialism demands that we bring about good states of affairs, whereas negative consequentialism requires that we avoid bad ones.Some Virtue Ethicists hold that Consequentialist theories totally disregard the development and importance of moral mtb15.compa Foot ( - ), for example, argues that consequences in themselves have no ethical content, unless it has been provided by a virtue, such as benevolence, etc..
Others have argued that Consequentialism is unable to explain adequately why a morally wrong. Sep 25, · Consequentialism says that right or wrong depend on the consequences of an act, and that the more good consequences are produced, the better the act.
Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action.
Ethical theories are often broadly divided into three types: i) Consequentialist theories, which are primarily concerned with the ethical consequences of particular actions; ii) Non-consequentialist theories, which tend to be broadly concerned with the intentions of the person making ethical decisions about particular actions; and iii) Agent.
Consequentialism. Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges whether or not something is right by what its consequences are. For instance, most people would agree that lying is wrong. STEPS OF THE ETHICAL DECISION DECISION--MAKING PROCESSMAKING PROCESS EESE Faculty Development Workshop.
Douglas R. May, Professor and Co-Director. International Center for Ethics in Business.
SUMMARY OF THE STEPS OF THE ETHICAL DECISION MAKING PROCESS 1. 2. Gather the facts 3. consequentialist preferred action?.