MSLD 634 Module 2- Theories of Ethics

For this week’s module, LaFollette introduced us to two different categories of ethical theory that have different approaches on problem solving: consequentialism and deontology. Consequentialism, as LaFollette (2007) defines is the way where ones choose the available action(s) with the best overall consequences, whereas deontology states that ones should act in ways circumscribed by moral rules or rights (p. 22). The key difference is that consequentialism focuses more on results while deontology focuses on how to get to the results (Rudin, 2014).

Of the two categories, I consider myself more of a consequentialist since I personally believe that a thorough analysis (more details) is what makes decision-making more efficient. As LaFollette (2007) stated, consequentialists typically specify which consequences are morally relevant, how much “weight” or consideration we should give to those that count, and how precisely we should use them in moral reasoning (p. 23). An example I had was whether to determine if making regular phone calls (general information) to students was an ideal operation for my campus. If I chose to regularly call students, I know that students will be informed and will likely be happy to hear from us. However, considering the fact that most students are full-time employees, I worried that calling them about non-urgent information in the middle of work could be a distraction and may lead to negative consequences. With these and other thoughts in mind, I decided that calling regularly will likely not be the best choice for my campus, an instead decided to email the information to the students.

                As previously mentioned, deontology is the way where we act in ways circumscribed by moral rules or rights (LaFollette, 2007). A recent example of this is when I went over the Train Dilemma in last week’s blog post. One of the scenario asked whether I should push an elderly man to save five children on the tracks or not to push. At an instance, my immediate thought was to not push the elder because, I believe that all human life is sacred regardless of their gender, age, race, etc. While I make some decisions in this category, I personally worry if my moral beliefs do not align with what others think. In a hypothetical setting, if I chose not to sacrifice the elder despite sacrificing to save the young were considered a moral act for many, I’d likely face deep consequences for my action. With this in mind, I personally believe that deontology is a better approach when dealing with less complex situations (no large consequences).

References:

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Rudin, S. (2014). Consequentialism, Deontology, Ethics, and Virtue. The Loop. Retrieved from http://www.theloopnewspaper.com/story/2014/03/29/local-news/consequentialism-deontology-ethics-and-virtue/416.html