Deontology vs. Utilitarianism: The Pros and Cons

Question 1 

Deontology is a branch of utilitarian ethics that relies on predetermined rules to judge wrong from right. The deontological ethical theory was forwarded by Immanuel Kant, whose ethical conviction suggested that specific universal moral laws govern ethical actions among human beings. Therefore, actions that obey these universal laws are considered ethical while those that do not remain unethical. The deontological branch of ethics augers well with natural human intuition, which governs what is perceived universally as wrong or right. 

Categorial imperatives in ethics constitute actions an individual does regardless of whether the consequences gain them anything beneficial. Hypothetical imperatives constitute actions individuals take, but only if doing so gains them something beneficial. The core difference between hypothetical imperatives and categorical imperatives is that the latter must be done regardless of desire or motive, while the former are moral commands. 

As an ardent critic of Kantian deontology, Schopenhauer had reservations on the Kantian view of goodwill. He stated that Kantian deontology viewed goodwill in a manner that contradicted the human spirit of virtue. Schopenhauer stated that the true spirit of human virtue was not hinged on the good deed performed as suggested by Kant, but rather their willingness to do it in the first place and the good feeling resulting from the same. 

Question 2 

Utilitarian ethics denotes a group of normative ethical theories and concepts that seek to satisfy human happiness and welfare to the maximum measure possible. Therefore, utilitarian ethics judge the morality of human actions according to the consequential or cumulative happiness and welfare obtained. Mathew and Hendricks (2019) report that “utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism” (pg. 46). Specific actions are considered ethical even while illegal because their end justified the means utilized. 

Question 3 

Kantian deontology and utilitarian ethics are similarly based on their focus on creating and maximizing human satisfaction and welfare. Although one relies on universal laws while the other on cumulative outcomes of actions taken, both focus on creating and maximizing human happiness or well-being. Additionally, both deontology and utilitarian ethics primarily focus on human actions without regard for virtue. 

Kantian deontology and utilitarian ethics differ in their criteria for establishing ethics. Deontology relies on what Immanuel Kant referred to as universal moral laws, while utilitarian ethics relies on the cumulative outcome to judge ethical morality. Finally, utilitarian ethics does not rely on any laws to judge ethical morality because it focuses on the final measure of human happiness and welfare. 

Question 4 

Example A: Deontology ethics considers lying unethical because of the universal rules attached to being untruthful and lying. Regardless of the outcome or intentions, lying is considered unethical and shunned in societies that subscribe to Kantian deontology. 

Example B: If a person steals a cheesecake from a shop and feeds a starving child in his neighborhood, his actions are considered ethical regardless of the action of theft. Utilitarian ethics measures morality using cumulative human happiness and well-being, and the action of theft to save a starving child is ethical. 

Question 5 

Kantian Deontology appeals to more people because it relies on universal laws. The universality of these laws implies consultation, much like in the current Constitutions of various countries and the Charter of Universal Human Rights. Utilitarian ethics might present problems of implementation in modern society because of diversity. Specific actions regarded as ethical in one society might be illegal and harmful in others, setting the stage for conflict.