Deontology is derived from the Greeks – it means duty. The deontological theory states that humans are obliged to focusing on acting irrespective of the outcomes. Religiously, deontology ensures we are wired towards a set of rules that discourages immoral acts like lying, cheating, or stealing. This conditioning supports the notion that deontology has been in practice for long periods. Immanuel, the deontological theory's pioneer, developed one of the most utilized moral theories in the year 1788. Despite other approaches focusing on religious doctrines, the maxims under Kant's development derives its content from the reasoning of humans. Opposing theories like Utilitarianism neglects morality since it revolves around taking maximum use of an act that makes you achieve more. Kant's deontological theory has stood the test of time because it extensively focuses on moral obligations.
Immanuel Kant is responsible for the development of the most active ethics in deontology. His theory is based on the view the humans are rational beings who can reason with some sense of uniqueness. This ideology is correct since no animal is incorporated with the propensity of analyzing action and thought. Therefore, Kant expects humans to utilize this capability by ensuring morality adheres to irrespective of the possible outcome of the act. He purports that humans should not involve their emotional self in decision making since it is bound to alter the results. Acts engaged in based on the reason most probably lead to a better outcome since adherence to morality also reduces risk exposure. Kant states that "action needs motivation from the obligations and patterns of thought expected off of an individual." Morality should incorporate a framework of rules that embrace rationality to prevent and guide selected actions (Alexander, 2007). It also needs to embrace being free from personal desires and intentions. Kant believes that the validity of an effort is highly dependent on human will.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The formulation of categorical imperatives has highly contributed to the validity of Kant's Deontological Theory. The initial formulation focuses on the importance of acting based on the maxim, which supports the utilization of will. Kant believes that the moral propositions formulated by an individual needs to adhere to logic, but not tied to the subject's identity in society. A valid moral judgment needs to be from any connections with the physical entities that may affect it, and also should be administered to any human. Despite their being imperfect duties, Kant believes that they still bind humans to embrace the need for morality. Perfect responsibilities ensure individuals adhere to the obligations expected off of them, after which they might receive praise for the completed assignment. However, imperfect ones offer praise irrespective of the condition of the outcome. Kant's theory has stood the test of time since contemporary society, especially the work environment, is extensively focused on rewarding individuals based on their moral obligations at work. Both imperfect and perfect works right with similar intensity.
Kant's second categorical imperative formulation plays a significant role in ensuring the act is practiced in the current society. It revolves ensuring humanity is treated not only as a means to an end, but also an end in itself, irrespective of whether it is you as a singular individual or another person. An end requires a categorical pursuit for it to focus on objectivity. Humans are presented with free will, and it is through adherence to morality that they achieve survival (Darwell, 2008). The current society is embracing Kant's second categorical imperative through the development of laws bound to make humans organized. Institutions ensure individuals present and actively engaged in their activities adhere to formulated obligations. This improvisation plays a significant role in developing a system that provides the decisions made have complied with morality. Employees also embrace their interactions in the workplace and ensure the decisions and actions made on others do not stray from treating an individual as an end in itself.
Currently, the medical field has embraced the continuity of applying Kantian theory in society. Most concerns in medical ethics are contemporarily solved through the incorporation of Kantian Deontology. Medical ethics have developed strategies that support the infusion of complex associations and tough situations (Gillon, 1985). This method is derived from the relationships that often emerge from physician-patient visits. Medical professionals need to understand the significance of interactions, especially with patients suffering from chronic health conditions for them to make proper decisions. Morality comes in handy since these cases demand an individual to extensively focus on making rational decisions despite the situation being surrounded by emotional triggers.
Kantian Deontology has stood against the criticisms put forward over time. Critics have questioned the validity of physician-aided suicide. These individuals claim, for example, that "a patient that is terminally ill and decides to die tactically believes that his life is entirely dependent on the pains and pleasures in his life." However, these ideologies are not true since the patient's decision to die might be based on the fact that dignity is at his peril. Rationality considers the factual information signaled from the physical environment. Therefore, the decision made is not based on emotional experiences, but reality. The critics' claim is also plausible since humans are granted free will. They, therefore, act based on their reasoning rather than what is expected off of them based on societal formulations. Kantian theory questions the claim of ending life as presented by the critical analysts by stating; how wrong is it if I decide to end my life to ease myself from bodily pains? The Kantian theory, therefore, applies across a broad spectrum. This spread makes it the most practiced ethical approach across the world in contemporary times.
The theory of morality has questioned arguments revolving around matters our duties towards animals. Critics argued on the validity of Kant's rationalism, i.e., he is mainly concerned with the reason behind animal mistreatment. Kant believes that humans owe their morality only to rational creatures, but not other beings. Therefore, we have the right to engage in activities that may cause harm to them, like slaughtering for consumption or farming. Critics' concern lies in questioning whether "it is essential for humans to intentionally harm animals or setting up factories that manufacture animal products." Kant's theory counters this ideology by incorporating its rationale for reasoning (Johnson, 2004). The critical concerns address the possibility of humans who treat an animal with cruelty to extend their acts to animals. Despite their being ignorant persons in society, the deontological theory argues on the importance of embracing morality on rational creatures. This idea demands individuals to ensure their actions do not involve cruelty to persons that adhere to the moral obligations expected off of them based on Kant's theory of true wellness.
Contemporary issues of same-sex marriage have led to the continued incorporation of Kant's theory in decision-making processes. Arguments revolving the objectification and instrumentalization brought about by sex in the society. People are said to desire each other intrinsically to use the individual a mere means through the desire for engaging in sex. Most argumentations believe sex is morally okay when individuals are involved through marriage, rather than the current forms of relationships established. The most argued segment is that it revolves around same-sex relations. Kant's theory does not go against engaging in this type of ties provided the decision was made between two rational beings. Most of the critics believe this is morally unacceptable, and if it is to be allowed, the participants need to engage in marriage. However, rationality assumes that decisions are made based on morality but not on emotions. Kant believes that sex is a problematic component that has no moral obligations tied to it.
Despite Kantian theory being of significance, some ambivalence is depicted within its content. Critics have questioned the inability of Deontological Theory to develop a set of strategies that will enable businesses to be morally accountable for their acts (Swabey, 1964). However, Kant purports that corporates are not moral agents; therefore, they are not obligated to doing what is right. This ideology raises concerns since a whopping number of activities in the businesses are bound to affect people both directly and indirectly profoundly. For example, a corporation with records of previous accounts of moral neglects that hurt people in society always walk free. Critics argue on the possible way through which this business entity can be held responsible for its acts. Through this consideration, Kant's theory will have to develop a varying account of experience to derive the necessary moral obligations.
The deontological theory revolves around morality and rationality. It has continually been used for an extended period. Medical ethics is mainly concerned with enhancing rationality among patient-physician interactions. This situation requires rational thought irrespective of the emotional triggers bound to emerge from the associations. Critics have come up with questions that challenge the validity of the deontological theory. Most of the concerns have been inquiring on matter same-sex relations, premarital sex, and corporate moral obligations. Kant defends all the possible outcomes of the criticisms by stating his theories work for rational situations and beings.
References
Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2007). Deontological ethics.
Darwell, S. (2008). Deontology.
Gillon, R. (1985). Deontological foundations for medical ethics?. British medical journal (Clinical research ed.) , 290 (6478), 1331.
Johnson, R., & Cureton, A. (2004). Kant’s moral philosophy.
Swabey, W. C. (1961). Ethical theory: from Hobbes to Kant . Philosophical Library.
White, M. D. (2009). In defense of deontology and Kant: a reply to van Staveren. Review of Political Economy , 21 (2), 299-307.
