1826 to mean more generally “the knowledge of what is right and proper”. Deontology is the study of that which is an “obligation or duty”, introduction to international studies brian orend pdf consequent moral judgment on the actor on whether he or she has complied. There are numerous formulations of deontological ethics.
Second, Kant argued that it was not the consequences of actions that make them right or wrong but the motives of the person who carries out the action. Kant’s argument that to act in the morally right way one must act purely from duty begins with an argument that the highest good must be both good in itself and good without qualification. Pleasure, for example, appears not to be good without qualification, because when people take pleasure in watching someone suffer, this seems to make the situation ethically worse. Instead, he claims, a person has a good will when he ‘acts out of respect for the moral law’. So, the only thing that is truly good in itself is a good will, and a good will is only good when the willer chooses to do something because it is that person’s duty, i. He defines respect as “the concept of a worth which thwarts my self-love”.
Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end. Every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in a universal kingdom of ends. This section has multiple issues. If they are acting on a bad maxim, e. I will lie”, then their action is wrong, even if some good consequences come of it.
Although not all deontologists are religious, some believe in the ‘divine command theory’, which is actually a cluster of related theories which essentially state that an action is right if God has decreed that it is right. The Divine Command Theory is a form of deontology because, according to it, the rightness of any action depends upon that action being performed because it is a duty, not because of any good consequences arising from that action. If they do not work on Sabbath because they are lazy, then their action is not truly speaking “right”, even though the actual physical action performed is the same. If God commands not to covet a neighbour’s goods, this theory holds that it would be immoral to do so, even if coveting provides the beneficial outcome of a drive to succeed or do well. One thing that clearly distinguishes Kantian deontologism from divine command deontology is that Kantianism maintains that man, as a rational being, makes the moral law universal, whereas divine command maintains that God makes the moral law universal. The Principle states that one may harm in order to save more if and only if the harm is an effect or an aspect of the greater good itself. This principle is meant to address what Kamm feels are most people’s considered case judgments, many of which involve deontological intuitions.