A634.2.4.RB - Theories of Ethics

In Chapter 2, A Tale of Two Theories, LaFollette (2007) discusses Consequentialism and Deontology. Discuss your thoughts on these two theories. Do you tend to lean toward being a consequentialist? Deontologist?

The theory of consequentialism, as detailed by LaFollette (2007), is founded in its “claim that we are morally obligated to act in ways that produce the best consequences” (p. 23). In contrast, deontologists claim that our moral obligations – whatever they are – are defined by the rules, partly independently of consequences” (LaFollette, 2007, p. 24). I interpret this to simply mean deontologists do not allow any exceptions to the rules, where consequentialists do.

While reading this week’s chapters, my husband was watching the movie, The Cabin in the Woods. The end of the movie suggests that perhaps it's better to let humans go extinct rather than commit murder, an anti-consequentialist position. After some discussion with my husband we agreed that another great movie dealing with consequentialism is Gone Baby, a disturbing story where two detectives search for a missing child following a child abduction. Throughout the movie, there are several dilemmas where the main star, Casey Affleck, must weigh moral high grounds or “ends-justify-the-means” decision.

My Christian upbringing taught me that killing is bad. However, I am in the military and work on the world’s premier nuclear bomber B-2 aircraft which is solely designed to kill others (or prevent it through strategic deterrence). I still believe killing is bad and that we should be ethical out of duty and moral obligation. Yet, consequences need to be considered regarding ethics.

In last week’s blog, I was asked to discuss and decide my actions during The Train Dilemma: When no Choice is a Good One. When faced with a situation to let five kids get run over with a train, I stated I would choose to let one child die rather than five. As humans, it is our ethical duty to save as many lives as possible in any given situation. With limited options and information, I would act in a way that produces the best consequences, thus consequentialism.

So, which theory is correct? The answer is both and neither. Like many examples in life, the solution lies somewhere in between. After understanding both theories, I feel I tend to lean towards being a consequentialist. I believe circumstances and consequences matter and in order to make the best decisions with the most effective and ethical outcomes one must practice critical thinking. Elder & Paul (2013) state thinking tells us what to believe, what is important, what is true as well as everything we know, believe, want, fear, and hope for. "All thinking has an internal dynamic. It leads somewhere and, when acted upon, has consequences. You can't be a critical thinker if you are insensitive to the many implications inherent in your thinking." (Elder & Paul, 201, p. 87). Much like critical thinkers consider the Elements of Thought, consequentialists must consider and specify three dimensions:

- Which consequences?

- How much do they count?

- How do they count?

References: 

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2013). 30 Days to Better Thinking and Better Living Through Critical Thinking: A Guide for Improving Every Aspect of Your Life. London: Prentice-Hall.
Gone Baby Gone. (2007, October 19). Retrieved June 13, 2020, from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0452623/

Lafollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, Mass: Blackwell.