Moral theories are theories that help us distinguish between a right or a wrong action. Adequate moral theories help us understand that what we should or shouldn’t do in certain situations. Two of the most famous moral theories are Utilitarianism and Kantianism. According to Utilitarianism, an action is right if only if it out of all the other action gives out the maximum utility. In oppose to that, Kantianism says that an action is right if and only if, in performing that action, the person does not treat anyone as a mean and treats everyone as an end in itself. The three different versions of Utilitarianism are, Act, Rule, and Preference Utilitarianism. Act Utilitarianism states that a person’s act is right if and only if it produces as many …show more content…
Utilitarianism is different from Kantianism because it says that you can perform any action even if it provides some harm to others, but at the end it should provide maximum utility. But on the other end, Kantianism says that you need to treat everyone equal, no one less than the other. They both hold different views but they both are right in certain situations. Utilitarianism and Kantianism conflict in many situations. For example, you have a friend who’s pregnant, but she’s scared to tell her parents. According to Kantianism, you should tell her parents because everyone deserves to be treated equally and they deserved the truth. In this situation if you tell her parents you are treating everyone equal by not hiding anything to her parents. On the other hand, according to utilitarianism, you should look for other options …show more content…
Truth telling and confidentiality depend upon the situations. It is right to tell the truth in certain but it is also right to hide something from the patients in certain situations. According to utilitarianism one should usually tell the truth and keep one’s promise because you should always perform an action that provides maximum utility and if keeping a promise and telling the truth makes someone happy then it is providing maximum utility. For example, your parents gave you present for your birthday but you don’t like it, in this situation not telling that you don’t like the present will give out maximum utility as it makes them happy. According to Kantianism, we should never treat anyone merely as a mean, which means that you should tell the truth even if it hurts other
It states that an action which is deemed right is one that has not merely some good consequences, but also the greatest amount of good consequences possible when the negative consequences are also given due considerations. According to the utilitarian principle, the righteousness of an action is solely judged on the basis of its consequences. Classical utilitarianism determines the balance of pleasure and pain for each individual affected by the action in question as well as the amount of utility for the whole
A moral dilemma that arises in a doctor-patient relationship is whether or not the doctor should always tell their patient the truth about their health. Although withholding information was a common practice in the past, in today’s world, patient autonomy is more important than paternalism. Many still are asking if it is ever morally permissible for a doctor to lie to a patient, though. David C. Thomasma writes that truth-telling is important as a right, a utility, and a kindness, but other values may be more important in certain instances. The truth is a right because respect for the person demands it.
In Joseph Collins article, “Should Doctors Tell the Truth?” he states that doctors shouldn’t tell the truth to their patients that deals with their life and death. Collins argued that doctor should withhold the truth on any circumstances. For example, when Collins blamed himself because of the death of a lawyer who suffered from kidney disease, only if he had lied to the lawyer about his health issue, the lawyer still could have been alive. However, I believe that doctors should always tell the truth to their patients regardless of the circumstances because withholding information violates patient’s autonomy and harms the doctor-patient relationship.
She advocates for the goal of disclosure and an atmosphere of openness, hoping to restore trust between the physician and the patient. Communicating truthful information, even if it may be life-changing, will promote more beneficial medical practices. However, she also acknowledges that there may be cases in which concealment of information may be necessary. In such cases, Bok suggests that truthful information should go to someone closely related to the patient which will promote a more open and trusting environment. A concern arises, then, about what the physician should do if the patient explicitly communicates that they do not want to be told about a diagnosis or treatment option even if it may better promote their
Truth telling is described as an utility, or is a sign of maturity because that person is maturing and handling situations correctly. Lastly, it is kind and overall the right things to do. Without telling
If we as nurses respect the confidentiality of a patient, we should do so for all the patients. However, Griffith (2007) argues that the duty of confidence should not be absolute and nurses should always consider sharing information if required. Though the principle of respecting patient autonomy and their right to confidentiality is broken here, the principle of beneficence and non-maleficence is uphold. Nurses have an obligation to protect patient’s confidentiality but the duty to warn an innocent party of imminent harm is far more critical. Therefore, breaking confidentiality here is potentially doing more good than
The variation between the two is that act utilitarianism states that an action is correct only when it brings good to the situation verses any other choice you could have made. Rule utilitarianism states that an action is correct if we followed the given rules that were made in order to have the greatest chance of achieving the most amount of
Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill are two of the most notable philosophers in normative ethics. This branch of ethics is based on moral standards that determine what is considered morally right and wrong. This paper will focus on Immanuel Kant’s theory of deontology and J.S. Mill’s theory of utilitarianism. While Mill takes a consequentialist approach, focused on the belief that actions are right if they are for the benefit of a majority, Kant is solely concerned with the nature of duty and obligation, regardless of the outcome. This paper will also reveal that Kantian ethics, in my opinion, is a better moral law to follow compared to the utilitarian position.
The divine command theory, utilitarianism, Kant’s duty defined morality, natural law theory, and Aristotle’s virtue ethics are the five types of ethical theories. The divine command theory states that what is morally right and wrong will be decided by God. Utilitarianism states that “Action “A” is morally right if and only if it produces the greatest amount of overall happiness. Kant’s duty defined morality states that what is important is acting for the sake of producing good consequences, no matter what the act is. Natural law theory states that people should focus on the good and avoid any evil.
The utilitarianism is common approach to make ethical decisions. The main point of this approach is that you have to make that decision which comes with the most utility. The utility in this approach can be described as „The good”, and the opposite of this is „the bad”. This means that in Computer Science you have to produce a computer programme or a hardware, which produces the largest amount of good , and during the producing phase, it makes the least amount of bad, for all who are affected: customers, employees, and even the enviroment. With the utilitarian viewpoint people can make right, and ethical decisions, for instance if you produce a programme which can make life easier for millions of people, you should not sell it for extremly
Libertarianism is a political philosophy that said that the state should interfere as little as possible with people. Utilitarians, differ from Libertarianism, because are primarily concerned with the advocating for human provision of a minimal level of well being and social support for legal resident and citizens. They maintained that society ought to be systematically arranged in whatever way that would best reached this end potentially defend the vase and achieve greater social equality for the needy. Utilitarians think that the right thing to do is whatever produces the greatest amount of happiness.
Utilitarianism and Kantian extreme deontology are two very different aspects of ethics. Merriam Webster defines utilitarianism as, “a doctrine that the useful is the good and that the determining consideration of right conduct should be the usefulness of its consequences.” Kant’s extreme view on deontology “believed that certain types of actions were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative” (Kantian Ethics). When evaluating the differences and coming up with examples such as, how the president of the United States would make decisions regarding the situation between how the tensions between the United States and the USSR occurred, after the United States accidentally bombed Moscow. The choice the president has to make is to either bomb New York City, killing roughly seven million, or letting Moscow resort to a full-scale nuclear war against the United States, killing over one hundred million.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethical theory based on the idea that an action is moral if it causes the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. The theory is concerned with predicted consequences or outcomes of a situation rather than focusing on what is done to get to the outcome. There are many forms of utilitarianism, having been introduced by Jeremy Bentham (act utilitarianism), and later being updated by scholars such as J.S. Mill (rule utilitarianism) and Peter Singer (preference utilitarianism). When referring to issues of business ethics, utilitarianism can allow companies to decide what to do in a given situation based on a simple calculation. Many people would agree that this idea of promoting goodness
Hyejin Jang Professor Writing DED 8 April 2016. 4. 7. Kant’s ethics differs from utilitarian ethics both in its scope and in the precision with which it guides action. In The Categorical Imperative, Kant emphasizes that human autonomy is the essence of morality.
These theories challenge what an individual think is right and wrong. Some of ethical theories are given in detail below. • Utilitarianism: Utilitarian ethical theories are based on person’s ability to foretell the reaction of a particular action. It is part of a normative ethics that is the study of ethical actions or ethics