-you must also post substantive responses to at least two of your classmates’ posts in this thread. Your response should include elements such as follow-up questions, further exploration of topics from the initial post, or requests for further clarification or explanation on some points made by the classmates.
-Reply to these 2 students.
-One paragraph for each (2 paragraphs total)
-reference for each paragraph reply
1)Briana:
Consequentialist approaches ethics in a way that deals with an action and its resulting consequences. This theory evaluates how right or wrong an action is based on the consequences following the action itself (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2019). On the other hand, non-consequentialist approaches ethics in a way that deals with the action but does not focus as much on an actions consequences. This form of theory focuses on the rightness or wrongness of the action based on the properties of the action (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2019).
Let’s focus on utilitarianism, this is one of the major theories associated with consequentialism. Utilitarianism is the theory that right acts will produce the most amount of good for the greatest number of beings, meaning the more good the better (Pence, 2010). More right acts will lead to more good results for a greater amount of people, in short. The main objection to this theory is that the right of an individual is not held to highest concern. This approach focuses on what is right for the majority and not what is right for a specific individual. People are looked at as a whole group and not how they will benefit personally, the goal is for the majority to feel the good of a right action.
Then, we have Kant’s theory. This theory is one of the major theories associated with non-consequentialism. Kantian ethics believes in the power of reason to solve all human problems (Pence, 2010). This approach believes the correct motive for taking part in a certain act is not because one feels it is correct but because morally it is the right thing to do. Kantian ethics has objections like all theories. One of the main problems seen within the ethics is the lack of guidance when it comes down to picking between two maxims (Pence, 2010). In any conflict there will always be two sides which is where some feel the Kantian ethics fell short.
2)Rocio:
Consequentialism is defined as the theory that suggests that the outcome of an action is what decides whether an action was good or bad (The Ethics Centre 15 FEB 2016 et al.). In other words, if one were to perform any action and the outcome brought about more benefit than harm – the action was a good one (The Ethics Centre 15 FEB 2016 et al.). While non-consequentialist theory values the action itself rather than the outcome (Ethics).
A major theory associated with consequentialism is Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is theory in which something is considered good if the consequences brings greatest good for greatest number (McCombs School of Business, 2018). This theory can be objected as one could state that there is simply no way to accurately predict the future 100% of the time (McCombs School of Business, 2018). One could also say that just because the outcome is good to one person that doesn’t mean it didn’t affect someone else negatively (McCombs School of Business, 2018).
A non-consequentialist theory is deontology. Deontology is an approach of which people should follow the rules and do their duty (McCombs School of Business, 2021). This theory doesn’t require one to measure the outcome of their actions as one should simply do their duty and follow rules (McCombs School of Business, 2021). But one could argue that sometimes a rule should be broken (McCombs School of Business, 2021). For example, since children are little they are told not to lie but what if one has to lie in order to protect a secret of another they promised to keep? Should they lie and keep their promise or break their promise and not lie? This theory can often be found as too rigid.
