Deontological and teleological approaches to ethics
Introduction
Deontological ethical approach judges if an action is right, despite the outcome of the action. On the other hand, there is teleological ethics which states otherwise, this theory judge’s morality from the outcome or the consequence it brings. Philosopher sought out to prove which of these two theories should be use to judge the morality of human actions in business and entrepreneurship. In most occasions the deontological approach is associated with German philosopher Immanuel Kant whom was the first one to define it in the 18th century. Kant believed for one to be morally upright one most follow the universal moral laws, and also one must have a good will that will lead one to act in accordance to the law out of respect than acting on natural inclination. Teleological approach focuses on the goals or achievement of an action. For many reasons it is advisable to use teleological theory in making business decisions.
These two approaches have their differences which are as follows; deontology approach is a theory that state that the results of the action do not justify the means that were used, while teleological approach is a theory that states that the results always justify the means that were used. Deontology can be referred to as ethics that are duty based, while teleology can be referred to as ethics that are results based. Teleology examines the history of the results of an action in order to determine or predicts the outcomes or results of an action, while deontology encourages on to follow what can be said to be morally right judging from the values that have been instilled in a person. Deontology advises one to maintain all fairness and not to use others for personal gains, while teleology advises one to use whatever means necessary to produce good results. Deontology adheres to rules and principles while, teleology does not adhere to rules or principals (Ayers, 2019). These differences help to set apart these two theoretical approaches.
`Each of the theoretical approaches has its strengths and weaknesses. Deontology theory helps to create and set a good foundation on how humans will conduct themselves. The Ten Commandments set’s a good example of what deontological theory is, they are rules that guide humans to do what is morally right since judgment is placed on their actions. Society has also the golden rule that advise one to do unto others what they would want done unto them. Deontological approach requires one to treat others with respect because that is what is morally upright. Deontological ethics helps in instilling personal responsibility in an individual. The requirements of deontological ethics, require one to be responsible while undertaking any action (Ayers, 2019). Any action undertaken by an individual in the society has to be done in accordance with the moral rules and any outcome from such action is ethically correct.
Deontological theoretical approach helps to create a moral absolute. For this approach there is nothing that can be considered as black and white since something is either right or wrong in the society. In cases where extreme situations arise and another course of action is needed the guidelines for this approach do not allow another action to be taken, this is because, morally they are not expected to take another action apart from the required action. This duty based approach places value on every person by aiming and providing respect to all human beings in a society. It forces everyone to offer regards and interests of each other (Ayers, 2019). The outcomes of these theory are not always right though they are dictated by what is morally upright. The last of the advantages of this theory is that it offers certainty of the results of an outcome because it pays concern to the action being undertaken to provide these results.
The deontological theory has its advantages that contribute or make up its weaknesses. This theoretical approach crates a paradox. When considering the welfare of the society as these approach emphasizes on, one cannot consider the welfare of others at the expense of his or her own life, since no self-sacrifice can be termed morally right. This approach also forbids taking another course of action in extreme conditions. In some conditions that would save lives another course of action should be taken to avoid destruction of life but this approach does not permit this (Ayers, 2019). Taking a situation where a missile is supposed to be launched, but launching this missile will kill or harm lives and the duty of the person is to launch it, going against that command can be termed as morally wrong but the course of action was changed to save life.
Deontological theoretical approach can be termed as a good supernatural excuse. This approach includes divine commands such as The Ten Commandments within its structure. If a person or society believes that God or the divinities, they worship is the one that dictates what is morally right and wrong they might be misled. Some people may do harm onto others in the name that their deity allows them and it is morally right. These deontological ethics tent to override morality on a personal level. These deontological ethics define what is wrong and right on a basis of subjective opinion. How to define what is right should be from the insight of an involved individual (Micewski, & Troy, 2007). It is absurd that even the act of quickly pushing a person through an exit to aid them to leave in a dangerous situation before alerting them is morally inferior.
Deontological ethical approach dictate that any form of violence is wrong therefore, in its system it fails to incorporate self-defense. In a situation where one is caught in any form of violence one is allowed to defend him/herself from anyone trying to cause them harm. This approach does not permit one to respond to any kind of violence. Self-defense does not make one morally wrong. This approach encourages one who is immoral to harm another person since the other person holds the perspective that defending him/herself is ethically wrong. This approach also as dictates that one is not permitted to let anyone hurt another person. Sometimes someone cannot control situations and that does not make them ethically wrong. This theoretical approach is also based on the action that one takes, lying in any situation is morally wrong according to this theory, in life some situations require a lie, taking a situation where one wants to commit suicide and they need to be told something in order to stop, it is morally right to lie to them than let them commit suicide (De, 2003). Morality should be judged on the better choice that is made in a situation, but not on the laws of nature that state what is wrong and right.
Every individual’s everyday missions are based on the goals they want to achieve. Individuals are concerned on what results their action will give them. Teleology helps individuals in shaping the decision they make each day by only considering the results of their actions. Just like the deontological approach the teleological approach has its strength and weakness, starting with the strengths; this theory tends to be more flexible than other theories. It allows action to be change in order to suit a circumstance and in order to produce better results. This theory also denies the fact that morality exist in relation to culture, society or even historical context thus making the teleological approach more individualistic. It allows us to look at situations and make decisions on what one sees fit rather than what society considers moral. An example is a situation where a doctor chooses to remove a person from life support system because they know the person has no chance of surviving in order to place a person who has the chances of surviving (De, 2003). The teleological approach helps the doctor to do this because it is what is morally right at the time
The teleological ethical approach is more useful in the 21st century. It is a century where people are not more concerned with playing God by determining what is morally right or wrong but concerned with getting life changing results despite the moral status of the actions they take. This theory has made room for practices such as cloning of embryo for infertile couple without worrying if the action is morally right according to society or not, simply because the results of these cloning action will be beneficial for many (De, 2003). It is arguable that the teleological theory helps people deal with problems arising in the real world that deontological approach fails to address. Teleological theory puts people in a real world while deontological theory puts people in an ideal world where nothing can go wrong and a change of course of action cannot be needed.
The teleological system has got weaknesses although they do not outweigh the strengths. Unlike the deontological system where the consequences or results are certain, in this system one is not certain of the consequences of an action. Taking into consideration the earlier example of a doctor who removes someone from life support to save the life of another, the doctor cannot be so sure that the other patient will survive or die, not being sure of the consequences can be seen as taking chance with people’s life in this case. This approach makes room for immoral deeds which are against Gods divine commandments an example is cloning of embryos which is against God’s command on the nature laws. From the former example, the act of the doctor pulling the patient from life support is immoral and goes against God’s commandment as stated in the book of Deuteronomy32:39 “learn that I alone, I am God, and there is no god besides me. It is I who bring both life and death.” (Harrington, & Terry, 2009). This is proof that committing even euthanasia when doctors are required to may seem right, but it is immoral according to divine commandments.
Since we live in a realistic world where problems arise, and people in various professions need to find solutions to them. It is advisable to use the theory that helps us deal with these problems not one that places us in a position where we cannot deal with these problems. Sometimes doing what is morally wrong can benefit people or even save lives. Teleological approach is the best approach in doing business. These theory allows one to be morally right when doing something good and morally wrong while still doing something good. It allows room for adjustment when needed. It has its weaknesses but everything that is good has pros and cons. These theory is guided by two principles; the greatest good has done to be done for the greatest number of people and the end results will always justify the means that were used (Harrington, & Terry, 2009). The deontological theory suggests that the means is most important than the results, which I personally disagree with because if the consequences of an action that is right are wrong why not change the action so that it can produce good consequences.
Teleological theory creates room for people with different believes on what is morally right and wrong and this is good because everyone is raised with different beliefs of what is good or wrong. If something is morally right for someone according to their background it does not mean that the action is morally right for a person raised in a different background. Another advantage provided by teleology is that it caters for the needs of the majority. Taking an example where a medical institution looks to find a cure for a disease that is affecting many people, the institution is likely to carry out procedures and treatment on patients suffering from that disease, it is true that they will violate the right of those patients, but those patients are likely to heal and the cure found will benefit a lot of people, only the end justify the means used (Teays, 2015)and to get to any fruitful results for the sake of saving humankind, then any means has to be used.
Teleological system can be most suitable and preferred to deontological methods because, deontological system does not offer the flexibility that is offered by the teleological system. For teleological system the consequences are usually morally rights since they are for the greater good but for a deontological system the consequences are mostly morally wrong because it places its emphasis on the means but not the consequences that will help everyone. In running a business, it is advisable to use means that are more concentrated on results than means that are more concentrated on good actions. Only good results are good for the growth of a business therefore, the ethical nature of an action should be completely based on the results produced but not the means that were used (Teays, 2015). It is only right to judge an action by the results it produces but not the means. To run a successful business, it is advisable to use the teleological approach when deciding the ethical nature of an action.
Conclusion
When it comes to choosing a method of evaluation the ethical nature of an action many philosophers tend to disagree on the teleological method and the deontological method. These two methods are different in so many ways and have no similarity. Each method is founded on a certain belief, the deontological method is based on the belief that one has to do what is morally right according to society while, teleological method is based on the belief that any decision that leads to consequences that are beneficial even if the action is morally wrong is right. These two theoretical approaches have strengths and weaknesses that make each of them suitable or not suitable to be used while determining the nature of an ethical situation. The flexibility offered by the teleological approach has made it more suitable to be used in businesses because only good results are considered despite the actions that were taken to arrive to such results.
References
Micewski, E., & Troy, C. (2007). Business Ethics: Deontologically Revisited. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(1), 17-25. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25075355
Teays, W. (2015). Business ethics through movies: Case study approach.
Chichester, West Sussex, UK ; Malden, MA : Wiley Blackwell
Harrington, N., & Terry, C. L. (2009). LPN to RN transitions: Achieving success in your new role. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
De, G. R. T. (2003). The ethics of information technology and business.Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub
Ayers, c. (2019). 12 Pros and Cons of Deontological Ethics. Retrieved from; https://connectusfund.org/12-pros-and-cons-of-deontological-ethics
