CONSEQUENTIALISM IN ETHICS

CONSEQUENTIALISM IN ETHICS

Introduction

Utilitarianism is a position in philosophy that actions, laws and social policies are to be justified by their utility- that is by their consequence. According to Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, consequences that count are happiness and unhappiness. Consequentialism says that we ought to do whatever maximizes good consequences. It doesn't in itself matter what kind of thing we do. What matters is that we maximize good results. In this way it sat that we have only one basic duty: to do whatever has the best consequences. We have only one duty and that is to produce better results. English philosophers and economists Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill that an action is right if it tends to promote happiness and wrong if it tends to produce the reverse of happiness—not just the happiness of the performer of the action but also that of everyone affected by it. In other words, utilitarianism is opposite to what is called egoism . Any theory in that case does not favour others’ interest. Actually, ethical theory that regards some acts or types of acts as right or wrong independently of their consequences is important.



Consequentialism, Deontology and Virtue Ethics

Consequentialism is usually understood as distinct from deontology and Virtue Ethics. Deontology derives the rightness or wrongness of an act from the character of the act itself rather than the outcomes of the action. It means the act is important than the results of the act. Virtue ethics focuses on the character of the agent rather than on the nature or consequences of the action itself. There are difference from the three group like, Consequentialists, Deontologists and Virtue Ethicists. For example, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong because of the negative consequences produced by lying—though a consequentialist may allow that certain foreseeable consequences might make lying acceptable. A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of any potential "good" that might come from lying. A virtue ethicist, however, would focus less on lying in any particular instance and instead consider what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character and moral behavior.



Consequentialism and Biblical Concept

Consequentialism is the philosophical thesis that the effects of an action exclusively determine its morality. Different schools of consequentialism, however, disagree on how these effects should be judged; for example, utilitarians measure the increase or decrease of pleasure and pain for sentient beings as the determinant of the morality of an action. Other consequentialist schools may measure effects such as the number of human lives saved or ended by the action being judged, or even the number of people whose preference is satisfied by that action. My belief is that a quality similar to consequentialism is required for any form of morality, but that the adoption of formal consequentialism has serious implication.

Informal consequentialism is the idea of consequences that are implicit in any moral code. For example, most of the biblical Ten Commandments carry acknowledgment of the importance of consequences - murder is forbidden because a human life is ended; honoring parents is sanctioned "so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you." However, the commandments are a very nonconsequentialist moral code. It is from the idea of God, speaking these words. One shouldn't murder, no matter what the benefits of murdering a person would be. Even though many times lying may be advantageous, it simply should not be done.



Consequences of Consequentialism

The best understanding of the concept of consequence or outcome leads to a theory resistant to counterexamples and difficulties commonly posed for consequentialism. The basic idea of consequentialism is that the ethical status of an act depends on the value of its consequences. The concept of an act's consequences is central to the theory. One of the important characteristic of the consequentialism defended is that it will allow a wide range of intrinsic values to contribute to the overall status of states of affairs. Loyalty, can carry its own independent value. Loyal acts bring about states of affairs in which a loyal act has been performed. Those states of affairs carry some positive value. Consequentialism can deal with certain common objections. Since Mill's Utilitarianism, people have claimed that in some situations it was best to do something which produces a less good overall outcome. Although this may seem incoherent on its face (it does to me), a classic example may lend it plausibility.

A sudden attack of murders has a city terrorized and in chaos. The people actually want peace and justice. The city officials know that if they were to hang an innocent in the square as if for the murders, peace would be restored. The real murderer will be caught soon enough and can be disposed of discreetly. Without a punishment ceremony immediately, however, the citizens will riot and loot, hundreds of lives will be lost, the effects will be disastrous. Consequentialism seems to mandate the hanging of the innocent. But commonsense finds this wrong. Rights-based ethical theories are often opposed to consequentialist theories over examples such as this. The hanging of the innocent is wrong because it violates the innocent's rights and no amount of good consequences can outweigh that right. Rights trump utilities, as it is sometimes put. The version of consequentialism defended here has a response that partially accommodates that intuition. The violation of the innocent's rights must be weighed along with the other factors in evaluating the states of affairs consequent upon his hanging. If the officials hang him they violate his right not to be punished unless guilty. The violation of that right is a very serious harm, perhaps greater even than many deaths which are not in punishment of innocent people.

Another example could be that of suicide. A guy goes out of despair, commits suicide. It is a virtue act? In the consequentialists’ point of view, they would look for the outcome the very act. So there is no question of why he committed suicide and how he did that? Their only concern is the impact of the very act, and not even the nature of the act. If the result of the act is bringing forth good response from the society, like that person’s death put to an end for the tensions in the society, as he was a notorious fellow in that place. It will contradict when it comes in the view point of morality.

Now, let us see another position of a student copying in the examination. The means is not at all considered. But it is the result. Thus he student passed out the examination and decorates the highest position and receives awards from the authorities. In the consequentialist point, he is a moral person. But what is the case of a studious and sincere student, who got less number comparing to him?



Conclusion

Consequentialism refers to those moral theories which hold that the consequences of a particular action form the basis for any valid moral judgment about that action, says the famous writer Dr.Suad AlFadhli, in his book, The End Justifies the Means. The moral judgment is possible, when the result comes. This is the stand of consequentialists. It is difficult to judge whether a person is moral or immoral. The result, though it is good, the motive might not be so. In that case, some moral people, if they don’t explicitly do good, things, they will not be counted as moral. This is the limitation of the consequentialism. The crooked and wicked authoritarians will come up by putting dust in the eyes of ordinary people. The mass is blind and are ready to follow any wicked leader, if they are met the needs. There will not be any serious problem, or even a minor problem, in taking the life of another to have a greater result. The euthanasia and abortion will be wiped away from the moral discussion, if they bring visible good results to the people.

Bibliography

Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism. Prometheus Books: NewYork, 1987.

West, Henry R. Mill’s Utilitarianism. Continuum International Publishing Group:

New York,2008.

Mulgan, Tim. The Demands of Consequentialism. Oxford University Press: New

York, 2001.