Deontology versus Teleology

Normative Ethics is a category of ethics that is mainly concerned on the judgement of human action in the context of right and wrong. Normative Ethics, in a general perspective, is sub-divided into two main ideas deontology and teleology, these two universal branches of normative ethics are conventionally contrasted to one another due to the underlying motives which prompts an indiviual to ask the question “What should I do? ”. Deontological ethics is a Normative Ethical system in which the focus of the judgement or the evaluation is on the action per se.

It simply translates that an individual should detemine his or her moral duties and integrate them on proper rules in order to behave morally. Teleology, on the other hand, grounds judgement from the subsequent causatum of every particular action. The theory of Teleologists is simply an analogy that if an act brings about a positive outcome, it is the moral and right thing that needs to be done, otherwise it is immoral. In a similar account, commonly conceived immoral actions are deemed as correct and moral if the result of such action brought about positive consequences.

In a less complicated manner, the conflict between the two theories is that on deontology the means justifies the end, that the result is moral due to the wasy it is done. Teleological theory basically states that the end justifies the means regardless if it is unreasonable. The principles of Deontology and Teleology are evident in particular philosophies. These philosophies exercise the major principles of their normative origins in theory and practice. A prime example of Teleological application is the Utilitarian theory. Utilitarianism states that the object or end of every action is directed to its beneficence to the common good.

The ideals of Natural Law bequeaths Implications of teleology, the Natural Law suggests that a particular act is justifiable in moral gounds if it does comply with nature (Runes, 1942) . For instance, it is natural for a human person to show compassion to friends, however if a person gives financial aid to an alcoholic friend which is the root of that person's homelessness, it is immoral. This is due to the fact that the intenition of the aid is for charity, but it overlapped the fact that the money can be utilized for the recipient's alcoholism, the giver does not acknowledge the possible consequences, only his intent.

Similarly, ethical Egoism also proposes a result driven belief, in its major ideal, Egoism suggests that the person's action should be considered if it will serve that person's interest or end. In this case, man should only proceed in doing a particular act if it will serve his best interests. Antithetically, religious beliefs, or at least most religions brush off teleology because of the belief that consideration for the act done is of vital importance. In the case of the catholic church, a death sentence on a serial killer is unlawful in spite of the effect that the execution can stop claiming lives.

A reflection on the theories of ethical formalism indicate a non-concequence oriented aim. Ethical formalism suggests that acts should be motivated by right reasons. In this regard, Ethical Formalism rejects the teleological thories and insinuates that action should be judged deontologically without consideration of the aftermath, that the action is deemed right or wrong based on the intuition of reason (Runes, 1942). The Ethics of Virtue and provide the thought that an individual should be more articulate on the character and not on the rules and consequences of every action (Runes 1942).

The deontological implications in Ethics of Virtue are blatant in its system, that habitual good deeds will pave the way for the achievement of the good life. This concept can be applicable, dependent on a person's idea of a good life and the mental discipline. For example, an individual aims to reach the age of 80 without any ailment of fatal condition, that person can achieve such through a healthy diet and regular exercise. The habit done by that person is the key to the achievement of his idea of a good life.

In a different note, the Ethics of Care also evaluates the correctness and wrongness of action, however its context are not inclined on the universal principles of deontology and teleology, but it centers more on relationships. The judgement Ethics of care is highly bedded on the understanding in relationships, the fullfillment of an individual's fraction to the person's whole in which he or she has a special bond with (Held, 2005). Like in a marital relationship, the woman does her part in her full capacity to love, satisfy and serve her partner as her part of the marriage.

A closer look at this show that the part of the woman was done with respect to duty, however it was also done in a non-universal context but only as her part in the relationship. Personally, deontology, particularly the Ethics of Virtue is, almost if not, close to identical to my ethical system. The concept of habit in order to achieve the good life is practical in that I rely on good means such as practice to achieve my personal goals, The simple yet substantial principle behind the ethics is applicable not just to a certain extent, it is also practical in several aspects of life such as family and profession.