Katana VentraIP

Deontology

In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek: δέον, 'obligation, duty' + λόγος, 'study') is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and principles, rather than based on the consequences of the action.[1] It is sometimes described as duty-, obligation-, or rule-based ethics.[2][3] Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism,[4] utilitarianism,[5] virtue ethics,[6] and pragmatic ethics.[7] In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences.

"Deontic" redirects here. For the linguistic term, see Linguistic modality.

The term deontological was first used to describe the current, specialised definition by C. D. Broad in his 1930 book, Five Types of Ethical Theory.[8] Older usage of the term goes back to Jeremy Bentham, who coined it prior to 1816 as a synonym of dicastic or censorial ethics (i.e., ethics based on judgement).[9][10] The more general sense of the word is retained in French, especially in the term code de déontologie (ethical code), in the context of professional ethics.


Depending on the system of deontological ethics under consideration, a moral obligation may arise from an external or internal source, such as a set of rules inherent to the universe (ethical naturalism), religious law, or a set of personal or cultural values (any of which may be in conflict with personal desires).

Act only according to that by which you can also will that it would become a universal law;

maxim

Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end; and

Every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in a universal .

kingdom of ends

1991. Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw Hill.

Beauchamp, Tom L.

1930. Five Types of Ethical Theory. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.

Broad, C. D.

. 1979. "Consequentialism." In A Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin's.

Flew, Antony

1996. Morality, Mortality Vol. II: Rights, Duties, and Status. New York: Oxford University Press.

Kamm, Frances M.

—— 2007. Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm. Oxford: . ISBN 978-0-19-518969-8, 978-0-19-534590-2.

Oxford University Press

(1964). Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Harper and Row Publishers, Inc. ISBN 978-0-06-131159-8.

Kant, Immanuel

«Législation, éthique et déontologie», Bruxelles: Editions de Boeck Université, 2011, Karine BREHAUX,  978-2-84371-558-7

ISBN

Olson, Robert G. 1967. "Deontological Ethics." In The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by . London: Collier Macmillan.

P. Edwards

1930. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Ross, W. D.

Salzman, Todd A. 1995. Deontology and Teleology: An Investigation of the Normative Debate in Roman Catholic Moral Theology. .

University Press

2005. Consider Ethics: Theory, Readings, and Contemporary Issues. New York: Pearson Longman.

Waller, Bruce N.

Wierenga, Edward. 1983. "A Defensible Divine Command Theory." 17(3):387–407.

Noûs

A concise summary of the key details of Kant's deontology

Kantian Ethics – Summary

Lecture 22 from Stephen Palmquist's book, The Tree of Philosophy (fourth edition, 2000).

Freedom and the Boundary of Morals

Deontology and Ethical Ends

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Special Obligations

Deontology framework ethics

Log in to ePortfolios@FedUni – ePortfolios@FedUni