Consequentialism Is a Moral Theory - Essay Example

Consequentialism Consequentialism is a moral theory, according to which, any moral judgment is based on its consequences or outcome. Major ethical theories, which are, Deontological ethics, Contractarianism, Utilitarianism, and Consequentialism, each have its own justifications and causes. However, from the view of a realist, Consequentialism proves to be the most adequate theory. In a world filled with choices and decisions, it would only be wise to understand the implications of the action and to act accordingly. The character of an action may not be described solely by nature of right or wrong but requires to be seen in the light of its outcome, which is more important that the action itself. Having to make decisions based on the general welfare of people or its capacity to bring about positive change is justifiable under all circumstances. Consequentialism has been accepted by many realists, who understand that some actions, even if considered wrong with regard to moral rules, may have positive outcomes, benefitting a large number of people, which then justifies the act. The argument presented is to validate the superiority of Consequentialism over other ethical theories in practice. It is important to defend the ethical theory of Consequentialism which can be the key to maintaining stability in the society, without forcing upon them a set of rules to accept as moral standards, giving them more realistic options, and allowing them to decide upon the moral implications of their actions based on its outcome. It requires to be accepted as a moral theory and not an incessant practical casuistry as alleged by opponents of Consequentialism. Standard rules that define moral values are not practically feasible, as many decision making situations may be indefinable in terms of morality. Standard Consequentialism is a theory of decision. It attempts to identify, from a given set of options, the option which is right that an agent should take. The right option to any decision is the option that maximizes probable value or that which will have the best probable consequences, which directly aims at common welfare, which should be the underlying goal of an ethical theory such as in Consequentialism. The function which determines what is the right decision is also the function which ought to be applied in decision-making: it serves at once to evaluate options, and to select them. (Pettit) Consequentialism promotes a more realistic and futuristic approach to define moral standards, implying that, a certain act may be justified by its consequence even if it goes against the traditional definition of moral values. It would be unfair to conceive a particular act as morally wrong, without taking into consideration, the outcome of such an event, which might be capable of a positive outcome, largely benefitting others. Since different actions decipher different meaning in relation to the situation and its environment, we can conclude that Consequentialism is a more adequate ethical theory and must be accepted for its beneficial methods. Opponents of Consequentialism argue that no theory can be credible if it compels us to ignore habits, spontaneous motives and principles, forcing them to always choose just by calculating outcomes. F. H. Bradley objected, So far as my lights go, this is to make possible, to justify, and even to encourage, an incessant practical casuistry; and that, it need scarcely be added, is the death of morality.(Pettit) This view can be defended by the argument that, decisions, in general have been more rewarding when made out of motives other than spontaneity or habit. Sidgwick stated, It is not necessary that the end which gives the criterion of rightness should always be the end at which we consciously aim: and if experience shows that the general happiness will be more satisfactorily attained if men frequently act from other motives than pure universal philanthropy, it is obvious that these other motives are reasonably to be preferred on utilitarian principles. (Pettit) The flaw that may be observed in the Consequentialism theory is that, under certain circumstances, taking into account other responsibilities or attachments, it would not be reasonable to always choose based on the goodness directed at the entirety of humankind, and instead, must be directed toward self. This flaw can be remedied by taking into consideration, restricted Consequentialism. The standard Consequentialism theory does not talk only about material or behavioral decisions but also includes psychological decisions, which means they must understand the need of the situation and decide whether the particular trait or motive must be encouraged or not. It is possible that the consequentialist agent will, based on his psychological decision, either encourage the maximum outcome or prevent it. In this case, the person will not calculate over options that particular option. This makes the person a restricted consequentialist, which would involve calculating the outcomes only for options that have been decided upon as necessary or feasible. A deontologist may argue that the idea of right or wrong must revolve around the act, irrespective of its consequences. In defense of Consequentialism, we may consider an instance where, suppose, the act of telling a lie could do great good to the humankind in a particular form, would it not be reasonable to consider that act as right? This is the concept of Consequentialism, which injects flexibility into moral rules which cannot be incorporated under all situations in the society and in life. The accusations against Consequentialism have been defended, giving reasons and justifications as to why Consequentialism is a realistic and futuristic approach to decision making in compliance to moral values. Support has been provided to the main argument, which validates the superiority of Consequentialism over other ethical theories in practice. Objections regarding the nature of concluding upon right and wrong were defended by explaining the need to do things which intends on the general good of humankind. Other objections stating that Consequentialism is only but an act of casuistry was explained by saying that many decisions made out of impulse may not be as rewarding as decisions made by calculating outcome. The flaw contained in the theory, which would force a person to do things based on general goodwill, leaving aside his or her own obligations may be remedied by the theory of restricted Consequentialism, which would , on the whole have positive outcomes. We may conclude that Consequentialism is an ethical theory which requires to be accepted, as it makes broadens our understanding of the philosophies involved in decision making interwoven with the society. This theory also has potential applications. For instance, Richard Mullender believes that the Consequentialism theory provides a rationale and foundation for better understanding of social democracy. Even Nicollo Machiavelli, an Italian philosopher wrote a book called ‘The prince’, where he stated that rulers must be consequentialists. Peace education may be defined as the process of acquiring the values, the knowledge and developing the attitudes, skills, and behaviors to live in harmony with oneself, with others, and with the natural environment.... . Reference Pettit, Phillip. Restrictive Consequentialism. Australian Journal of Philosophy. 64. 4 (1986). Read More