Kant Article

Utilitarianism versus Margen

Case 3: Confidentiality


Linda S. Neff



Have you ever watched a group argument an ethical decision provided a particular case study with many different variations to the story? It can be fascinating to watch. Some of the persons feel so strongly regarding being " right" they will argue right up until they obtain point across. Others waffle trying to look at the scenario from many different perspectives. Provided a particular Example based on terms of confidentiality, this paper compares the foundation of morality under two alternative moral systems -Utilitarianism and Kantianism. We will certainly explore the theory behind every single ethical program, describe the reality of the Case, and interpret a course of ethical action using both moral systems, plus the significance on this dilemma.

I selected to examine the Utilitarianism and Kantianism ethical systems since at times they seem diabolically opposed based upon the assumptive reasoning lurking behind choosing a particular action. But, in many cases the chosen action is the same. For this particular case upon confidentiality, a private relationship tries to complicate how to identify the morally correct actions. I explore this correlation by evaluating Utilitarianism and Kantianism.

Utilitarianism uses a fairly straightforward cost-benefit analysis where the calculation is usually " indifferent to people and relationships (Dombrowski 2000: 248). " Consequently, when using a Utilitarian system to measure what moral action is acceptable everyone is " on equivalent footing (Dombrowski 2000: 248). " This really is somewhat of any simplistic perspective of how people make decisions; however , it is just a simple view that allows you to make a to some degree unbiased decision. A decision not really based on " rank, position, wealth, competition, gender, or personal romance (Dombrowski


2000: 248). " Comparable to Utilitarianism, Kantianism would as well negate the value of any kind of personal interactions. The Kantian would carry out unto other folks, as they could consent to treating you. The one common way to act should carry from person to person in spite of your personal relationship to that person.

Let us check out the comparison between these two ethical ideas. Next, all of us will take a close look at the details of one particular Case Study wherever personal human relationships do come into play. After that, we will certainly compare what sort of Utilitarian and a Kantian might action and for what reason. What motivates the decision-makers under each moral program?


Comparing Theory

2 . 1

Theory: Utilitarianism

2 . 1 . you Pleasure compared to Pain: Utilitarianism is a somewhat general term for a various perspectives that all generally belong to the guise of this assumptive stance. Whatever the case, I will make an effort to summarize the main theoretical opinions of this honest system. Generally, Utilitarianism acknowledges two absolutes in the world: pain and delight. Moral legislation follows the Principle of Utility, basically, what motivates human beings. That they found that Good has top priority over the Right (Justice) (Griffin 2005, personal communication) and they make ethical decisions by determining " the greatest useful goodness for the greatest number of individuals (Dombrowski 2150: 54). " Good equals happiness (pleasure) and otherwise bad means pain or perhaps displeasure and has no benefit. Utilitarianism determines the right or correct action based on a formula that shows which usually action results in maximized very good (happiness/pleasure). Maximized good considers all those persons affected by the actions into consideration.

2 . 1 . 2 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Utilitarianism simplifies meaningful law to a quantitative computation that can determine ethical choice: Total Satisfaction - Total Pain = Total Utility (Griffin 2005: personal communication). Utilitarianism utilizes a cost-benefit research to decide whether we notify or usually do not tell. We determine what can be ethically


correct with an objective and quantitative way of measuring utilitarian...

Referrals: 2000 Dombrowski, Paul. Values in Specialized Communication. The Allyn & Bacon

Series in Specialized Communication: Boston & Greater london.

2005 Griffin, Chris (friendly neighbor Teacher of Philosophy). Gratefully

described Utilitarianism and Kantianism one particular night on the dinner table.

june 2006 www.wikipedia.org. Discussion posts posted on Come july 1st 25, june 2006.



 Essay regarding Jjt Activity 1

Essay regarding Jjt Activity 1

For the five years Unique. com has been in organization they have identified Social Responsibility as a primary value within the organization. It has been the generating factor of your…...

 Essay regarding BDS4614

Essay regarding BDS4614

BDS4614 MANAGING DECISION SCIENCE ASSIGNMENT Trimester 2, 2014/2015 General details: Organisation Group (group members shall not go over 3 students per group) Assessment…...

 ecosystem Essay

ecosystem Essay

Biotic Components Daily news From this paper, I will be sharing information on the significant structural and functional aspect of the ecosystem of Tallgrass Pririe Preserve in Pawuska, Oklahoma.…...

 Essay about Why Men Lie

Essay about Why Men Lie

Why Guys Lie (and always will) by Vince Passaro Prior to I ripped my Roberto Duran, ahead of I transferred out, prior to I lost the ability…...

 Literary Criticism of Lord of the Flies Essay

Literary Criticism of Lord of the Flies Essay

Raef Sengupta 2 British H, six Georgantas 4/17/13 Literary Critique of Head of the family of the Flies This article was very interesting in…...

 Introduction to Psychology Essay

Introduction to Psychology Essay