Consequentialist and Nonconsequentialist Theories of Morality Two major consequentialist ethical theories are ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Both theories say human beings should behave in ways that will bring good consequences. They differ in ways that who should benefit from these consequences. Ethical egoist essentially says that human beings should act in their own best interest and utilitarianism says human beings should act in the interest of all concerned. If someone is a consequentialist they will try to predict the good or bad outcome consequences. If someone is an egoistic consequentialist, they will try to predict what’s in their own best interest where as utilitarian consequentialist will predict what will be the interest of everyone concerned. Utilitrianism stands to say that everyone should perform that act or follow that moral rule which brings about the greater good for everyone’s concern. Act utilitarianism stands to say everyone should perform that act which will bring the greater good over bad for everybody that is affected by the act. Rule utilitarianism stands to say that everyone always should follow the rule(s) that will bring about the greater number of good consequences The problems with consequentialist theories is that it demand that we discover and determine all consequences of our actions or rules. Carol Gilligan, has established Care ethics. Gilliagan believes that men’s moral attitudes have to do with justice, rights, competition, being independent, and living by rules. Women’s moral attitudes have to do with generosity, harmony, reconciliation, and working to maintain close relationships. The advantages of nonconsequentialist is they do not necessitate the difficult task of computing consequences for a moral action. They provide in their rule form, a strong set of moral guides. On the other-hand they are no more satisfying than the consequentialist for many people.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document