Summery Philosophy Class4
Summery
The Variety of Principle-based Approaches
No single approach can be called the principles approach. Criticism aimed at a deontological theory that is principle-based may not be effective against a consequentialist theory that is also principle-based. And yet the language of "principles" is sometimes mistakenly restricted to deontological theories, that is, to theories holding that some inherent or intrinsic features of actions, such as lying or truthfulness, make them right or wrong.
Act utilitarians apply the principle of utility directly to different possible acts in a situation to determine which act would probably produce the greatest good; that act is then right and obligatory. Act utilitarians apply the principle of utility directly to different possible acts in a situation to determine which act would probably produce the greatest good; that act is then right and obligatory.
Various deontological and consequentialist moral principles appear in bioethical debates. For example, three major principles are: respect for persons (which includes respect for autonomy), beneficence (which includes nonmaleficence) and justice.
Key Principles:
General moral considerations: obligations to respect the wishes of competent persons
Autonomy; obligations not to harm others, including not killing them or treating them cruelly Nonmaleficence; obligations to benefit others
Beneflcence; obligations to produce a net balance of benefits over harms
Utility; obligations to distribute benefits and harms fairly (justice); obligations to keep promises and contracts
Fidelity; obligations of truthfulness; obligations to disclose information; and obligations to respect privacy and to protect confidential information (confidentiality).
In short, one major difference among principle-based approaches is how they sort out different obligations. Some may encompass several obligations under a few general headings, while others may view them as distinct and even
The Variety of Principle-based Approaches
No single approach can be called the principles approach. Criticism aimed at a deontological theory that is principle-based may not be effective against a consequentialist theory that is also principle-based. And yet the language of "principles" is sometimes mistakenly restricted to deontological theories, that is, to theories holding that some inherent or intrinsic features of actions, such as lying or truthfulness, make them right or wrong.
Act utilitarians apply the principle of utility directly to different possible acts in a situation to determine which act would probably produce the greatest good; that act is then right and obligatory. Act utilitarians apply the principle of utility directly to different possible acts in a situation to determine which act would probably produce the greatest good; that act is then right and obligatory.
Various deontological and consequentialist moral principles appear in bioethical debates. For example, three major principles are: respect for persons (which includes respect for autonomy), beneficence (which includes nonmaleficence) and justice.
Key Principles:
General moral considerations: obligations to respect the wishes of competent persons
Autonomy; obligations not to harm others, including not killing them or treating them cruelly Nonmaleficence; obligations to benefit others
Beneflcence; obligations to produce a net balance of benefits over harms
Utility; obligations to distribute benefits and harms fairly (justice); obligations to keep promises and contracts
Fidelity; obligations of truthfulness; obligations to disclose information; and obligations to respect privacy and to protect confidential information (confidentiality).
In short, one major difference among principle-based approaches is how they sort out different obligations. Some may encompass several obligations under a few general headings, while others may view them as distinct and even