‘Kant’s deontological approach to ethics works better than teleological Approaches.’ How far do you agree?
Firstly in defence of that statement, in my opinion deontological systems are intrinsically better in both a ease of decision making process and the moral worth of your actions. This is due to deontological ethics not having to guess what the consequences of their actions because of previous experiences in the past. Moreover a system which removes emotion and experience from moral decisions makes every decision made extremely fair and unbiased. In my opinion following your duty is an extremely rational way to make decisions. However this can be argued against as in this day and age it is almost impossible to ever make a decision without taking into account the effect of your actions and letting a form of emotion getting in the way, it is just not humanly possible to make every single decision based around duty and nothing else. For example if a chainsaw wielding serial killer was to knock on your door wielding a bloody chainsaw asking where your children were if you were to follow Kant’s reasoning you would have to tell the truth to the serial killer as it is your duty to do so. Kant’s theory is simply not particle in some situations and arguably does not have a proper understanding of human nature.
On the other side of the argument different societies tend to work with different ways of thinking better than others. So for example countries like Switzerland and Sweden are renowned for being extremely liberal in their legislation and purposive when it comes to their courts. Whereas England are fairly liberal but still conservative on a large range of issues. This clear difference between the two show that different societies work naturally with different ethical systems. There is no objectively better approach towards ethics it just depends on the context on which it is used and what the state of the social expectations are In that country are....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document