In the ethics problem below, a chief of police encounters …show more content…
He is arrested; but will not tell anyone where the bombs are hidden, or how to deactivate them. The police chief thinks that the interrogators should use torture to get him to talk. It is illegal to torture people, but this is a very desperate situation. The police chief is convinced that this is the right thing to do in order to protect the lives of hundreds of people.” (TRACS)
The chief of police is in tough position because he is conflicted with following the principle of not torturing the criminal because torture is considered wrong and illegal, morally and socially. Though not following the principle can also save the lives of innocent people. Instead of harming a lot of people, only the criminal will be harmed. This situation as you can see can be followed by the utilitarianism or deontology ethics. Both are similar in that they are concerned in defining what is wrong and right, but have different moral …show more content…
"Utility" is defined in various ways, usually in terms of the well-being in animals or human beings. It also focuses on the consequences rather than the motives that the deontology theory does. “According to Mill, acts should be classified as morally right or wrong only if the consequences are of such significance that a person would wish to see the agent compelled, not merely persuaded and exhorted, to act in the preferred manner.” (West) If the chief of police chooses the right thing to do is to torture the man to get him to talk where the bombs are, to stop them and save the lives of innocent people he is following the utilitarianism theory, the greatest good for the greatest amount of