In a message dated 02/29/2000 23:03:55 EST, TriscitMan@xxxxxxx writes:
<< What are some reasons to use a deontological framework to make policy over
that of a utility framework? >>
It always perplexes me that people assume that this is an either/or decision.
"You don't like John Stuart Mill's ethics? Ah! Then you must be a
deontologist!"
Personally, I've read both sides and don't think either extreme is very wise.
Absolute ethics determined in any categorical sense can cause very bad
decisions. On the one hand, Utilitarianism could justify mass genocide in the
name of population control (greatest good for greatest number), whereas
deontology could justify telling nazis where Jews are hiding (yeah, I know,
this example is a cliche). Situations change and people change. Categorical
attempts to fit the entire universe of decisions into a little "logical"
human framework are destined to be problematic.
<< What are some reasons to use a deontological framework to make policy over
that of a utility framework? >>
It always perplexes me that people assume that this is an either/or decision.
"You don't like John Stuart Mill's ethics? Ah! Then you must be a
deontologist!"
Personally, I've read both sides and don't think either extreme is very wise.
Absolute ethics determined in any categorical sense can cause very bad
decisions. On the one hand, Utilitarianism could justify mass genocide in the
name of population control (greatest good for greatest number), whereas
deontology could justify telling nazis where Jews are hiding (yeah, I know,
this example is a cliche). Situations change and people change. Categorical
attempts to fit the entire universe of decisions into a little "logical"
human framework are destined to be problematic.