DEONTOLOGY

by Group 3
Table of Contents
1. Deontological Ethics
1.1. Deontology
1.2. Deontological Framework

2. Deontological Theories
2.1 Immanuel Kant’s Deontology
a. two kinds of law produced by reason
b. three formulations of Kant’s theory of categorical
imperatives

2.2 William David Ross’ Prima Facie Duties

a. five prima facie duties
b. the role of judgment

3. The Advantages of Deontological Theories

4. The Weaknesses of Deontological Theories
Deontological Ethics
Deontological Ethics
Duty theories base morality on specific,
foundational principles of obligation.

places special emphasis on the relationship

between duty and the morality of action
 what is
DEONTOLOGY?
 what is
DEONTOLOGY?
 DEONTOLOGY
from the Greek word deon, or duty, in
view of the foundational nature of our
duty or obligation.

a normative ethics, considered as non-

consequentialist since these principles
are obligatory, regardless of the
consequences that might follow from
our actions.
DEONTOLOGY
It holds that acts are right or wrong in and of themselves because of the kinds of
acts they are and not simply because of their ends or consequences.

The ends do not justify the means.

A good end or purpose does not justify a bad actions.

You are duty-bound; binding is not dependent on consequences, no matter

if it is painful or pleasurable.
Duty is not based on what is pleasant or beneficial,
but rather upon the obligation itself.
Deontological Framework

An action is right if and only if it is in accordance with a moral rule

or principle.

This is a purely formal specification, forging a link between the

concepts of right and action and moral rule, and gives one no
guidance until one knows what a moral rule is.
So, the next thing the theory needs is a premise about that: A moral rule is one
that would have been historically:

So, the next thing the theory needs is a premise about that:

A moral rule is one that would have been historically:

A. Theistic:
1. Given to us by God;
2. Is required by Natural Law (theistic connection);

B. Secular (though can still be connected to God):

1. Is laid on us by reason.
2. Is required by rationality;
3. Would command universal acceptance;
4. Would be the object of choice of all rational beings.
 DEONTOLOGICAL
THEORIES:
1. Divine Command Theory
2. Natural Law & Natural Right theories
3. Agent-Centered Deontology
4. Patient-Centered Deontology
5. Immanuel Kant’s Deontology Theory
6. William David Ross’ Prima Facie Duties
 Divine Command Theory

the idea that we have a duty to obey God, and therefore a duty to

do or not do whatever God has commanded us to do or not do

a familiar example:

“The Golden Rule"

Also known as the ethic of reciprocity, which states that,

“Do to other as you want them to do to you”

Natural Law & Natural Right theories

Humans have reasoning and the Laws of nature are discernible by

human reason

Example:

Considering eating too much or too little and placing life in

jeopardy is morally wrong.

 Agent-Centered Deontology Theory

Theories focused on the moral agent (the person acting) rather than the
rights of the person being acted upon (patient-centered theory).

Idea of Agency

The idea is that morality is intensely personal, in the sense that we are
each charged to keep our own moral house in order.
Agent-Centered theory can be divided into those that:

a. focus on the mental state of the agent

an action is wrong or right because of the intentions that motivated it

b. focus on the nature of the agent's action

assumes that all action originates with a will or volition,
will + action = agency
 Patient-Centered Deontology Theory

Ideas are focused on people's rights as a reason to act or not act

 Immanuel Kant's
Deontology Theory
IMMANUEL KANT
A German Enlightenment philosopher, regarded
as one of the most influential philosophers in
the history of Western philosophy.

the most important proponent in the

philosophical history of deontological, or duty-
based ethics.

In Kant’s view, the sole feature that gives an

action moral worth is not the outcome that is
achieved by the action, but the motive that is
behind the action.
Good Will
 Good Will
acts solely out of reverence
or moral law
 Reason & Morality:

Reason is not only the judge, but also the source of right and wrong.

. RATIONALITY is what allows humans to be moral beings.

Moral objectives exist and can be discerned through reason.

When properly used (rationally guided), will is good.

Moral principles that meet the demands of reason are always valid for everyone.
Moral Truth & Ethical Duty:

Moral truth stands by itself; it is autonomous and self-contained.

Ethical duty should not be based on the opinions of any individual, group,
tradition, faith, cultural norm, or even God's will. They should be based on reason.

Ethical duties are the same for all.

Being good is a matter of reverence for duty.

 TYPES OF DUTIES:

Perfect Duties Imperfect duties

strict or inflexible duties. These are duties, the laxer duties. These are duties, such as
such as the duty not to commit suicide and the duty to help people in need
the duty not to make a false promise, which (beneficence), which do have exceptions.
have no exceptions. They are still duties, but you have some
choice about how to fulfill them.
These are never okay to break.
Ex. You don't have to give all your money to
every charity; your inclinations can enter into
which charities you choose to give to.
 IMPERATIVES
An imperative is a command to act, it is prescriptive
2 KINDS OF LAW
PRODUCED BY
REASON

Immanuel Kant
1. Hypothetical Imperative 2. Categorical
Imperative - Moral Law

Commands that are not absolute, but Absolute and unconditional moral commands
are conditional, and premised to one's
desires “You ought to X"

“If you want Y, you ought to X” (X = end-in-itself, without regards to means or

other ends)
(Y = goal/consequence/end,
X = means)

2 KINDS OF LAW
PRODUCED BY
REASON
1. Hypothetical Imperative 2. Categorical
Imperative - Moral Law

Example:
Example: 2 KINDS OF LAW You ought to study. (because
If you want to pass the test, PRODUCED BY you are a student)
you ought to study. REASON
It is implied here that the
rule or maxim is that
students are supposed to
study… the end
 THREE FORMULATIONS OF KANT’S
THEORY OF CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

1. Principle of
Universal Law

2. Principle of
Ends

3. Principle of
Autonomy
 THREE FORMULATIONS OF KANT’S
THEORY OF CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

1. Principle of Universal Law

“act only that maxim, whereby thou canst at the same time, will that it should
become a universal law”

simply means that, an individual’s actions and duties should not just be applicable or
true to that individual, but it should be the same to all.
 THREE FORMULATIONS OF KANT’S
THEORY OF CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

2. Principle of Ends

“act as to treat humanity, whether in your person or in that of any other, in every
case as an end and never as merely means”

simply asserts that every person must be recognized and treated as a subject

with inherent dignity and therefore must be treated with respect at all times.
 THREE FORMULATIONS OF KANT’S
THEORY OF CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES

3. Principle of Autonomy

“act as if you were always through your maxims a law-making member of the
kingdom of ends”

emphasizes that moral rules which are shared by members of the community

must be accepted willingly. In other words, morality must not be forced to be

followed by individuals but rather must be accepted by their free will.
4 examples famously used by Kant:

1. Suicide

2. Lying and not keeping a promise

3. Developing one's habit

4. Helping others
4 examples famously used by Kant:

1. Suicide

“Whenever continuing to live will bring more pain than pleasure, I shall
commit suicide out of self-love.”

Suicide can’t be a universal law for one can’t will that would be universal
will.
Remember, suicide would be morally right if and only if the person who is
thinking about suicide can consistently will that suicide be a universal law.
4 examples famously used by Kant:

2. Lying and not keeping a promise

“Whenever I need money, then I shall borrow the money and promise to repay, even though I
know I will not repay.”

Lying and not keeping promises can’t be a universal law for one can't be a universal will.
Remember, lying and not repaying would be morally right if and only if the person who is thinking
about lying and not keeping promise can consistently will that lying and not keeping promise be
a universal law.
4 examples famously used by Kant:

1. Developing one's habit

“When I’m comfortable as I am, I shall let all my talents rust.”

Everyone necessarily wills that some of his or her talents be developed.

If everyone necessarily wills that some of his or her talents be developed, then no one can consistently
will that his non-use of talents to be a universal law.
Non-use of talents is morally right if and only if the agent thinking about non-use of talents can
consistently will that non-use of talents be a universal law. (The Categorical Imperative)
Therefore, allowing one’s talents to rust is morally wrong.
4 examples famously used by Kant:

1. Helping others

“When I am flourishing and others are in distress, I shall give nothing to charity.”

Everyone necessarily wills that he or she be helped in desperate circumstances.

If everyone necessarily wills this, then no one can consistently will that non-help be a universal law.
Not helping others is morally right if and only if the agent thinking about not helping others can
consistently will that not helping others be a universal law. (The Categorical Imperative)
Therefore, not helping others is not morally right.
 About Categorical Imperatives (Cls)

CI's derive their authority from within from the rational impulse to obey the dictates of Reason
itself (as an expression of my autonomy)
Cl's command absolutely, unconditionally, "no ifs, ands or buts" (no strings attached)
Cl's are universal, unconditional, NOT subject to variation or change
Duty and the institution of morality are like this (Must comply-no alibi)
"Do this, whether you want to or not, whether you can be made to or not, whether anyone will
notice, reward, praise, or blame you (or not).”
It is 1942. You are hiding Anne Frank, a young Jewish girl, to protect her from the Gestapo and Nazi
policies of ethnic cleansing.
Imagine you are Immanuel Kant, there is a knock at the door and an SS officer asks if you are hiding
Jews in the attic.

What do you tell him?

 [WWKD, WWYD]
(What would Kant Do?, What would You Do?)
Do you break the categorical imperative against lying?
 Categorical Imperative means - by definition - it is an UNCONDITIONAL
requirement to always comply.

Kant didn't believe one should lie to protect others; this would break the Cl
against lying.
William David Ross’
Prima Facie Duties
William David Ross
BORN: APRIL 15, 1877 - Thurso, Scotland
DIED: MAY 5, 1971

WORKS: The Right and the Good

Like Kant, Ross is a deontologist, but he believed

(as Kant apparently did not) that moral duties can
conflict, in which case their relative merits had to
be weighed and the chosen action based on the
outcome of that weighing.
William David Ross
Because duty A might be outweighed by another
duty B in a situation where they conflict, it might
seem inappropriate to call A a duty in the first
place.

Aware of this concern, Ross describes A and

B as prima facie duties. They are duties we
have "all things being equal". But in a
situation only one of them will turn out (after
weighing) to be our actual duty.
5 Prima Facie Duties:
Duties that are tentatively binding until
outweighed by a stronger duty that
must be followed.

In Latin, prima facie means 'at first

glance.' So these are things that seem like
duties at first glance, unless a greater duty
comes along.
5 Prima Facie Duties:
according to Ross

1. a duty of FIDELITY
2. a duty of REPARATION
3. a duty of GRATITUDE
4. a duty to PROMOTE A MAXIMUM OF AGGREGATE
GOOD
5. a duty of NON-MALEFICENCE
 5 Prima Facie Duties:

1. A duty of FIDELITY
that is, a duty to keep our promises

For example:

If you promise to meet a friend for lunch, you should make every effort to keep that promise.
 5 Prima Facie Duties:

1. A duty of FIDELITY
that is, a duty to keep our promises

For example:

If you promise to meet a friend for lunch, you should make every effort to keep that promise.
5 Prima Facie Duties:

2. A duty of REPARATION

a duty to correct a previous wrong we have done.

For example:

If you accidentally break someone's window, you should offer to pay for the repairs.
 5 Prima Facie Duties:

3. A duty of GRATITUDE

a duty to return services to those from whom we have in the past accepted benefits.

For example:

If someone does you a favor, you should thank them sincerely.

 5 Prima Facie Duties:

4. A duty to PROMOTE A MAXIMUM OF AGGREGATE GOOD

a duty to promote a maximum of aggregate goods. In general, the duty of beneficence requires
us to take positive steps to help others when we have the opportunity and resources to do so.

Examples:

volunteering your time to help those in need

donating food or clothing to a local food bank or shelter
or providing emotional support to a friend who is going through
a difficult time.
 5 Prima Facie Duties:

5. a duty of NON-MALEFICENCE
a duty not to harm or injure others.

Example:

During the COVID-19 pandemic, it's important to follow public health guidelines to avoid spreading
the virus and harming others.

This includes:
getting vaccinated
wearing masks
and practicing social distancing.
Note:

It is pluralist in the sense that, unlike Kantian ethics and

utilitarianism, Ross recognizes several different
fundamental rules or principles that he terms prima
facie duties.
Ross does not rank these duties in order of importance.
Ross admitted that the listed prima facie duties may be
incomplete.

Ross' View:
-We have many prima facie duties.
-Each is fundamental.
-Each can be outweighed by competing reasons in any
particular situation.
 Resolving Conflicts between Duties
Our prima facie duties represent our moral responsibilities and commitments, other
things being equal.

In situations where two or more prima facie duties are relevant and our actual duty is not
clear, Ross argued that we determine our duty using a quasi-consequentialist approach
that accounts for a plurality of intrinsic goods.

When we face such situations, Ross argued that our duty is whatever action will result in
“the greatest balance of prima facie rightness . . . over . . . prima facie wrongness”
(Ross 1930, 41, 46).
Our actual duty will be whichever duty is most pressing and immediate, the one that we
are most responsible for.
 EXAMPLE:

You make a promise to meet a friend after work. As you leave your office building after work,
however, you discover a coworker on the ground who is experiencing chest pains. You have to
keep your promise, but you also must help your coworker. You help your coworker because,
given the circumstances, it is more pressing than the duty to fulfill your promise. It is clear which
obligation is your actual duty in this example. When you are able to, you apologize to your
friend and explain what happened. Your apology, Ross thought, is in part motivated by a
recognition that you were prima facie wrong; that is, you recognize that had your coworker not
needed help, your actual duty would have been to fulfill your promise and meet your friend.
THE
ROLE
OF
JUDGMENT
THE ROLE OF JUDGMENT

Judgment, Ross thought, plays an important role in moral life. We will

often need to determine our actual duty in situations where multiple
contradictory prima facie duties are relevant. Ross thought we rank
the relevant prima facie duties and use facts of the situation to
determine which duty is our actual duty.

In the case in which you are approached by a woman with a gun

who seems to be chasing your neighbor, your duty to protect your
neighbor from harm probably outweighs your duty to tell the
truth. But what if the woman is wearing a blue uniform and
wearing a badge indicating that she is a police officer? What if
you know that you watched your neighbor carry a carload of
computers, televisions, expensive jewelry, and nice paintings into
his apartment last night? In this case, to make the best decision,
you must make a judgment informed by your own experience and
observations.
The Advantages of Deontological
Theories
The Advantages of Deontological
Theories:

1. Clear Guidance
2. Emphasis on Intentions
3. Universalizability
4. Moral Consistency
5. Protection of Rights
6. Ethical Clarity
The Advantages of Deontological Theories

1. Clear Guidance:

Deontological theories provide clear and specific moral rules and principles, offering
guidance on what actions are morally permissible or impermissible.

2. Emphasis on Intentions:

Deontology focuses on the intentions behind actions rather than solely on the outcomes,
prioritizing moral motives and intentions.

3. Universalizability:

Deontological principles are often based on universal moral laws or duties, which can
apply consistently across different situations and cultures.
 The Advantages of Deontological Theories

4. Moral Consistency:
Deontological ethics can help individuals maintain moral consistency by adhering to principles
and rules, even in situations where the consequences may be unfavorable.

5. Protection of Rights:
Deontological theories often prioritize the protection of individual rights and autonomy, providing
a framework for respecting the inherent dignity of each person.

6. Ethical Clarity:
Deontological ethics can provide clarity in morally complex situations by offering a structured
approach to decision-making based on moral principles.
The Weaknesses of Deontological
Theories
The Weaknesses of Deontological
Theories:

1. Rigidity
2. Conflicting Duties
3. Lack of Guidance in Gray Areas
4. Absence of Consequences
5. Cultural Variation
The Weaknesses of Deontological Theories:

1. Rigidity:
Deontological rules and principles may be too rigid and inflexible to account for the
complexities of real-life situations, leading to moral dilemmas where following the rules
may lead to morally undesirable outcomes.

2. Conflicting Duties:
In some cases, deontological principles may conflict with one another, making it
challenging to determine which duty takes precedence in a given situation
3. Lack of Guidance in Gray Areas:
Deontological theories may struggle to provide guidance in morally ambiguous or gray areas where
it's not clear which moral rule or principle applies.
Inability to Justify Actions: Deontological ethics may struggle to justify actions that lead to morally
good outcomes but involve violating moral rules or duties, leading to criticisms of moral absolutism.

4. Absence of Consequences:
Critics argue that deontological theories fail to adequately consider the consequences of actions,
which can result in morally unacceptable outcomes being justified if the intentions are deemed
good.

5. Cultural Variation:
Deontological principles may not be universally applicable across different cultures and societies,
as moral rules and duties can vary based on cultural norms and values
References:
Simpson, D. William David Ross. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
ISN 2161-0002. https://iep.utm.edu/home/about/

Smith, N. (2022). Introduction to Philosophy.

Openstax.https://openstax.org/books/introduction-
philosophy/pages/9-3-deontology

Kant, Immanuel: Metaphysics. (n.d.). Internet Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Retrieved April 5, 2024, from
https://iep.utm.edu/kantmeta/#H8
MEMES
MEMES-kita
 YESSS!!!!

DONE NAAAAAA
Bautista, Vijae Esquillo, Ellaine Lingayo, Hanna Lomerio, Julie Ogayon,
Christine Joy

GROUP 3
Thank You!