Philosophers in the field of ethical science tend to portray deontological ethics as a paradigm of restriction. Deontological ethics in its rights apply rules and regulations to ensure adherence to the desired ethical behaviors in society. Therefore, deontology bases its moral judgments on the rules or regulations. According to deontology, the duties of various people in society transcend the rules. The theory also propounds that right or wrong conduct cannot be judged from the consequences of one’s actions, but the motives of the actions. As such, the motives may go contrary to the requirements of the rules in society. In this philosophical theory, the right and the good must have intrinsic values that are based on a predetermined qualification.
Based on its position, deontology has attracted insurmountable criticisms from various sectors. For instance, the theory has been perceived by philosophers as a tool that denies people the opportunity to explore and achieve various moral experiences. In this regard, deontology tends to promote authoritarian principles where individuals and groups in society have to limit themselves to the rules. The other source of criticism is that deontology does not provide for accidents or mistakes. For example, the theory does not tolerate the fact that negative consequences of one’s behavior or actions can emanate from mistakes. Individuals in society should respect moral laws to ensure peaceful coexistence and good life. However, deontology tends to promote fear of morals. According to the theory, the laws should be questioned and/or challenged.
Pragmatic ethics is a complete contrast to deontology. According to this theory, the ethics and hypothesis behind them should be challenged to provide opportunities for advancement. Unlike the deontological approach, pragmatism provides freedom to the members of the society to explore different aspects of ethics and apply other relevant ethical theories such as virtue ethics and consequentialism. The theory also draws a clear distinction from other theories by promoting the interest of the society, not the individuals. Moreover, it provides room for revision and improvement.
As noted in the second paragraph, the best criticism for deontology as an ethical philosophy should be based on its restrictive approaches towards the issues of morality. The theory does not provide room for advancement and tends to ignore the rules of correction in improving moral behaviors. The philosophy does not provide room for change, which is very important in determining moral behavior in society. There is a need to embrace the fact that different generations in society may apply different elements of ethics in different ways. Environmental changes may force society to transform its ethics.
My position on moral ethics tends to concur with the stance taken by moral ecology. The theory accommodates the view that morality should be given the room to evolve and adapt to the changes in society. The theory indicates that morality should be given room to evolve like other societal elements such as the ecosystem. My approach will also embrace the Nicomachean Ethics, which tend to morality by embracing the aspect of justice and happiness. According to the theory, moral ethics should enable members of society to attain happiness.
As a norm, moral ethics should accommodate change and provide for alternative ways of doing things. Moral ethics should also promote the interest of the society at large not the interest of individuals. Moral ethics should ensure the judgments on morality are based on elements of identity. In this case, the aspect of age should be given attention. Finally, moral ethics should also provide room for improvement to nurture the desired behaviors in society.