The idea of the purpose justifying the means is central to utilitarianism. The scholars Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill came up with the idea. In contrast to the latter, it considers actions’ results to be of greater worth. Utilitarianism is dependent on consequentiality since it asserts that the most moral thing to do is to use happiness for the benefit of society. Despite facing harsh criticism, the philosophical perspective on these circumstances is entirely dependent on its recipients. The practical method can also be selfish in that it is based on the philosopher’s preferred judgments.
Deontology, on the other hand, is a moral philosophy based on the Scriptures and may reference laws, moral principles, and intuition. According to deontology, the actions and the results must be morally correct. It emphasizes that the morality of the action has higher weight and that the consequences of a wrong action are not always the same as the deed itself. One specific instance is childbirth, where both the mother and the child are in danger. Although rescuing at least one of the two patients is preferable, saving both would be ideal, according to the experts. Due to its reliance on an approach to morality that is generally recognized, deontology offers a fair test of what is right or evil. Additionally, it forces the philosopher to consider opposing viewpoints without compromising the results.
The utilitarian tenet states that a course of action is appropriate if it maximizes the happiness of the most significant number of people. According to deontology, a decision should be made based on whether a set of norms deem the action to be right or wrong. The ideal alternative for choosing a stable course of action that helps everyone rather than most individuals, if the hypothetical decision truly succeeds, is to strike a compromise between these two ethical ideas.