Ethical actions are guided by a multitude of principles, which dictate the focal points of each decision-making process. Utilitarianism is primarily based on the outcome, where the one with the most amount of good is considered to be the right choice (Audi, 1995). For example, I had three close friends during my high school years, and I remember the moment when I was invited to two separate parties. The first party included two of my friends and the second event only one, and, therefore, I chose to go to the first party because I would upset only one of my friends.
Deontology or duty ethics mainly focus on the action itself, and, if it is the right way to act, then it is the only way to do so. For example, at one of the school examinations, I had an opportunity to cheat on the multiple-choice test by copying from my classmate. However, I did not cheat because I knew that this action was wrong, although the outcome of such unethical behavior would create more good for me in terms of my grades. In other words, utilitarianism would encourage me to copy the answers because they would only be positive results of such actions since I am usually prepared for the majority of tests. Duty ethics addresses the act itself, which is wrong, and, thus, it needs to be avoided regardless of outcomes.
Virtue ethics is vaguer but interesting among all the theories because it does not focus on the results or actions but actors themselves. One of the pioneers of this moral concept is Aristotle, who claimed that, if a person is inherently good, they will know how to act (CrashCourse, 2016). For example, I always considered that cowardice is the opposite of courageousness, but I later learned that it is recklessness, whereas being courageous means being rational. During my early school years, when I was bullied by older boys, I told my parents, who resolved the issue quickly. However, I considered myself a coward for not doing so on my own, which is an incorrect pattern of thinking according to virtue ethics. A virtuous person should not evaluate actions or outcomes as the basis for decision-making but rather focus on themselves. An inherently good person will always act in the right way, whereas actions and results might vary according to the situations.
The last notion is justice theory or justice ethics, which focuses on disadvantaged individuals or groups. For example, I had encountered such occurrence when my teacher spent 10 minutes at the beginning of the lesson to quickly summarize for students who missed the previous sessions. In my opinion, the given theory is the most difficult to implement in practice because people might possess different notions of fairness. In order to ensure absolute justice, one needs to know all the details of all the members involved and conduct a thorough assessment or evaluation, which is impossible in the real world. Therefore, I do not think that it is a fully valid theory because the chain of reasoning for unethical behavior can extend indefinitely.
It is important to identify key takeaways from the given ethical concepts. Utilitarianism focuses on outcomes, and deontology is based on actions themselves. Virtue ethics addresses the actor, where a good person will always act ethically. Justice ethics is the most impractical, where the focal point is taking care of the disadvantaged. Although each theory has some valid points, the moral idea of virtue seems to be the most plausible and correct one. The main reason is that actions’ and outcomes’ ethical aspects might differ depending on the circumstances, and ensuring complete justice is an unachievable task.
References
Audi, R. (Ed.). (1995). The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
CrashCourse. (2016,). Aristotle & virtue theory: Crash course philosophy #38 [Video]. YouTube.