Virtue theory is the oldest among ethical frameworks, which primarily focuses on one’s internal guidance and virtues. In other words, a person having a specific set of virtues make him or her ethical, which makes the actions and behavioral ethical as well. The teleological theory emphasizes the overall importance of consequences or net benefit of actions, which follows the paradigm of ends justifying the means. Therefore, one behaves ethically if his or her actions result in the highest amount of goodness compared to the alternatives, where means are not relevant. Deontological theory mainly focuses on external duties and obligations, which means that one behaves ethically only if he or she adheres to these duties, such as not lying irrespective of consequences or virtues.
The key factor in regards to virtue theory is virtues themselves, where one having these virtues automatically makes his or her actions ethical. In the case of teleological theory, the major element is the result of the behaviors or actions, where the consequences direct how one should act. Deontological theory’s key factor is duty and obligations, where one’s strict adherence to certain principles makes him or her act ethically. In both deontological and virtue theories of ethics, consequences are not as important as their core factors, which is why they are similar to each other in this regard.
The primary distinction between normative and virtue ethical frameworks is centered around the fact that the former is interested in what is morally wrong or right, whereas the latter is focused on character and virtues. The deontological theory has both normative and virtue characteristics due to one’s duty adherence being mainly driven by virtues and characters. The different worldviews shape distinctions by emphasizing the externality or internality of the determiners.
In the case of teleological theory, the shooting of Osama bin Laden was an ethically defensible thing to do because the overall or net outcome is mostly positive. The key reason is the fact that the given individual had the power and influence to proliferate terrorism and terrorist organizations. In other words, the given framework is among the most compelling and evident theories to make the shooting highly ethically feasible.
The deontological theory also follows a similar pattern by making the killing ethically defensive due to the strong adherence to the duty of eliminating terrorists by the people tasked with this operation. Deontology theory might not completely make the case defensible in an ethical manner since because following one’s duties or orders might be of paramount importance to the performer, but some of the variants of the frameworks might not support the killing because one can have a duty not to murder or kill, and participating in Osama bin Laden shooting will be wrong.
Virtue theory does not necessarily make the shooting event ethically defensible since one might do so with no positive virtues or with an outstanding amount of internal will to build a solid and resilient characters through virtues. In other words, the shooting might be ethically indefensible due to the lack of adherence to one’s virtues since it is the latter elements which make someone ethical or unethical. The key reason is that it is not an action that makes a person ethical, but rather his or her character or virtues, which means the shooting on itself is irrelevant.