Introduction
Utilitarianism refers to the idea that the moral of a particular action is determined mainly by its utility in bringing about happiness or pleasure as a summation among all sentient beings. It can therefore be a form of consequentialism. This, therefore, implies that the ethical worth of an action is solely determined by its level of outcome. Utilitarian reasoning is the guiding idea of a person that the worthiness of a moral action relies on its utility to provide happiness to a large number of people.
Utilitarian reasoning depends on the theory of utilitarianism that heavily relies on consequentialism as the main approach to making decisions on morals. It states that for an action to be right, it must be able to increase happiness to a very large group of people for a long period of time. When coming up with a moral choice, the theory of utilitarianism requires that a cost-benefit analysis is done with an aim of achieving the highest level of human happiness. This renders that kind of action as being good. One aims at seeking happiness as the main target (Kant, 1993).
Deontological reasoning
Deontological reasoning is the guiding thought of a person on the necessity and worth of a moral basing on one’s obligations and duties. The reasoning results from the theory of deontological normative that acknowledges moral worth as an attribute of a person’s actions (Brewer, 1998).
The moral worth settles on official rules of behavior expected from that very person. Under this theory, it is believed that moral obligation results from the duties of a person irrespective of the practical consequences of the actions from those very duties.
With deontological reasoning, one is expected to hold on to his or her responsibilities and duties when evaluating ethical dilemmas (Lyons, 1965). Through upholding duties, one is required to adhere to his or her responsibilities to another to be ethically accepted. The result of applying this theory is the production of consistent decisions simply because it is based on everyone’s set duties.
The argument in terms of normative ethics
Deontological reasoning is not a very much suitable approach for evaluating moral worth, this is because it does not put into account the idea of rationality. There is a need to have a logical basis when coming up with an individual’s duties which is not very much considered in this kind of approach to moral worthiness (Bentham, 2000).
A person’s duties sometimes conflict with deontology reasoning as the approach to evaluating moral worth. It is not concerned about other people’s welfares. This accepts brings about conflicting responsibilities and does not at having clear ethical resolutions.
Utilitarian reasoning does not put into consideration that though people use the available life experiences to tell the outcomes, no one can be sure that there will be truths in the predictions made. It does not also consider that people are expected to frequently behave for the benefit of others regardless of the problem that results from an action (Rosen, 2003).
Conclusion
Utilitarian reasoning can best be used as an argument for a variety of political views; this is because it aims at satisfying all the people and support the liberty principle to prevent harming others. Deontology reasoning helps one adhere to his or her obligations and duties for good morals which results in efficiency at workplace.
References
Bentham, J. (2000). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Brewer, S. (1998). Moral theory and legal reasoning. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Kant, I. (1993). Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. London: Routledge Publishers.
Lyons, D. (1965). Forms and Limits of Utilitarianism, Sydney: McGraw Hill.
Rosen, F. (2003). Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill. London: Routledge Publishers.