Comparison of Utilitarian and Deontological Theories

What is Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism also known as consequentialism is a theory that focuses on the consequences of human actions. Theorists who follow utilitarianism believe that everyone ought to act as to bring the most happiness for the greatest number of people. In other words, the correct moral solution is the solution that has the most positive outcomes with the least negative ones. The process of decision making can be seen as very mechanical, calculations are made in order to determine the best outcome. Utilitarianism relies on all followers agreeing on a set list of general rules. The list of rules is followed to increase the overall happiness of a society over long term. Some consider these rules more like general guidelines (Act Utilitarian’s), that can be broken under certain conditions, but the consequences must always be taken into consideration first.

What is the Deontological Theory

Deontological moral systems focus on a person’s obedience to moral duties/rules. Deontologists believe that in order for a person to make the correct moral decisions, they must first understand what their moral duties are and what rules are in place to regulate these duties. So, by following these rules/duties means that a person is behaving morally correct. If they don’t comply to these duties, then that means that the person is behaving immorally.

Views of the Human Person

A Utilitarian and Deontologist have very different views on the human person. These views are created by the foundations of each theory. A utilitarian believes that the right moral decision is depended on the consequences that come with making the decision. He/she believes that if his decision brings more happiness than sadness then it is the morally correct thing to do.

Let’s take this hypothetical situation into consideration, if a suspect is captured in relation to a hidden nuclear bomb would it be ok to torture him to find the bomb and prevent this terrorist attack? Looking at this situation from a utilitarian’s point of view the answer would be yes. For arguments sake let’s suppose there are two potential choices: (1). Torture the suspect to get the location of the bomb and prevent it from causing a huge amount devastation or (2). Don’t torture the suspect and hope for another lead to appear putting millions of lives at risk. The answer is calculated, and the lowest number of casualties is found to be in option one. In conclusion utilitarian believe that it is sometimes necessary to sacrifice people for the greater good of humanity.

On another hand we have the Deontologist. Deontologists believe that all human life should be valued equally. They believe that morality is about respecting every human being’s capacity to set rational goals and devote their lives to achieving set goals. The rules that deontologists follow reinforce this theory, these rules forbid many things such as lying and harming others. So, if we were to review the above hypothetical situation (Bomb suspect scenario) but through a deontologists perspective the outcome would be completely different to that of a utilitarian’s.

Contrast in Human Rights

Looking into the fundamentals of both theories we can see that both have a very different take on human rights. To show the difference in human rights between both theories let’s look at abortion. Abortion is a difficult ethical topic in most theories, is it right? Is it wrong? I believe that whether it’s right or wrong depends on the circumstances but let’s consider the following case about a woman who left her home country after falling victim to rape. When the woman arrived in this new country she requested medical treatment and was horrified when she found out that she was pregnant. This pregnancy became a reminder of the pain she had suffered and done a lot of damage to her mental health. Will she be able to get an abortion in this new country? To show the differences between the two theories let’s look at this scenario in two different ways. One where the woman has arrived into a utilitarian society and two she has arrived in a deontological society.

Looking at this Woman’s unfortunate reality with utilitarian human rights, the woman would be eligible for an abortion. The consequences of not having the abortion out way the consequences of having the abortion. If the woman did not have the treatment, then there could be a possibility she could consider ending her life. Resulting in the loss of two lives. So, if this was the case she could get the abortion. If the woman arrived in a deontologists society she would be unable to have an abortion as it goes against the societies beliefs, all human life is valued the same. She would have to put up with the fact that she must give birth to an unloved child whose existence will remind her of pain and suffering she went through. The human rights in both theories are very different, as you can see from this example the difference in human rights completely changes this woman’s life.