Question

Give an example of a possible conflict between a consequentialist theory and a considered moral judgment. (Show how these two may be inconsistent.)

Think up an imaginary case and explain.

Answer 1

Answer.

In moral reasoning, there are largely two broad categories of ethical theories: consequentialism and non-consequentialism.

According to the consequentialist theory, an action is considered right if the amount of good produced that is its consequences, are proportionally greater. The two main consequentionalist theories are utilitarianism (both act- and rule-utilitarianism) and ethical egoism. According to the utilitarian view, the morally right action is the one that produces the most favorable balance of good over evil, where everyone considered and it ensures greater good for greater number of people. Thus for instance, the practice of euthanasia can be morally justified from such a viewpoint as it reduces the suffering of the patient of a terminal illness, reduces the emotional distress of his/her family meerschaum or caretaker also allows the hospital services to cater to many other patients who can benefit from in-patient service by clearing the space occupied by a patient who wilfully decides to terminate medical assistance and get euthanised.

However, in this situation, considered moral judgement theory will condemn the practice as immoral . Considered moral judgement is a reliable and carefully made opinion about an issue which requires careful deliberation, and is free of personal bias. From this viewpoint, the doctor’s use of euthanasia may be out of their own self interest to reduce the costs of treatment and maintenance incurred by the hospital authorities in managing a terminally ill patient in the ward. Our moral experience would show us that We are sometimes mistaken in our moral beliefs and that We occasionally have moral disagreements. Thus, while euthanasia may be a morally right decision for the patient Andy the doctors involved, it may be morally condemned by human rights agents and social conservatives who may argue that it goes against the law of nature as human beings cannot be made in charge of determining life and death.