Question

In your own words, describe the primary difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist approaches to ethics. Choose one of the major theories associated with consequentialism: what objections might be made to this theory? Choose one of the major theories associated with non-consequentialism: what objections might be made to this theory?

Answer 1

I will try to be clear and concise with my answer. As the names itself defines that consequentialist approaches to ethics is when the ethical theory that we are applying judges the rightness or wrongness of the situation based on its consequence. The final outcome of the situation justifies the applied value. While on the other hand non-consequentialist approaches to ethics are based on the inherent properties or values of the action and not on the consequence.

One major theory associated with consequentialist approache is the hedonism theory which states that an action can be considered right if it brings pleasure or removes pain. One major objection against hedoism is that the term 'pleasure' or 'pain' are intangible and can not be measured. One can have a totally different estimation of pleasure and pain than the other. Also some pleasure are considered disgusting or false. For example, addiction of a substance is a pleasure for a junky (drug addict).

One major theory associated with non-consequentialism is Libertarianism which states that people should have the liberty to do whatever they want as long as they do not hinders the liberty of others. It emphasizes on the free will of people in doing things. One major objection against libertism is the luck objection which states that our actions become matters of luck if we do not determine them casually. For example if someone lies to anybody, then it is not based on their free will but their actions in the past which is not letting them to accept the truth before them.