Kant and Bentham Walk Into a Bar

Previous Activity

Applied Ethics: Theory to Practice

It may seem a large leap that theory would have an actual and pragmatic impact on real life, but explore this

Learning Activity to see just how practical theory can be in applied ethics.

From Many, Two Important Theoretical Perspectives

Because all ethical analysis and decision-making (for instance, analysis for applied ethical situations such as in business

and leadership) are grounded in foundational ideas, you should be familiar with two theoretical perspectives related to

the questions of ethics: the Deontological perspective and the Teleological perspective. These two categories of theories

offer some understanding and explanation about how one locates the “rightness” or “wrongness” of an action.

Let’s replace the word “teleological” with the term consequentialism for a moment (granted some nuances are being

suspended for applied illustration purposes). The perspective of the consequentialist indicates that the morality of an

action is located in the outcome(s) or consequences of the action.  Another way to think of this perspective is looking

toward Jeremy Bentham’s idea of Utilitarian ethics, which in substance, indicates that action is good if it results in good

utility for many or more (as we’ve heard it said “the greatest good for the greatest number”). In light of a teleological

perspective, one might do “bad” or “harm” by truth telling if the outcome is “bad.” You can hear in this perspective the

substantiation for the white-lie answer.  It may be said that in the Teleological perspective, consequences or outcomes

are prime for locating morality.

In contrast, the Deontological perspective locates the “rightness” or “wrongness” in particular actions, generally

irrespective of outcomes/consequences. Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative (obligation, duty, rightness,

wrongness regardless of context) indicates that actions are unconditionally right or wrong. For the duty-bound, there is





























 



  





an argument against the white-lie, not because of consequences being good or bad for the greater number, but because

intentionally lying in and of itself categorically wrong. Language pertinent to Deontological perspectives include: duty,

obligation, right-way.  It may be said that in the Deontological perspective, actions are prime for locating morality.

Each perspective can be seen at play in our observations of ethical issues in our organizations and communities. With

due reflection, we should also be able to see where our own perspective is anchored. Most people don’t hold to one

perspective over the other 100%, but may have a stronger preference for one or the other. For the conversation here in

this competency, each of these perspectives can be seen to help frame the perception and definition of an ethical issue or

question.  Each of the perspectives also impact deliberation of an ethical issue that may result in dichotomous

conclusions about the same facts, and of course the perspectives ask one to consider questions of universalism or

relativism as a matter of personal reflection.

Watch these two videos to reinforce key ideas, especially Deontology and Teleology.

Introduction to Ethics

© Academy of Ideas

Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy

© CrashCourse





























 



  



