Consequentialism is a normative eth

Consequentialism is a normative ethical theory, which means, it is a theory about ethical action and a proposed method for deciding how one should choose the right ethical act. (Feiser) Consequentialism says that the consequences of an action are all that matter when taking an ethical decision to act. There is important reason for the root word. The word consequence is selected carefully and it is possible to make a distinction between the word itself and synonyms such as, results or outcomes. (Haynes) The word result or outcome is more commonly understood to mean the product of an action directly and inevitably follows from that action. Consequences have the possibility of being probable, or hypothetical. Alternative moral theories to consequentialism are: deontology, which proposes that ethical decisions should be made by following rules or fulfilling duties; and virtue ethics, which proposes that the ethical action to be taken is the one that would be taken by a virtuous person.

Consequentialist theories have been around for a long time. But the term “consequentialism” was coined by Elizabeth Anscombe in her essay “Modern Moral Philosophy” in 1958. (Frost) Utilitarianism is by far the most widely known form of consequentialism, and there often is confusion when distinguishing the two. Teleology is the classical term for ethical theories that focus on outcomes, or ends, to determine correct ethical action. (Ferrell) Teleology comes from the Greek words “telos” meaning, “end” and “logos” meaning, science. Before Anscombe, utilitarianism was the more general term for ethical theories associated with teleology, focusing on the overall good created as the desired outcome. Today, consequentialism is the most widely accepted umbrella term, containing distinguishable sub-categories with a broadening of desired outcomes. To summarize concisely, consequentialism evaluates actions based solely on weighing the consequences of the action against a desired outcome.

Types of Consequentialism

Consequentialism may be divided in different ways depending on how it is applied and the desired outcome. Many types of consequentialism do not have a formal name, and the variations we list below are not intended to be comprehensive. Our intent is to explore the most common forms of consequentialism, using the most widely accepted names for these forms. We can apply consequentialism to a decision by using its two forms: act consequentialism or rule consequentialism. Act consequentialism examines each act individually and determines the right act to be the one that produces the greatest number of consequences consistent with the desired outcome. (Frost) Rule consequentialism determines the morally right action to be the one that follows a rule whose observance would produce the desired outcome. (Sinott-Armstrong)

There are many desired outcomes. Two of the most widely known are: creating the most good for the most people – utilitarianism, and creating the most good for one’s self – egoism. We discuss utilitarianism in greater detail. Egoism is a selfish way to make ethical decisions, but some philosophers argue it truly is in everyone’s best interest for everyone to act in his or her own self interest (Shaw). To some degree everyone must act in her own self interest – the opposite extreme, altruism, means we act completely selflessly and only in the interest of others. The problem with altruism is that eventually, one who is completely selfless will have nothing left to give. Thus, the altruist destroys her ability to act in the interest of others.

Strengths of consequentialism

We can apply consequentialism ubiquitously, because all decisions have measurable consequences. Deontology requires a rule to govern a decision, and not all decisions have a rule or duty associated with them. Virtue ethics examines a decision in the context of one’s character, but there is some debate as to what dispositions are virtues. We can apply consequentialism systematically. If we assign a numerical value to consequences, we can reach an ethical decision through mathematical evaluation. In summary, the biggest strengths of consequentialism are the relative ease of universal application and its usefulness for practical application.

Problems with consequentialism

Despite its ease of universal application, applying consequentialist theory to a decision can be quite time-consuming and complicated in practice. In the ideal case, all consequences are identified and accounted. However, in almost all real decisions this is not possible. The process of identifying and weighing all the consequences, or even a number of consequences deemed sufficient to make the decision, is often too time consuming for decisions that need to be made quickly.

A second problem with applying consequentialism is observer or agent limitation. Once again the ideal case is a completely unbiased ethical agent weighing all possible conse

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Consequentialism adalah teori etika normatif, yang berarti, ini adalah sebuah teori tentang tindakan etis dan metode yang diusulkan untuk memutuskan bagaimana seseorang harus memilih tindakan tepat etis. (Feiser) Consequentialism mengatakan bahwa konsekuensi dari tindakan yang peduli ketika mengambil keputusan etis untuk bertindak. Ada alasan penting dari akar kata. Konsekuensi kata dipilih dengan hati-hati dan dapat membuat perbedaan antara kata itu sendiri dan sinonim seperti, hasil atau hasil. (Haynes) Kata hasil atau hasil lebih umum dipahami berarti produk dari tindakan langsung dan pasti berikut dari tindakan itu. Konsekuensi memiliki kemungkinan yang mungkin, atau hipotetis. Alternatif teori moral untuk consequentialism yang: moral, yang mengusulkan bahwa etika keputusan harus mengikuti aturan atau memenuhi tugas-tugas; dan kebajikan etika, yang mengusulkan bahwa tindakan etis untuk diambil adalah salah satu yang akan diambil oleh orang saleh.Teori-teori consequentialist telah sekitar untuk waktu yang lama. Tapi istilah "consequentialism" diciptakan oleh Elizabeth Anscombe dalam esainya, "filsafat Moral Modern" pada tahun 1958. (Es) Utilitarianisme adalah jauh yang paling dikenal luas berupa consequentialism, dan sering ada kebingungan ketika membedakan keduanya. Teleology adalah istilah klasik untuk teori etika yang fokus pada hasil, atau berakhir, untuk menentukan tindakan etis yang benar. (Ferrell) Teleology berasal dari kata Yunani "telos" berarti, "akhir" dan "logos" artinya, ilmu. Sebelum Anscombe, utilitarianisme adalah istilah yang lebih umum untuk teori-teori etika yang terkait dengan teleology, berfokus pada yang baik secara keseluruhan diciptakan sebagai hasil yang diinginkan. Hari ini, consequentialism adalah istilah payung paling diterima, yang mengandung sub-kategori dibedakan dengan memperluas hasil yang diinginkan. Untuk meringkas ringkas, consequentialism mengevaluasi tindakan-tindakan yang hanya berdasarkan beratnya konsekuensi dari tindakan terhadap hasil yang diinginkan. Jenis ConsequentialismConsequentialism may be divided in different ways depending on how it is applied and the desired outcome. Many types of consequentialism do not have a formal name, and the variations we list below are not intended to be comprehensive. Our intent is to explore the most common forms of consequentialism, using the most widely accepted names for these forms. We can apply consequentialism to a decision by using its two forms: act consequentialism or rule consequentialism. Act consequentialism examines each act individually and determines the right act to be the one that produces the greatest number of consequences consistent with the desired outcome. (Frost) Rule consequentialism determines the morally right action to be the one that follows a rule whose observance would produce the desired outcome. (Sinott-Armstrong)There are many desired outcomes. Two of the most widely known are: creating the most good for the most people – utilitarianism, and creating the most good for one’s self – egoism. We discuss utilitarianism in greater detail. Egoism is a selfish way to make ethical decisions, but some philosophers argue it truly is in everyone’s best interest for everyone to act in his or her own self interest (Shaw). To some degree everyone must act in her own self interest – the opposite extreme, altruism, means we act completely selflessly and only in the interest of others. The problem with altruism is that eventually, one who is completely selfless will have nothing left to give. Thus, the altruist destroys her ability to act in the interest of others. Strengths of consequentialismWe can apply consequentialism ubiquitously, because all decisions have measurable consequences. Deontology requires a rule to govern a decision, and not all decisions have a rule or duty associated with them. Virtue ethics examines a decision in the context of one’s character, but there is some debate as to what dispositions are virtues. We can apply consequentialism systematically. If we assign a numerical value to consequences, we can reach an ethical decision through mathematical evaluation. In summary, the biggest strengths of consequentialism are the relative ease of universal application and its usefulness for practical application. Problems with consequentialismDespite its ease of universal application, applying consequentialist theory to a decision can be quite time-consuming and complicated in practice. In the ideal case, all consequences are identified and accounted. However, in almost all real decisions this is not possible. The process of identifying and weighing all the consequences, or even a number of consequences deemed sufficient to make the decision, is often too time consuming for decisions that need to be made quickly.A second problem with applying consequentialism is observer or agent limitation. Once again the ideal case is a completely unbiased ethical agent weighing all possible conse