Back
to top
Differences??? Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
What is the difference between moral absolutism and deontological approaches to ethics?
The OCR philosophy mark scheme says that moral absolutism is where certain actions are right or wrong intrinsically, that consequences and circumstances have no bearing, and
that moral commands are considered objectively and universally true.
It says that the deontological approaches to ethical decision making look at whether the action itself is right or wrong.
So what is the actual difference between the two terms if both state that their ethical standpoints and judgements concern whether an action itself is right or wrong?
Please help!
Thanks to all that answer
The OCR philosophy mark scheme says that moral absolutism is where certain actions are right or wrong intrinsically, that consequences and circumstances have no bearing, and
that moral commands are considered objectively and universally true.
It says that the deontological approaches to ethical decision making look at whether the action itself is right or wrong.
So what is the actual difference between the two terms if both state that their ethical standpoints and judgements concern whether an action itself is right or wrong?
Please help!
Thanks to all that answer
0
reply
Report
#2
Basically, Deontological ethics is defined by 'deon' meaning duty which means that Deontological ethics is duty based which is concerned with the act and intention of the moral decision.
Absolutivism is what Deontological ethics is because it rules out any consequentialist theories like utilitarianism etc.
this means that a moral act is always and will ALWAYS remain absolutely wrong or right in a circumstance .
For example, in kanthan ethics we have the example of his 'axe murderer' it is our duty to tell the truth always so he goes and kills the Jews hiding inside the attic.
So it's always wrong to lie
Do you want the arguments for this?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Absolutivism is what Deontological ethics is because it rules out any consequentialist theories like utilitarianism etc.
this means that a moral act is always and will ALWAYS remain absolutely wrong or right in a circumstance .
For example, in kanthan ethics we have the example of his 'axe murderer' it is our duty to tell the truth always so he goes and kills the Jews hiding inside the attic.
So it's always wrong to lie
Do you want the arguments for this?
Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Report
#4
Aqafor English language
And aqa for Philosphy and ethics
Unit 4C: ways of moral decission making
Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Report
#5
I'm on AQa
Unit Rss04 and unit 4C for ways of moral decision making ?
Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
I'm doing OCR...but both boards would probably have the same rough topics I guess
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by park1996)
I'm doing OCR...but both boards would probably have the same rough topics I guess
I'm doing OCR...but both boards would probably have the same rough topics I guess
Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
