CHAPTER V

DEONTOLOGY
In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology(from Greek work deon, “obligation, duty”)
Is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right
or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.
It is sometimes described as duty, obligation or rule-based ethics.
In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology(from Greek work deon, “obligation, duty”)
Is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right
or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.
It is sometimes described as duty, obligation or rule-based ethics.
Other usage of the term goes back to Jeremy Bentham, who coined it before 1816 as a synonym of Dicastic or
Censorial Ethics(ethics based on judgment)
The more general sense of the word is retained in French, especially in the term code de deontologie (ethical
code), in the context of professional ethics.
Depending on the system of deontological ethics under consideration, a moral obligation may arise from an
external or internal source, such as a set of rules inherent to the universe(ethical naturalism), religious law, or a set
of personal or cultural values(any of which may be in conflict with personal desires.)
Confucius : Duty and the Community
Fundamental principles of the metaphysics of ethics
The good will and proper self-esteem
We cannot think of anything in the world or outside of it that could be purely good—something that is good in
itself, without qualification—except a good will.
— IMMANUEL KANT
The duty to improve ourselves as moral people is important virtually every ethical system.
In Confucian and Buddhist ethics, continuous self-improvement through right living and right thinking is
the only way to reach moral excellence.
For Kant, the development of the good will and proper self-esteem is the only way to ensure that we will
consistently do our duty.
According to Kant, reason, rather than emotion, directs the will. As autonomous and rational beings, we have the
ability to use our reason to discern what is right or wrong without needing to rely on outside authorities.
A person of good will, unlike a heteronomous moral agent, always acts out of a sense of duty and a
reverence for the moral law without regard for consequences or immediate inclinations.
The good will, Kant wrote, “ is already present in a sound understanding and requires not so much to be
taught as merely to be clarified.”
As autonomous beings, people of good will are free from external pressures. They are lawgivers unto themselves;
that is, they impose the moral law upon themselves. Kant, however, was not suggesting that morality is relative or
subjective. Instead, he believed that all rational beings would arrive at the same conclusions regarding what is
right and wrong.
A person of good will can be depended on to do what is right, even when other motives are absent. An action that
is done out of sympathy or because one enjoys helping others, rather than out of a sense of duty, may be
praiseworthy; however, according to Kant, such an action has no moral worth
It is easy to help others who may someday return the favor or to feel compassion for those who are like us. Acting
out of duty and the good will, however, involves the intention to do what is right, regardless of our feelings or any
rewards.
If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. If you do good
to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those
from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return.
―Luke 6:32-35
The term duty, unfortunately, has a negative connotation for many people. Indeed, Kant has often been interpreted
as promoting assort of joyless duty. However, he was not suggesting that we ought not to feel sympathy for others
to receive joy from helping others or from personal friendships.
The duty of justice
Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought.
—JOHN RAWLS, A Theory of Justice(1971)

If then the unjust is the unequal, the just is the equal;everyone accepts this conclusion without demanding a reason
for it
—ARISTOTLE, Nicomachean Ethics,Bk.5,Ch.3
The duty of justice is regarded by many philosophers as our most important duty as members of our community.
The ongoing duty if justice requires that we give each person equal consideration. Because laws and social
institutions are generally the agencies for balancing conflicting interests, the issue of justice is closely tied in with
that of the good society; however, legal justice is not always consistent with moral justice. Not all laws are just,
nor are all demands for justice addressed by laws. The duty of justice is generally subdivided by philosophers into
two types: distributive and retributive justice.
Distributive justice
refers to the fair distribution of benefits burden in a society.
Retributive justice
The second type of justice involves punishment for wrong doing punishment for a crime according to the most
deontologist is our duty because the moral order requires that the guilty should suffer in proportion to the
magnitude of their crime.
Sissela bok: IS THE DUTY NOT TO LIE ABSOLUTE
according to Kant a person of good will, always does his or her duty no matter what the consequences.
- although Kant suggested that lying may be acceptable in a situation when we are forced to lie.
SISSELA BOK- Swedish born American philosopher, writer, and educator. The daughter of two Nobel prize
winners ALVA AND GUNNAR MYRDAL.
- she is primarily interested in the application of moral theory to real-life issues such as lying, euthanasia, and war
and peace.
- suggest that although lying is generally wrong, there may be isolated cases where the duty to lie conflicts with
the important duty to protect innocent human life.
- she defines a lie as “any intentionally deceptive message which is stated”.
- she acknowledges that we have a duty not to lie.
When deciding whether lying is morally justified in a particular case, BOK suggests that we use the following
criteria: FIRST, we should look for another alternative to deception. SECOND, we should ask ourselves whether
the lie can pass the test of publicity by examining the lie from the viewpoint of others. FINALLY, we should
engage in personal soul-searching.
CRITIQUE OF DEONTOLOGY
1. Western deontologists have been accused of promoting an abstract moral philosophy that sacrifices community
in the name of autonomy.
Kant’s description of the moral community as a collection of autonomous units has especially come under fire.
KANTIAN DEONTOLOGY - the private life replaces the public life as the sphere of our moral actions.
Kant’s assumption that people are basically autonomous private units who are free to carry out the moral law fails
to take into consideration that we are all part of a wider social network of relationships.
George Hegel (1770-1841) a German philosopher questioned Kant’s belief that individual autonomy and
rationality are possible prior to membership in an ethical community. Hegel argued that our sense of self cannot
exist outside personal interaction and community; we are woven together in a common web. Like Confucius,
Hegel believed that the unhappiness of one is the unhappiness of us all.
2. Deontologists tend to focus too much on justice and abstract principles and ignore moral sentiments.
The deontologists’ concern with justice and abstract principles of duty, rather than with community, has also been
criticized by feminist care ethicists such as Carol Gilligan and Nel Noddings as a distinctively male approach that
ignores caring relationships.
Practical morality, they argue, is constructed dialectically through interaction with others , not merely an
autonomous examination of the dictates of our reason.
By reducing morality to one component – moral judgment – deontology fails to take into account the influence of
relationships and the role of moral sensitivity in informing our moral values. Knowing what is right on the level
of reason does not necessarily mean that we will do what is right. Reason alone, without the ability to sympathize
with others, seems unable to produce the categorical imperative or to inspire us to respect others.
Abstract rational principles, care ethicists, are insufficient to motivate us or provide us with concrete guides to
action. History has, time and again, shown how easy it is for us to set aside these abstract formal principles and
slip back into dogmatism, violence, and intolerance.
Nietzsche likewise accused Kant’s moral rationalism of being hostile to life by its rejection of the natural passions
and instincts of life. Nietzsche argued that true morality is dominated by an instincts for life, not abstract reason.
Thus, judgments that are impersonal and universal should nor be taken seriously.
[Virtue] must be our own invention, our most necessary self-expression… The fundamental laws of self-
preservation and growth demand the opposite – that everyone invent his own virtue, his own categorical
imperative. A people perishes when it confuses its duty with duty in general.
Nietzsche’s criticism is partly based on a misconception of the concept of duty. Kant and other deontologists such
as Confucius and Ross did not believe that doing one’s duty is antithetical to personal growth and relationships
nor to the expression of our natural passions and instincts. They were aware that the love of humanity in general is
not a good substitute for particular friendships and relationships.
3. Deontology may be compatible with consequential theories.
Most deontologists believe that consequences, though not as important as duty, should be taken into
consideration. Therefore, Kant’s denial that consequences are morally revelant has also been criticized by
utalitarians and other deontologists. John Stuart Mill pointed out that the categorical imperative, by its very
nature, requires that we take consequences into account when adopting moral rules.
According to Mill, people would not universalize a moral rule that would harm, rather than benefit the
moral community.
4. Deontology is a rich theory that has made significant contributions to thinking about human dignity and human
rights.
Despite these shortcomings, the strengths and richness of deontology far outside its weakness. In any case, it
would be a mistake to consider any philosophical theory, or even any scientific theory, as a finished or complete
statements about a particular phenomenon.
One of the characteristics of a good theory is that it is open-minded and generates further thought. In this respect,
deontology has made important contributions to the study of ethics.
Although Kant’s moral philosophy, because of its formal character and lack of personality, suffered a
serious decline in popularity among philosophes during the first half of the twentieth century, it is now making a
comeback.
Few philosophers except Kant’s moral philosophy in its entirety; still, Kantian deontology is one of the most, if
not the most, influential and fertile moral philosophies in modern history.
Kant’s thinking has had a major influence on modern European and American moral philosophers such as
Sissela Bok, john Rawls, and W.D Ross; it has also left its mark on philosophers around the world.
Deontology, with its emphasis on the dignity of the individual, has also had a major influence on the development
of right ethics in both Western and non-Western philosophies.