Nonconsequensialists and Consequensialists Essay

Nonconsequensialists and Consequensialists - Essay Example As in consequentialism, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong, and the reason he or she will gave is that it generates negative consequences or the results. But a consequentialist might allow this in some foreseeable consequences, and where lie is good enough, so people can lie in those situations. On the other hand a deontologist may argue that lying is always wrong, no matter what good it can bring to the liar. They will never allow this in any situation or the circumstances. G. E. M Anscombe, in 1958, came up with the term consequentilism first time in her essay "Modern Moral Philosophy". In her essay, she expressed what she thought as the major error of some moral theories, for example by Mill and Sidgwick. 1 The term, consequentilism became popular further and many authors used it in their writings. The ethical theories are sorted into two groups, one theory is regarding the wrong and right actions, and this is called consequentialist theory. The other theory is non-consequentialist theory; utilitarianism is an example of consequentialist theory. And that judgment in consequentiatlist theory is done by the rightness ad wrongness of any action and also the results of those acts. ... On the other hand, the non-consequentialist theory in ethics concludes the right or wrong acts not on the base of consequences but on their properties and attributes. Libertarians support this theory and believe that people should be free to do whatever they want to. If someone's action is hurting or harming other people than it does not mean that people should stop doing things on their own will. They should do what ever they want to but they should respect the privacy and freedom of others too, but should not hold back their actions only because of people. The major difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist is the judgment of action and in consequentialist theory; the final conclusion is based upon the consequences and results whereas in non-consequentialists theory, it checks the nature of the action. What happens normally is that non-consequentialists limit the scope and range of facts, which should be reviewed to perform the right action. Non-consequentialists try to ignore the consequences, which is not actually possible and can create a lot of problems in future. So the non-consequentialist theory limits the range of considerations that could be used in determining the rightness and wrongness of any action. Though it is proved psychologically that the acts by people are limited because of many constraints, for example, time limit, finite processing capacities etc. So non-consequentialist ethics is suitable for the decision procedures, where the empirical restrictions are rationality talked about. Many philosophers agreed that non-consequentialist theory can be successful only after the proper judgment of