Consequentialism and Integrity - Consequentialism Essay Example
Consequentialism and Integrity
Consequentialism refers to the views that the outcome of particular action lays the basement for any sound moral judgement concerning that action. It indicates that morally right action are those which produces good outcomes. It therefore involves assessment and evaluation of the results to estimate the rightness or wrongness of the action. Consequentialism calls for results therefore prompting the mode of achieving the results.
essay sample on "Consequentialism and Integrity"? - Consequentialism and Integrity introduction.? We will write a cheap essay sample on "Consequentialism and Integrity" specifically for you for only $12.90/page
Integrity is considered as the consistence of values, methods, measures and principles that are in line with the expectations of the people’s beliefs and values.
Both consequentialism and integrity seek positive answers and results that are acceptable to the people and the society they live in. However some approaches taken on the basement of integrity may hinder achievement or limit the level of achievement the results will produce. With differences from definition, consequentialism approaches some of integrity’s core principles as stumbling blocks for attainment of maximum positive results. Integrity’s involves respecting one’s duty, obeying the nature, actualizing ones potential, being reasonable, respecting ones rights and obeying God (Darwall, 2003, p. 12). However, this may only be possible within a particular context making the view to be inconsistent with integrity and consequentialism requirements.
Whereas integrity employs the concept of the whole process of action, results and morals, consequentialism is concerned more on results with less concern on the actions that were used to achieve the results. Integrity however have several demands that differ from the consequentialsm in both theory and practice. As Integrity calls for only morally accepted ethics to be present for actions to be taken, consequentialism demands action to achieve the best results possible (Darwell, 2003, p. 37). Consequentialism assumes that whatever a man does, he does it to produce good results, therefore it will be of benefit to him and or others. The actions are therefore justifiable depending on the weight of the results that will be achieved. The cause of action may be prompted by law, earlier promise and not necessarily because of moral consideration that you want to produce good results. Those results may be good and fantastic thus discrediting the integrity call for only morally right actions for an action to take place. There is always need to act for positive results to be achieved and help the society (Hooker, et al., 2000,p. 102).
Morality theory is very too demanding in that it considers the actions as well as the outcomes which may be in different situations and therefore hard to evaluate. Though some actions may appear to be very negative their outcomes could be very enjoyable. The invasion of Iraq by the United States may be considered morally wrong, but the overall outcome makes the previously crying and wailing souls to sound the drums of joy. It is morally wrong to choose worse rather than choosing better in that the expected results must be at the maximum possible benefit that can be realized through that action. Besides some actions may have unquantifiable ultimate results and values which may not be recognized by integrity thereby a possibility of rejecting the option. Reason of actions like to give joy or skills will have multiple and uncountable benefits which cannot be quantified. The intrinsic value of some benefits are appreciated by consequentialism where as they are not by integrity (Scheffler, ed, 1988).
In addition, integrity demands full objectivity with knowledge of every thing and sympathetic to every one. This premise becomes very hard to adopt and maintain as actions will always have different results that will be regarded differently by various individuals and entities. Common sense including both thoughts of limits in the demands of morality, and the perception that the demands of morality are dependent on the state of the globe puts integrity to test in order to achieve different acceptable results. As a result, there is need for compromise to achieve the same results. The principle of benevolence therefore indicate that great demands will be put to to the world to satisfy the people’s needs. The need to balance between our needs and those of others must therefore be considered carefully balanced (David, 1996, p. 89).
In addition, the call for impartial empathy and ability to balance satisfaction for all people makes it even harder. With varying considerations for actions and different repercussions in the different parts of the world, it becomes very hard to meet all the peoples desires. An activity in the northern hemisphere could have very positive effects to the people in the region but very negative impacts to others in further regions. Industrialization in the world by the developed countries not only supported the higher provision of food but also made life very comfortable. However it have contributed to the great effect of global warming and the green house effect in the world thereby endangering many people (Darwell, 2003, p. 67).
Abiding by morality tends to alienate people from their particular commitments that help to add value to it. To act morally can be regarded as insubordination to oneself and all that relate to the person. Morality therefore is alien in the daily life with purity of heart being impossible to achieve expected results by a person as it is required by the moral standards. However, consequentilaism would call for particularistic commitment that would bring the best results. Individuals are likely to act correctly if they are having motivation, character traits or special commitment. However individuals with these traits would miss some opportunities to maximize the results for not considering the consequences.
The common conception for morality is purity which is not just unrealistic, but unachievable by majority of the people. The requirement of an individual to live holy life therefore becomes applicable in only very few instances. Societies and individuals with different entities, social relations and commitments becomes impossible to hold this rule as we are subject to choices from different avenues as well as the authority that have legislation to be followed. The presence of central governments that make laws will therefore new demand a specific line of action that will contravene the holiness concept. Consequentialaism through the call for positive results demands high self respect for the individuals (Hooker et al, 2000, p. 91).
Egoism is strongly advocated for by consequentialism theory unlike integrity views where everybody must be considered to validate actions for positive results. Every moral entity must commence from assumptions that are undefined to reality. These assumptions are then turned into reality by acting on them to achieve positive results. In addition, contractual policy for goal achievements is strongly advocated for by consequentialism theory. Through allocation of different assignments to specific individuals one can have different assignments finished in time and in the required mode. Though integrity raises concerns on actualization of different contractual jobs, the results are easier to predetermine and even analyze well in advance to avoid being surprises. The contractual dispensation is applied more in the political arena and helps to maximize the positive results (David,1996, p. 155 ).
According to Williams (Williams, 1981, p. 22-31), libertarianism assist in attainment of maximum positive benefits. This is a contrast view according to integrity theory which call for empathy by requiring one to be considerate of his or her brother at all times. The believe that one can do all that he or she wants with his own property puts the desire for achievement and even further maximization of profits from that individual. The maximization of the positive benefits from the libertarianism however contravenes the ethical setting in that one can accumulate as much as possible even when the other do not have at anything all. Besides, alienation stands between the full participation of the people and is left to only the few involved individuals in pursuit of maximum beneficial results. Majority of the people are left out in the process of different actions either due to their qualification or are considered as non partisan. Separateness is considered vital in integrity but virtually regarded in the consequential theory. Integrity regards the separateness of people from others being immoral. It indicates that each person is unique in his or her own way therefore the need to highly respect their combination and life that results from those combination. This view contravenes the maximum utilitarian nature that seeks to maximize under all costs the out put with highest levels of sacrifices and disregards separateness of the individuals (Darwell, 2003, p. 104).
There is lack of in depth utilization of resources when the integrity factor is considered to have more weight in the society. With emphasis on the social values the rate of exploitation of services and resources is very low. The entrepreneurial management is highly suppressed with the little that is available being for all the people with regard to social ties and empathy. This makes consequentialism to strongly advocate for individualistic approaches to capitalism for faster and more efficient services and products production, supply, and eventual distribution.
These concerns can be addressed by integrating the various views to come up with hybrid workable and more effective principles that are both acceptable by consequentialism as well as integrity considerations. To begin with, Integrity objection can be addressed through evaluation of different alternatives that can complement the need for everybody’s welfare. It is important to view every life from outside and reduce alienation by considering our selves as part of the consequentialism entity and bound to produce results that will bring more benefits to all. Without violating anyone’s integrity there is need to view the world from impersonal perspective with full of need to change it and thereby leave it a better place for those who will come after us. Separateness of persons should in addition be harmonized to reflect the peoples requirements for socialization at different levels. Consequentialism having little regard to the people being separated should initiate better mechanism to address the concern. With more and more people crying due to the extent of separateness they must be addressed. Special compensation schemes must be developed for higher productivity and benefits maximization.
To add to that, different remarks on well being of the people as social beings must be addressed. With the consequentialism insisting on the maximization of benefits the integrity of the people need to be safeguarded. Every action meant to produce results need to be evaluated to reduce human suffering. The idea of end justifying the means should be cropped with divergent views and applications for higher benefits and eventual enjoyment of the same benefits. According to Darwall (2003, p. 78), a dam being built in a settlement area must meet all the requirements of resettling the people who will be affected in a humane manner and thereafter ensuring that they fully settle to their full capacity. The overall benefits of hydro power supply, availability of fish, climate adjustment and water availability need to balance alongside the humanity feelings. Also, ample information must be given to the people who will be affected by the project. They need to be included in the plan to lay down the facility thereby owning the whole project and maximizing the results even more. Human lives must be understood as the nones that make any outcome valuable and therefore need to be assured of their support (Williams, 1981, p. 41),
Consequentialism can also make up the need to change its approach to different principles of concerns. There is need to adequately consult in different instances from the people who will be affected by the actions as well as the perceived recipients of the actions. The actions or services that are directed towards a group of people may require reconnaissance consideration for better reception of the proposed commodity or the service. There is need for recognition of the correct action that will have the least negative effects towards the people for higher standards in quality and reception by the people ( Scheffler, 1988, p. 112,). Besides, it is also evident that some considerations and accuses that are launched against consequentialism will demand reconsideration with overall definition. The actions involved though claimed by consequentialism as the best, can yield results which should include the objectivity for even more and better results.
Inhuman and immoral thinking that integrity claims of double consequentialism do not estimate the repercussions of everyday activities by the people taking the actions themselves. The demands of consequentialism and it’s consideration from integrity, pinpoints to new designs that will be theoretically sound, moderately demanding and and intuitively appealing (Hooker et al, 2000, p.89).
According to Consequentilism resources must be put where they will give the highest and the best outcome. Energies should therefore be focused in areas where the losses are low to improve them, and pointing to our daily needs. Consequentialism concerns for integrity raises the major questions on morality with respect to attainment of the best possible results. However the differences are important for they will help the benefits from the actions accrued to them be more friendly to the different individuals in the action process or in the receiving end. Human being consideration as indicated by integrity must take the center stage in every consideration for an action.
With stronger calls for maximization of benefits, the reconsideration of the channels and modes of action should be evaluated to increase efficiency and benefits for the particular action. Liberalization and capitalization should in addition be fully cognizant of the great need for respecting humanity and therefore establish the correct channels for addressing the sanctity and integrity accruing to the process. Integrity and consequentialism combination for efficiency and success is thus very logical and need to be articulated for the sake of present and future generations.
Darwall, S. (2003). Consequentialism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
David, C.(1996). Consequentialism; New York: Oxford university press.
Hooker, B. Mason, E & Miller, D. (2000). Morality, Rules, and Consequences. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Scheffler S, ed., (1988). Consequentialism and its critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Williams, B.(1981). Persons, Character, and Morality: Moral Luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.