Comparing and Contrasting Deontology and Utilitarianism

Dec 19, 2011
Brittney Weber

Weighty Matters - indi.ca

Deontology and utilitarianism can be viewed as opposing forces that balance the strengths and weaknesses of each other.

Since deontology is means-oriented, it requires honesty (or morality) at all times. It cuts out a lot of the analysis about where a situation will end up since the end, or consequences, do not matter in this type of philosophy. However, deontology will not consider the possibility that an immoral action could have a moral outcome.

For example, a person could enter a relationship with only their own desires in mind. Yet, over the course of this relationship, they could amend their viewpoint to allow themselves to care about the person as an end rather than a means. Ironically, following the duty-bound sense of morality in deontology stifles a person's potential for learning Kant's second formulation of his categorical imperative. This maxim states that people should always be treated as an end, never as a means only (Trinity.edu).

Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism, if followed blindly, has an equal chance of smothering a person's spiritual and/or personal advancement. This philosophical standpoint allows a person to mull over a variety of outcomes, but there is always a chance that they will suffer from the common situation known as "analysis paralysis." Because utilitarianism is pleasure-oriented, it is more focused on the morality of the end result of an action. Nevertheless, this tactic completely ignores the morality or immorality of one's behavior in the interim.

Using the same example of a relationship, a person could experience their entire relationship by acting a certain way because they thought it would deliver them to a moral outcome. There is a strong likelihood that they ignored their deeper desires in order to arrive at an end that would supposedly be more pleasurable. In this case, the person's actions, though seemingly moral, may carry them to an end that is actually immoral, based on this person's lack of honesty with themselves.

Balancing Deontology and Utilitarianism

In the cases of both deontology and utilitarianism, there is a certain irony attached. Though deontology relies on the morality of the means, it does not allow for the possibility that an immoral action could lead to more of a moral end than could a moral means. With utilitarianism, the incongruity lies in one's personal view of morality versus a more temporal view of it. A person may act a certain way in order to gain a pleasurable (or moral) end, yet they may also lose a sense of themselves in the process. This raises a question about whether their actions could still be considered moral.

This irony brings to light the question of whether one style of philosophy is somehow better or more useful than another. When considering deontology and utilitarianism separately, there seems to be a sense of dissonance, yet the blending of these two philosophies can create a system where both the means and the end of a situation are balanced.