Deontology
You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|December 2005|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
Deontological ethics (from the Greek Deon meaning obligation) or Deontology is an ethical theory holding that decisions should be made solely or primarily by considering one's duties and the rights of others. Deontology posits the existence of a priori moral obligations, further suggesting that people ought to live by a set of permanently defined principles that do not change merely as a result of a change in circumstances. One of the most important implications of deontology is that praiseworthy goals can never justify the immoral actions; ends do not justify the means. Deontology is directly in opposition to consequentialism, an ethical theory in which the ends can justify the means because decisions are judged primarily in terms of their consequences.
==Proponents of Disadvantages of Globalization
Some Advantages Some Disadvantages Increased free trade between nations Increased liquidity of capital allowing investors in developed nations to invest in developing nations Corporations have greater flexibility to operate across borders Global mass media ties the world together Increased flow of communications allows vital information to be shared between individuals and corporations around the world Greater ease and speed of transportation for goods and people Reduction of cultural barriers increases the global village effect Spread of democratic ideals to developed nations Greater interdependence of nation-states Reduction of likelihood of war between developed nations Increases in environmental protection in developed nations
.
Other examples of deontological theorists include the English philosopher John Locke and the modern-day philosopher John Rawls. Locke held that individual persons have rights that are part of the natural law of the world, and that actions (including the death penalty he advocated) can be judged as right or wrong based on whether they respect these rights. John Rawls clarified the meaning of deontology by explaining the distinction between the right and the good. Whereas consequentialist theories argue or assume that an act is right (and should therefore be carried out) if it maximizes the good, deontological theories assert that an act can maximize the good yet still be wrong (and therefore should not be carried out) if it violates some deontological principle such as a right or a duty or the categorical imperative.
Criticism of deontology
Many utilitarian philosophers offer interesting critiques of deontology. Jeremy Bentham, an early utilitarian philosopher, criticized deontology on the grounds that it was essentially a dressed-up version of popular morality, and that the unchanging principles that deontologists attribute to natural law or universal reason are really a matter of subjective opinion. John Stuart Mill, who lived in 19th century Britain, argued that deontologists usually fail to specify which principles should take priority when rights and duties conflict, so that deontology cannot offer complete moral guidance.
Shelly Kagan, a current professor of philosophy at Yale University, notes in support of Mill and Bentham that under deontology, individuals are bound by constraints (such as the requirement not to kill), but are also given options (such as the right not to give money to charity, if they do not wish to). His line of attack is to first show that constraints are immoral, then show that options are immoral without constraints. If this reasoning is sound, then it follows that deontology is immoral.
Another, unrelated critique of deontological ethics comes from Aretaic theories, which often maintain that neither consequences nor duties but "character" should be the focal point of ethical theory. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, for example, sought to describe what characteristics a virtuous person would have, and then argued that people should act in accordance with these characteristics.