Ethical Theories Compared

This is a quick overview of some relations between utilitarian, deontological, and Aristotelian ethical theories. For links to many excellent internet resources on these ethical theories and others, see Lawrence Hinman's Ethics Updates site.

Rosalind Hursthouse's Comparison

Here is a brief indication of the way Rosalind Hursthouse describes the relationships between the three kinds of theory in the first section of her essay "Virtue Theory and Abortion": Consequentialism example Mill's utilitarianism Deontology Kantian ethics Virtue Theory Aristotle's moral theory An action is right if it is what a virtuous agent would do in the circumstances.

An action is right if An action is right if abstract it is in accordance it promotes the description with a moral rule best consequences. or principle.

The best more consequences are concrete those in which specification happiness is maximized.

A virtuous agent is one who acts virtuously, that is, one who has and A moral rule is one exercises the that is required by virtues. A virtue is a rationality. character trait a human being needs to flourish or live well.

Classification of Ethical Theories

A More Detailed (But Very Tentative) Comparison

Here are some suggestions about how some of the chief ethical theories would address various issues. This is all pretty tentative, in part because different ethical theories tend to focus on different issues, so it's not always easy to determine how one theory would address the issues that are the chief concern of another theory. Also, many of the categories in the table are not strictly parts of the moral theories, but rather views on other topics (such as personal identity or the nature of rationality) which seem to mesh well with a particular ethical theory. Consequentialism example model of practical reasoning personal identity (what is essential to utilitarianism Deontology Kantianism Virtue Ethics Aristotelianism what habits should I develop? will& reason + desires + character traits

means-ends how do I reasoning: how do determine I get what I what's rational? want/what's good? will & reason + desires will & reason (desires are thought of as

the self?)

outside forces with the potential to thwart rationality) doing what reason requires (at a minimum, not having inconsistent or selfcontradictory policies) having the kinds of desires which reason determines are best

rationality

getting what you want

central question

what's the best what ought I to sort of person to what ought I to do? do? be? (act orientation) (act orientation) (agent orientation) acts right action itself (? or possibly states of affairs brought about by right action? or states of affairs in which people who act rightly are rewarded?) people (agents) whatever results from the actions of good people? happiness? acquisition of goods internal to practices (MacIntyre)?

primary object consequences of evaluation (states of affairs) BASIC NOTION the good (for most consequentialists, maximum happiness or something similar)

the right

the sort of thing actions that a virtuous BASIC NOTION maximize the good person would do in the situation being disposed to maximize utility (for simple versions of consequentialism, there will be just one big virtue; more complex versions might have many) BASIC NOTION (but may be positive attitude analyzed, e.g. as toward doing those one's moral dispositions duty(?) necessary for the attainment of happiness)

virtue

Last update: April 16, 2001. Curtis Brown | Introduction to Philosophy | Philosophy Department | Trinity University cbrown@trinity.edu