Deontology: Focuses on right actions versus consequences. What matters is following the RULES. Your action is right even if it only conforms to the moral norms Some actions are forbidden no matter HOW good the consequences. It's "wrong to break a rule" Opposite to utilitarianism Criticized for being too restrictive. Utilitarianism is criticized for being too lax.
Deontology to me just seems like consequentialism with extra steps. How does the deontologist arrive at their moral claims in the first place as to what actions they deem good or bad? Well, at some point in the past, they must have examined the consequences of certain actions, and THEN assigned the values of goodness or badness to the actions that produced those consequences. But wrapped up in the Deontoligical claims is an intrinsically Consequentialist framework; otherwise, if someone said “deontologically, murder is permissible,” you would have no refutation other than appealing to the bad consequences of this action. Or you could appeal to a different deontological system, but to say which one is “better”, you would also have to appeal to their outcomes (read: consequences).
Is this existence necessary, hence deontological, the removal of being... just to see what we want to do. He will take it to the extreme if it's intentional. Intentionality is when ethics and rules are reversed then isolated to isolate then amplified with beliefs and idea's. Like crucifixion.
HEY CARNADES, Inspiringphilosophy has made a video where he tried to debunk YOUR argument against logic. PLEASE make a video response to him as his objection is so bad it needs to be debunked. If you dont, I’ll make it myself to debunk him, the video is called “the laws of logic defended”
An isolate who can't break the rules like the group, or deontological ethics are a list of rules that breach categorical ethics. So it would the churches rules applied to kant himself he is an isolate the church has already breached ethics. Rape can be cryptic. Especially when you get paid for it. We are always breaking an implicit set of rules.
I think of it as the way fact (and mabye other stuff idk) interact. But I am not sure that is correct. However, when you say rules of inferances that would aim at the rules you use to work with a set of things. www.wikiwand.com/en/Inference In logic for example. If I say that this: p=>q (p implies q) becomes this: (-p) v q (It is true that p is false or that q is true) I would be using a rule of inference sometimes called material implication. I think inference is this proces
Many superheros conform to deontological principles, or at least look more deontological than utilitarian (not killing the villain even though that might reduce overall suffering in the long run). I don't know if this is so much an affirmation of a particular theory as it is a plot device to keep the villains around from story to story.
Deontology:
Focuses on right actions versus consequences.
What matters is following the RULES.
Your action is right even if it only conforms to the moral norms
Some actions are forbidden no matter HOW good the consequences.
It's "wrong to break a rule"
Opposite to utilitarianism
Criticized for being too restrictive. Utilitarianism is criticized for being too lax.
You just gained a life-long subscriber. Thank you for simplifying everything!
Thanks for watching and subscribing! I'm glad I could help.
Wow! A video on philosophy that speaks my language! Thank you for the simplicity and accessibility.
Explained in a most simplified way and especially the example only enough to define what deontology is.. Thanks a lot
very informative and to the point. Great video, man.
Fantastic video. You got right to the points and explained the theory well.
"Qwansequences"
Hmm?
Consequences is based upon Teleological Ethics
Kant-sequences.
your video has good explanation on cantian theory... thank you
Thanks!
You're welcome. Thanks for watching!
Deontology to me just seems like consequentialism with extra steps. How does the deontologist arrive at their moral claims in the first place as to what actions they deem good or bad? Well, at some point in the past, they must have examined the consequences of certain actions, and THEN assigned the values of goodness or badness to the actions that produced those consequences. But wrapped up in the Deontoligical claims is an intrinsically Consequentialist framework; otherwise, if someone said “deontologically, murder is permissible,” you would have no refutation other than appealing to the bad consequences of this action. Or you could appeal to a different deontological system, but to say which one is “better”, you would also have to appeal to their outcomes (read: consequences).
Helped me so much!
Awesome! Thanks for watching!
Is this existence necessary, hence deontological, the removal of being... just to see what we want to do. He will take it to the extreme if it's intentional. Intentionality is when ethics and rules are reversed then isolated to isolate then amplified with beliefs and idea's. Like crucifixion.
Is deontology the same thing as normative ethics?
D ynamin No. Deontology is one of the views in normative ethics (along with virtue ethics and consequentialism).
Deontology is an abdication of moral responsibility.
HEY CARNADES, Inspiringphilosophy has made a video where he tried to debunk YOUR argument against logic. PLEASE make a video response to him as his objection is so bad it needs to be debunked. If you dont, I’ll make it myself to debunk him, the video is called “the laws of logic defended”
Inspiringphilosophy is such a joke of a channel
Where is that video? Or are you blowing steam?
Debunk it yourself if its so bad.
@@nisancastelan2411 really? How so? Seems pretty knowledgeable to me. Maybe you'd like to give some examples or engage them in debate yourself?
Thank you!
thanks
so helpful, thank you.
So I need a theory as an umbrella to support my deontology in order to define the rule set? What theories can I choose from?
An isolate who can't break the rules like the group, or deontological ethics are a list of rules that breach categorical ethics. So it would the churches rules applied to kant himself he is an isolate the church has already breached ethics. Rape can be cryptic. Especially when you get paid for it. We are always breaking an implicit set of rules.
what is inference?
I think of it as the way fact (and mabye other stuff idk) interact. But I am not sure that is correct. However, when you say rules of inferances that would aim at the rules you use to work with a set of things.
www.wikiwand.com/en/Inference
In logic for example. If I say that this:
p=>q (p implies q)
becomes this:
(-p) v q (It is true that p is false or that q is true)
I would be using a rule of inference sometimes called material implication.
I think inference is this proces
Batman is a deontology
Many superheros conform to deontological principles, or at least look more deontological than utilitarian (not killing the villain even though that might reduce overall suffering in the long run). I don't know if this is so much an affirmation of a particular theory as it is a plot device to keep the villains around from story to story.
I love deontological life
Is virtue ethics the same as axiology? 😂
Axiology is more broad (czcams.com/video/YLXTOyKz6eY/video.html), it is more like value theory than a particular normative theory of right and wrong.
0.25x