Kranak, J. (2019). “Kantian Deontology”. In G. Matthews (Ed.), Introduction to Philosophy: Ethics (pp. 53-64) (Website) (PDF ) https://press.rebus.community/intro-to-phil-ethics/chapter/kantian-deonto

Expert Solution Preview

Introduction: In this assignment, we will discuss the flaws of deontology, how a deontologist would approach the issue of organ donors on the black market, and whether using deontology can always include everyone.

1. Reflect on what flaws you may find with deontology. Refer to actual quotes and page numbers in your reading.

Deontology is a moral philosophy that emphasizes the duty or intention behind an action, rather than the consequences of the action. One flaw of deontology is that it can be inflexible in certain situations, as actions are judged solely based on the motive behind them. For example, Kant states in his writing that lying is always wrong, even if it is to save an innocent life (Kranak, 2019, p.57). This inflexibility can lead to absurd moral conclusions where an action that clearly benefits society is unjustified simply because it violates a certain principle.

2. So, after thinking about how a utilitarian would approach the issue of organ donors on the black market, how would a deontologist approach that same issue and why?

Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy that prioritizes the greatest good for the greatest number, whereas deontology emphasizes rules and duties. In the case of organ donors on the black market, a utilitarian would argue that legalizing the sale of organs would increase the supply of organs and save lives, outweighing any negative consequences. However, a deontologist would argue that the sale of organs is inherently wrong because it treats the human body as a commodity and violates the dignity of human life. From a deontological perspective, donating an organ should be an act of selflessness, not a transaction.

3. Explain whether using deontology can always include everyone no matter what.

Using deontology as a moral philosophy can exclude certain groups of people, depending on the principles that are being emphasized. For example, Kant’s Categorical Imperative, which is a fundamental principle of deontology, states that you should act in a way that treats humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means (Kranak, 2019, p.55). However, this principle does not address the issue of how to treat non-human animals, and therefore excludes animals from moral consideration. In addition, deontological principles can conflict with each other, resulting in moral uncertainty and exclusion of certain individuals or groups.