Basics of Deontology
Deontology is a branch of moral philosophy that reduces normativity to the conformity with duty. The right action is that which aligns with one’s duty. Deontology therefore judges how we act, and not necessarily who we are.
For example, Kant’s Categorical Imperative states that we ought to act as if what we are doing is a universal principle. If I steal a book from the library, then I must accept that everyone can steal a book from the library. However, if everyone did this, the library would not survive. Therefore, stealing a book from the library, under the Categorical Imperative, would lead to the dissolution of the library. And this would preclude others from stealing books from the library. Therefore it is not universal, and therefore we ought not to steal books.
If we take the Categorical Imperative to be our duty, then Deontology tells us that our actions are right only insofar as our actions conform to it. My actions do not necessarily constitute who I am. I am not a “good” person for conducting “right” actions. In fact, if my duty was to conduct some “bad” action, using Deontology, I would still be in the right.
Consider the famous Nazi at-the-door scenario. Imagine you are hiding Jews from the Nazis in your house, and a Nazi approaches your door. He asks you whether you are hiding Jews. Due to the Categorical Imperative, you might believe that lying is universally wrong, and therefore, it would be right to tell the Nazi that you are hiding Jews. However, by doing so, you are leading the Jews to their death, which is bad. Therefore, Deontology puts the “right” prior to the “good.”
Deontology is often contrasted with Consequentialism. Consequentialism is the normative moral theory that we judge the rightness of our actions based on the goodness of their consequences. For example, I believe my abstinence from eating cake today is good because then I will be less fat tomorrow, and being less fat is good for me. The pleasure of being thin outweighs (no pun intended) the pleasure I receive from eating cake. Consequentialism is often compared to Utilitarianism, which argues that we ought to act in a way that maximizes the goodness of our consequences.
However, Consequentialism falls victim to a very specific case: doing something bad to achieve something good. For example, consider the Organ Donor Hypothetical Case: consider you are in a hospital, and five patients will die without receiving organs. You can kill a nurse and harvest her organs to save the five patients. Using consequentialism, you could argue your action is right: you save 5 lives by taking 1. Personally, I can’t accept this argument. Murdering someone is something I could never pull myself up to do because it goes against my principles. Thus it becomes deontological. From the consequentialist view, the right action is to commit murder. However, from a deontological view, in which you lead a life that conforms to the principle that one ought not to murder, you should not.
Overall, Deontology gives us a way to justify the righteousness of our actions. We have a sacred duty to ourselves and others that we must act within. However, our duty does not necessarily maximize the “Good” in the world. As long as one is consistent with their own principles, we act rightly and being good becomes secondary.
