Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
NORMATIVE THEORY, A non-consequentialist simply claims that (non-moral)…
-
A non-consequentialist simply claims that (non-moral) goodness or badness of the consequences is not the only thing that determines moral rightness or wrongness. It judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on properties intrinsic to the action, not on its consequences.
These claim that morally appropriate (or ethical) actions, policies, practices, institutions, and others are those that have good consequences or outcomes.
Fairness is determined according to whether everyone has been free to acquire rewards for their efforts.
Fairness is determined according to whether the consequences (positive and negative) are distributed in a just manner, according to some underlying principles such as need or merit.
Human rights are the basic, unalienable entitlements that are inherent to all human beings, without exception.
It is the simultaneously fair treatment of individuals in a given situation with the result that everybody gets what they deserve.
An action can only be right if the rule guiding that behavior should be
Consistently followed by everyone in all cases, without contradiction.
Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your person or in that of another,
always as an end and never as a means only.
The rules guiding actions should be universally lawgiving. That is, people have to be acceptable to every rational human being.
, an action is morally right if the decision-maker freely decides to pursue either their desires (short-term) or their interests (long-term).
an action is morally right if it results in the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people affected by the action
“To choose under the ‘veil of ignorance’”: ignorant about one’s place in society, take the position of the least well-off member