Content

Moral philosophy is the foundation upon which the study of ethics rest and it is
impossible to develop a framework of ethical decision making without evaluating normative
ethical standards derived from moral philosophy (Singhapakdi, Marta, Rao and Curtis,
2001).Generally, philosophers classify moral philosophies under two main headings which are
teleology and deontology (Barnett, Bass, Brown 1994, Ferrell and Gresham, 1985,Forsyth,
1992, Hunt and Vitell, 1986 and Murphy and Laczniak, 1981). According to Hunt and Vitell,
1986, deontological theories focus on the specific actions or behaviors of an individual, whereas
teleological theories focus on the consequences of the actions or behaviors. In other words, the
key issue in deontological theories is the inherent goodness and badness or rightness and
wrongness of an action, whereas teleological theories concentrate on the degree of goodness or
badness embodied in the consequences of the action.
Deontology is a moral theory that holds that acts are inherently right or wrong,
irrespective of the consequences of the acts. A central theme among deontological theorists is
that people have a duty to do those things that are inherently right. Namely, that duty is to take
the right action. Deontology may be the most preferred ethical philosophy today. Ideas of
deontology came to the general public through church, the Boy and Girl Scout pledges, ethical
codes, and even the military (Reidenbach & Robin, 1990). Besides, deontology is associated
mostly with Immanuel Kant who argued that the highest good was the good will, and morally
right actions are those carried out with a sense of duty (Kant, 1998 (1781; 1785)). Thus, it is the
intention behind an action rather than its consequences that make that action good (Bowie,
2002).
Deontology focuses purely on the intrinsic rightness of an action, without regard for its
consequences. Derived from two Greek words: deion, from dei, meaning 'must'; and logos,
meaning 'the word' deontology is in essence the account of the musts. Deontologists therefore
believe in the absolute necessity of duty, irrespective of the rewards or punishments that may
follow. So, for example, the deontologist would not tell a lie, even if by so doing he might save
the lives of many people. Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804) insisted that human reasoning and good
will are necessary for consistent moral behaviour and he defined the good will as the will that
obeys the universal moral law (Rossouw, 2002: 51). He believed that some duties are absolute,
e.g. the duty to tell the truth, but others not, e.g. the duty to excercise and he therefore
distinguished two forms of imperative the categorical an instruction to act that is not
dependent on anything - and the hypothetical a conditional instruction to act. Kants
Categorical Imperative requires people to always act in such a way that they can, at the same
time, wish that everyone would act in that way. Thus, the act of telling a lie would be wrong,
irrespective of the motive for or consequence of the act. This is in contrast to a hypothetical
imperative that depends on some other condition, say a desire for example one should go to
church only if you want to. Kant also believed persons should never be used as a means to an
end, and consequently he developed his Principle of Ends, which states that people should act in
such a way as to treat humanity always as an end and never as a means only. For deontologists,
moral actions are always rational actions, so the primary value of these imperatives is to provide
a way to reason with the question of, What is right? In practice, this can be achieved by
applying the maxim: If everyone did this, would it still be okay? Deontology is not unlike
virtue ethics, in the sense that as a moral theory its goal is for everyone to act virtuously at all
times. The difference is that it seeks to prescribe moral duties by promoting an imperative to act
morally, assuming that people will not, of themselves, always act in virtuous ways. It conforms
to most of the minimum conditions for morality, in particular responsibility, concern for others,
consistency, universality, and reason.

On the other hand, utilitarianism is another teleological theory of ethics which is the idea
that an action is determined solely by its contribution to happiness or pleasure as agreed among
all people. Utilitarianism is commonly described by the phrase of the greatest good for the
greatest number of people. Thus, it is also known as the greatest happiness principle.
According to Reidenbach & Robin, 1990, utilitarianism forces the decision-maker to consider all
of the outcomes of an action or inaction and to weigh one against another to determine that
which is best for society. In addition, Reidenbach and Robin (1990) argued the general public
learns about the ideas of utilitarianism through the democratic process, which is focused on
majority rule.

Utilitarianism represents the dominant and most influential normative teleological or
consequential ethical philosophy, and its different forms incorporate various concepts of utility.
Jeremy Bentham (1789) and John Stuart Mill (1863) embraced a "hedonistic" conception of
"pleasure" or "happiness." Pluralistic utilitarians have developed an approach that added a list of
other intrinsically good things to pleasure, such as knowledge, freedom, friendship, etc.
Preference utilitarianism proposes a firmer basis for theories of utility, based on peoples' desires,
choices, and behavior rather than on pleasure (Snoeyenbos & Humber, 2002). Utilitarianism
focuses on ends and not on the means required to achieving those ends, and it takes into account
all present and future benefits and harms that accrue or might accrue to anyone who is affected
by the action, including items that may be difficult to evaluate accurately (Schumann, 2001).
According to the utilitarian moral principle, an act is morally acceptable if it produces the
greatest net benefit to society as a whole, where the net social benefit equals social benefits
minus social costs (Bentham, 1789; Mill, 1957; Brandt, 1979; Rachels, 1999; Velasquez, 1998;
Schumann, 2001; Cavanagh, 1981). Utilitarianism regards the welfare of any single individual as
no more or less important than the welfare of any other individual, but it does not assume that all
individuals should be treated in the same way.