Question

critique this and write one question relating to this post

The primary difference between consequentialist and non-consequentialist is that consequentialism is a theory that judges the right and wrong based off the consequences that come with it. While non-consequentialism judges the right and wrong of something not based off its consequences but based off the actions that was produced. One of the major theories associated with consequentialist is utilitarian which defines doing good acts that will help produce the most number of good. One objection that might be made to this theory is that sacrificing one person to save more people can be an ethical problem especially in medicine. Our goal in medicine is to save as much lives as possible without having to sacrifice anyone else. One major theories associated with non-consequentialism is deontology which is when a person believes people should do their job. The theory suggests that people who follow the rules and do their duty. For example, always telling the truth to your coworkers and patients about their condition. It is the nurse’s duty to follow the rule and tell the truth. An objection to this theory could be having to lie for the sake of others. For example, if you were locked in a closet and the serial killer is outside the door and needs a passcode to enter the closet. Would you lie to them about the passcode or according to deontology, do you need to tell them the truth and give them the real passcode.

Answer 1

By studying the above article, according to deontology, it is good telling truth for the sake of others. As per the above example, If a serial killer is outside the door of your closet do not reveal the pass code to enter that person inside of the closet. I you are revealing pass code according to your ethics, you are presenting keys in thief hand as a gift. It is complete stupidity and don't make a sense.

Does it make sense to open up secrets to a unknown person?