Comparing Rules Versus Consequences, and The Re-Emergence of Virtue Ethics

p {margin: 0; padding: 0;} .ft00{font-size:18px;font-family:NimbusSansBold;color:#000000;} .ft01{font-size:15px;font-family:OpenSymbol;color:#000000;} .ft02{font-size:18px;font-family:NimbusSans;color:#000000;} COMPARING RULES VERSUS CONSEQUENCES, AND THE RE-EMERGENCE OF VIRTUE ETHICS I. Comparing Rules versus Consequences  Deontological (duty/rule-based) vs consequentialist (outcome-based) theories have disagreements, but also similarities.  Kantian duty can seem utilitarian; utilitarianism can incorporate duty.  Act-deontology developed to address criticisms of rule-deontology. Still not very popular due to its situational uncertainties.  Rule-utilitarianism developed to address act-utilitarianism criticisms. Works better for consequentialists.  Disagreements play out in politics - e.g. cost-benefit analysis vs duty-based protections. II. The Problem of Dirty Hands  When is it acceptable to violate moral rules for a greater good?  Can be justified in supreme emergencies, but remains contentious.  Specific role principles may override general ones. III. The Re-emergence of Virtue Ethics  Dissatisfaction with deontology and utilitarianism overlooking personal factors.  Corresponds to psychology identifying Big Five personality factors relevant to ethics.  Virtue ethics focuses on character over rules or consequences.  Requires conceptual analysis of virtues. Influential work by Macintyre.  Popular in business ethics and moral psychology.