If the ethical decision-making consequensalism in education is often applied to the types of guides to the theory of action based on relativism. Philosophers and ethicists teleogy the term, the Greek word telos, meaning end (Beckner 2004). Consequentialism, the term was used to (1) a theory of liability, but is now generally (2) a theory of right and wrong uses. (1) of the opinion that the agent is also responsible for the consequences of any act intended and unintended consequences, but expected (Anscombe 1958).
Ethical theories that under the classification of consequentialism that the rightness or wrongness of an action must fall in order to represent the consequences of the action shall be taken into consideration. In other words, the consequences are usually to the extent that they serve some good considered intrinsic. The most common form of consequentialism is utilitarianism (consequentialism, social), which, it was necessary in such a way as to produce the greatest happiness of the greatest number of law does. Consequentialism is the name given to the ethical theories that have the moral right, wrong, and the need to focus exclusively on the value of the consequences (impact, outcomes), what do we argue hang. Ethical egoism states that the moral right, wrong, and the obligation depends only on the value of the consequences for the agent (Brandt, 1959).
Utilitarianism (Lyon 1992) suggests that the moral right, wrong, and the need to focus exclusively on the value of the consequences for all, both the agent (and thus denying altruism, ethics) and all other related (so deny ethical egoism) . Consequentialism says we should do whatever maximizes good consequences. It is not in matter itself, which kind of what we do. What matters is that we maximize good results. A popular genre of consequentialism is classical (hedonistic) utilitarianism. This view, so that we always do what maximizes the balance of pleasure over pain for all affected by our actions. This view could be based, the golden rule that guides us about the happiness and misery of others affected. Or it could be based on the will of God, self-evident truths, or our personal feelings.
Consequentialism’s basic idea that the ethical status of the law depends on the value of their consequences. (Beckner, 2004). The concept of the consequences of an action is central to the theory. The first feature to note about this kind of consequentialism that to allow a wide range of issues from such consequences. In fact, any situation, which is also a result of an action can be called a consequence of this Act. An indication of the result are the states that by this Act. For example, if an action fulfills the promise, the state of things kept that promise was the result of this action requires is that you act to maximize the value and the further consequences. Take an overview of such consequences immediately makes a potentially different responses to hypothetical examples.
On the other hand, is the opposite of what consequentialism says deontologism ethical position that it is possible for us, an act or a law justified by other means in addition to the consideration of the moral goodness or identify despite the consequences. “Denotology The term comes from the Greek word deon, meaning” duty “and logos, meaning” logic. “With this system of things, the FOCIS value of the act or the type of action,” (Pojman, 2002, p.107). Deontological moral systems are mainly due to the emphasis on respect for independent moral rules or duties. So to make the right moral decisions, we need to understand just what are our moral obligations and the rules of correct functions. If we follow our duty, we act morally. If we do not do our duty, we are behaving immorally. Deontological moral systems also place some weight on the reasons why certain actions are performed. So just to the rules of correct morality is often not enough – instead, we must have the right motivation. This would allow a person not to be immoral, even if they have violated a moral rules, but only as long as they do not and responsibilities objectively and absolutely, must be determined subjectively.
Some examples of ethical theories of ethics include: God’s command to one of the most common forms of moral ethics theories are those that derive their set of moral obligations of a deity. An action is morally right if it is established in accordance with the rules and obligations of God. Duty Theories: An action is morally right if it accords with some list of tasks and duties. Theories of Rights is an action that is morally right if the rights that all people (or at least all members of society) are equivalent. This is sometimes called libertarianism, the political philosophy that people should be legally free to do what they want as long as their actions do not infringe on the rights of others. Contractualism: an action is morally right if it complies with the rules that rational moral agents would agree to observe when entering a social relationship (contract) for mutual benefit. Finally, the monistic ethics, if the action is morally correct if it agrees with a simple principle, that all ethical principles leads subsidiary.
Argues McCain R. (1999) describes a mixed consequentialism is rationally and ethically justifiable. To rationally is to gather the views to which we are engaged in advance, to be moral is to the views that should be taken in advance. Mixed-Consequentialism refers to moral decisions can not depend on the consequences of all time. Mixed-consequentialism requires the reasons for the appropriateness of actions in situations. Mixed-Consequentialism is a combination of both consequentialism and deontologism and it only stands to reason that each approach has applications in various situations. “The situation and circumstances specific variables must be carefully checked and adjusted according to the decisions” (Beckner, 2004, p. 151).
In short, institutions are with the idea that she is confused, to make decisions that are solely the result of the action or related institutions should be left the virtues and character of the person to whom the decision. If institutions follow very consequentialism, then they can make decisions necessary for the common good, and despite the consequences that should have been the decision of the individual or a particular concern for the person doing it is driven. We separate the decision of the person.
