Three Frameworks of Ethics: Comparing Consequentialism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics with Applications
Moral philosophy’s (ethics’) core questions: what is the right action? What makes actions right or wrong? How to decide in moral dilemmas? Three main systematic frameworks each have internal logical consistency and intuitive difficulties.
## Utilitarianism (Consequentialism): Greatest Happiness for the Greatest Number
Systematized by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill: an action’s moral rightness is determined by consequences — the action producing the greatest overall happiness (utility) is right.
**The Trolley Problem**: a runaway trolley will kill 5 people; you can pull a lever to divert it, killing 1 on another track. Utilitarianism’s answer is direct: pull — 5 > 1. But critics note extreme conclusions: if executing an innocent person prevents five deaths in a riot, utilitarianism seems to support it — challenging the intuition that “innocents should not be used as means.”
## Kantian Deontology: Categorical Imperative and Human Dignity
Kant proposed a fundamentally different framework: an action’s rightness lies not in consequences but in whether it follows universalizable moral law (duty). The **Categorical Imperative** first formulation: act only according to maxims you could simultaneously will to be universal law. “Lying for personal benefit” — if everyone did this, lying would lose its meaning (no one would believe anything), so this maxim cannot be universalized; thus lying is always wrong for Kant, regardless of consequences. Second formulation: always treat persons as ends in themselves, never merely as means. Kantian ethics provides philosophical foundations for modern human rights concepts.
## Virtue Ethics: Becoming a Person of Virtue
Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics asks not “is this action right?” but “what kind of person does this action? What kind of person should I become?” Virtues (courage, honesty, justice) are stable character traits cultivated through practice; the mean between extremes is virtue’s location (courage is between cowardice and recklessness). Contemporary philosophers Philippa Foot and Alasdair MacIntyre (*After Virtue*) revived virtue ethics in the 20th century.
