The utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics we have studied so far provide important frameworks for judging social issues. Let us organize how to balance efficiency and justice, freedom and equality, and how to use the three ethical perspectives appropriately.
Basic Knowledge
There are three main ways of looking at social issues ethically. First, consequentialism (utilitarianism): it judges right and wrong based on the total amount of happiness or unhappiness produced as a result of an action. Second, deontology (Kant): it judges actions based on their motives and duties, determining that anything contrary to universal rules is morally impermissible. Third, virtue ethics (Aristotle): rather than focusing on the action itself, it asks “What kind of person should the agent be?” and holds that a virtuous person performs virtuous actions. In considering how society should be structured, we are also continually asked to balance efficiency (producing the greatest results with limited resources) and justice (ensuring that processes and distributions are equal and impartial), as well as freedom (the scope for individual choice) and equality (equal opportunities and outcomes). These often have a trade-off relationship in which pursuing one thoroughly sacrifices the other.
Consequentialism (Results-Based Ethics) (The position that judges the rightness or wrongness of an action by its results. Utilitarianism is its representative form.)
Deontology (The position that judges right and wrong based on an action’s motives and duties. Kant is its representative.)
Virtue Ethics (An ethical theory focusing on the character and virtues of the agent. Aristotle is its representative.)
Efficiency and Justice (A trade-off always considered in social policy. Prioritizing efficiency tends to produce inequality.)
Freedom and Equality (Basic values that are difficult to reconcile and form opposing axes. Complete freedom produces disparities, while complete equality restricts freedom.)
Trade-Off (A conflicting relationship in which increasing one decreases the other.)
Deeper Exploration (Background and Significance)
When considering real-world social issues, such as taxation, healthcare, education, and the environment, it is often difficult to make judgments based on only one ethical position. For example, when considering the issue of tax increases, a utilitarian perspective might say, “They are justified if they increase the happiness of society as a whole.” From a deontological perspective, “Paying taxes as a duty arising from promises and contracts should be universally observed.” From a virtue ethics perspective, the view would be, “Act as a virtuous citizen who contributes to the common good.” By combining multiple perspectives in this way, we can deepen our understanding of social issues and make more appropriate judgments. How to realize the four values of freedom, equality, efficiency, and justice is at the core of every policy debate in a democratic society.
- The three frameworks for ethical judgment are “consequences (utilitarianism), duty (Kant), and virtue (Aristotle).”
- The same issue can lead to different conclusions from the three positions.
- Efficiency and justice are often in a trade-off relationship.
- Maximizing freedom produces inequality in outcomes, while enforcing equality restricts freedom.
- Rawls’s difference principle provides a theoretical basis for arguments that prioritize “justice over efficiency.”
- Combining multiple ethical perspectives deepens insight into real-world social issues.
- In a democratic society, each citizen is expected to understand and discuss these values.
Points to Note (Easily Confused)
① Efficiency and justice may conflict, but they are not necessarily always opposed. Designing appropriate institutions to achieve both is a policy challenge. ② Equality includes “equality of opportunity (making the starting line equal)” and “equality of outcome (making results equal),” and policies differ greatly depending on which is emphasized. ③ Virtue ethics focuses on “the character of the agent,” but this does not mean that “anything is permissible as long as the person has a good character.” ④ Understand that the three ethical positions are not mutually exclusive and can be used complementarily.
Practice
- Compare consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics in 1–2 sentences each from the perspective of “what criteria are used to evaluate an action.”
- Explain the claim that “freedom and equality have a trade-off relationship,” using a specific example of social policy.
- Choose one familiar social issue, such as a scholarship system, consumption tax, or environmental regulation, and discuss it from each of the three perspectives: utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics.