What is the fundamental difference between consequential and categorical moral reasoning?

During Michael Sandel’s lecture, the two moral reasoning’s he described was Consequentialist and Categorical moral reasoning. According to Sandel, Consequentialist moral reasoning locates morality in the consequence of an act, while Categorical moral reasoning located morality in certain duties and rights.

What is consequential reasoning?

Consequential reasoning involves looking at the consequences of an action or decision to determine its moral value. This type of reasoning has application in making moral judgments in personal decisions as well as the fields of political, business, medical and engineering ethics.

What is the difference between Kant’s categorical imperative and consequentialism?

i. Concept of Consequentialism as ethical theory is based upon nature of consequences be it utility, welfare, or pleasure. Kantianism is based upon moral imperatives which are absolute.

What is categorical moral reasoning example?

In this type, a person places the actions in a certain categories and chooses the least evil of the lot. In this case, it can be said that killing one sailor was better than letting all the sailors die of starvation.

What is categorical reasoning?

Categorical reasoning uses logic to reason about whether a specific concept belongs in a particular category or classification.

What is consequentialism example?

Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges whether or not something is right by what its consequences are. For instance, most people would agree that lying is wrong. Two examples of consequentialism are utilitarianism and hedonism.

What are examples of categorical imperative?

A categorical imperative, instead of taking an if-then form, is an absolute command, such as, “Do A,” or “You ought to do A.” Examples of categorical imperatives would be “You shouldn’t kill,” “You ought to help those in need,” or “Don’t steal.” It doesn’t matter what your wants or goals are; you should follow a …

Why was Kant not a consequentialist?

Kant’s theory is an important example of a purely non-consequentialist approach to ethics. Kant held that only when we act from duty does our action have moral worth (not just coincide, like giving someone back correct change after they left to avoid legal trouble). Good will is the only thing that is good in itself.

What is Consequentialism example?

What is an example of categorical logic?

A categorical syllogism is a syllogism that contains only categorical sentences. Here is an example: All Dogs are mammals. All mammals are animals.

Is Peter Singer a consequentialist?

Historically, hedonistic utilitarianism is the paradigmatic example of a consequentialist moral theory. However, some contemporary utilitarians, such as Peter Singer, are concerned with maximizing the satisfaction of preferences, hence preference utilitarianism.

What is the difference between consequentialist and Nonconsequentialist?

A consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the consequences that action has. A non-consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on properties intrinsic to the action, not on its consequences.