Dimensions of Ethics

In this section, we will discuss the dimensions of ethics that help in investigating how ethical conduct is determined in given circumstances. There are four major dimensions of ethics Meta-ethics, Normative or Prescriptive Ethics, Descriptive Ethics and Applied Ethics.

Normative (Prescriptive) Ethics

Normative ethics is the study of ethical theories that prescribe how people ought to act. Norms: Social expectations that guide our behaviour, and are a form of social control.

Its various characteristics are as follows: 

1. It examines standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions. It focuses on the explicit question of ‘what people ought to do’.
2. It also focuses on how people can decide what the ‘correct’ moral actions are.
3. Finally, it suggests punishment when a person deviates from the path of ideals. It justifies punishing a person who disturbs social and moral order. 

It can be grouped into 2 broad categories: 

• Consequentialism evaluates the morality of actions based on their outcomes, emphasizing results over intent. For example, the Ethical theory of utilitarianism.
• Non–consequentialism, on the other hand, assesses actions based on their inherent nature, principles, or duties, regardless of the consequences. For example deontological approach.

For example: In bioethics, we question the ethical, social, and legal issues that arise in biomedicine and biomedical research. Normative ethics prescribe what one should do in biomedical research for example it is against the exploitation of animals in biomedical research. 

Consequentialism

Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges the morality of an action based on its outcomes or consequences. It holds that an action is right if it leads to the best overall results. It means the following: 

1. Ends approach – The moral worth of an action depends solely on its consequences. If the end is well all is well. For example, if independence is the final goal for India, then, any approach including violence might be valid.
2. Maximization Principle – Actions should aim to maximize good outcomes (e.g., happiness, well-being).
3. Impartiality – The effects on all individuals are considered equally.

Teleological approach

Consequentialism is often also referred to as the Teleological approach.  The teleological approach in ethics evaluates the morality of actions based on their consequences or the end goals they achieve. Derived from the Greek word telos (meaning “end” or “purpose”), this approach holds that an action is morally right if it leads to desirable outcomes. For example, according to the teleological approach, one must never cheat because that would create an insecure society. Thus, we need to make laws punishing those who cheat.

Types of Consequentialism:

We have several theories based on the ideas of Consequentialism: 

1. Utilitarianism – Thinkers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill state that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or utility in society. Therefore, the poor must be taxed at a lower rate than the rich because this gives “greatest happiness to the greatest number” of people. It has two types:

• Act Utilitarianism – Assesses each action individually based on its consequences. 
• Rule Utilitarianism – Advocates following rules that generally lead to the greatest good.

Utilitarianism is the best theory put forth by consequentialists.

1. Ethical Egoism – Argues that actions should maximize individual benefit. Ayn Rand, a key proponent, argued that self-interest leads to personal growth, innovation, and societal progress. Thomas Hobbes suggested that social cooperation arises from self-preservation. Ethical egoists claim that altruism is unsustainable and that prioritizing personal well-being naturally benefits society. 

However, critics argue that it ignores moral duties toward others and could justify harmful actions if they serve individual interests.

1. Rule Consequentialism – Suggests that actions should follow rules that generally lead to the best consequences. However, the moral rules should be designed based on their overall consequences, rather than evaluating each action separately.

For example, Rule Consequentialists might still say that violence is not the right path to achieving independence, because if a society starts justifying violence to achieve its aims, it will soon encounter anarchy which would take forever to remove. For example, the Afghani society.

1. Preference Consequentialism – Argues that the best action is the one that satisfies the most individual preferences.

Criticism of Consequentialism:

Consequentialism provides a practical approach to ethics by focusing on results, but it also raises challenges related to justice, rights, and unintended consequences.

• It may justify morally questionable acts if they produce good outcomes. Is the killing of Sarabjit Singh OK, even if it brought pleasure to all of Pakistan? Sarabjit Singh was an Indian farmer who strayed into Pakistan in a drunken state and was caught there by the authorities and then tried in a Lahore Bombing case.
• Predicting consequences accurately is often difficult. Who can tell if the use of violence for quicker independence is good in the long run or not?
• It may ignore individual rights and justice in pursuit of the overall good.

Non-consequentialism

Non-consequentialism, also known as deontological ethics, evaluates the morality of actions based on their intrinsic nature rather than their consequences. It holds that certain actions are inherently right or wrong, regardless of their outcomes. It means the following:

1. Morality needs enforcement: All ‘deontological’ theories agree that there must exist some rule or law that ‘enforces’ moral value.
2. Intuitively known Universal Moral Rules: Morality is natural to the human person, and is intuitively known to us; whether as ‘conscience’ (Ockham), ‘moral sense’ (Shaftesbury), or the ‘right reason’ (Thomas Aquinas and Suarez). For example, some actions (e.g., lying, killing) are considered wrong in all circumstances.
3. Intent Matters – The rightness of an action depends on intention rather than results.

Deontological Approach

Deontology is a moral theory that judges actions based on whether they follow a set of rules, rather than the consequences of those actions. The word “deontology” comes from the Greek word deon, which means “duty”. For example, Cheating is wrong because it is evil. That it!

Major Non-Consequentialist Theories

1. Kantian Ethics (Deontology) – Proposed by Immanuel Kant, it argues that moral actions follow universal moral laws, guided by the categorical imperative. Morality is such duty (imperative) that you are commanded by it, and you cannot opt out of it or claim that it does not apply to you. Kant wants us to follow the maxim: “Act only according to that maxim which you can will to be a universal law”. 
2. Divine Command Theory – It suggests that moral rules come from divine authority, and actions are right or wrong based on religious teachings.
3. Natural Rights Theory – Proposed by thinkers like John Locke, it holds that individuals have inherent rights (e.g., life, liberty) that must be respected, regardless of consequences.

Criticism

• Rigid and Absolute – This may lead to moral dilemmas where strict rules cause harm.
• Ignores Outcomes – This can result in impractical decisions that neglect real-world consequences.
• Conflict Between Duties – Different moral rules may clash, making ethical choices difficult.

Despite its challenges, non-consequentialism remains a crucial ethical framework, emphasizing moral integrity, human dignity, and duty-based ethics.

Case Study: Breaking any issue into Utilitarian and Deontological point of view

We can break any ethical issue into its utilitarian and Deontological perspectives. Let us understand this with an example of the LGBT marriage issue – whether to legalize same-sex marriage. This decision affects multiple stakeholders, including LGBTQ+ individuals, religious groups, policymakers, and society at large. 1. Utilitarian point of view: The utilitarian view assesses same-sex marriage based on its overall impact on societal happiness and well-being. Utility of allowing Same-Sex Marriage: Securing relationships – Recognizing same-sex marriages promotes stable relationships, benefiting families and communities. Without this recognition, couples might be living without any legal protection that is available in ordinary legal marriages. Social Inclusion: Legal recognition provides LGBTQ+ individuals equal rights, fostering social inclusion and emotional well-being. Harms (Counterarguments): Legal and Institutional Adjustments – Changing laws, including inheritance and adoption rights, may involve administrative challenges. It will alienate other members of the society. The Utilitarian Judgment: If allowing same-sex marriage leads to greater societal well-being without causing significant harm, it is ethically justified under utilitarianism. 2. Deontological Perspective   Deontology evaluates same-sex marriage based on moral duties and rights rather than consequences. Moral Justifications: Freedom – Denying same-sex marriage violates individuals’ autonomy and freedom to choose their partners. Equality – If marriage is a fundamental right, it must be granted to all individuals equally. Right to Marry – Every individual has the moral right to marry, regardless of gender, upholding principles of fairness. Ethical Violations (Counterarguments): Marriage is a social Norm – It is a social norm that recognizes and gives social acceptance to relationships and therefore it must abide by the existing norms. Thus, religious-based ethical perspectives argue that marriage should align with traditional definitions. Ethical Judgment: If fairness, autonomy, and human dignity are universal moral duties, then same-sex marriage is ethically justified. If religious or traditional norms are prioritized as absolute moral duties, opposition may arise. Editor’s Note: By considering both teleological and deontological points of view, you can be sure that you have considered most of the dimensions of your case. We will take up various Case studies in our Case study section in this book to practice this approach better.

Descriptive Ethics

Descriptive ethics aims to find out people’s beliefs about values, which actions are right and wrong and which characteristics of moral agents are virtuous. 

• It is an empirical investigation of people’s ethical ideals or what actions are condemned in a society. 
• It studies the history and evolution of ethics. For example – it states the history of various institutions like family or marriage. 

Descriptive ethics is about what motivates pro-social behaviour, how people reason about ethics, what people believe to have overridden importance, and how societies regulate behaviour (such as by punishing people for doing certain actions). 

For example, when we see the previous example, descriptive ethics describe various norms followed in biomedical ethics. 

Normative Ethics	Descriptive Ethics
Normative ethics is the study of ethical action	Descriptive Ethics is the study of people’s views about moral beliefs
It analyses how people ought to act	It analyses people’s moral values, standards and behaviour
Attempts to evaluate or create moral standards and prescribe how people ought to act.	Describe how people behave and what types of moral standards they claim to follow.

Meta-Ethics:

Meta-ethics is defined as the study of the origin and meaning of ethical concepts. (‘meta’ means after or beyond). It seeks to understand the nature of ethical values. It is the study of moral thought and moral language. 

• Rather than addressing questions about what practices are right and wrong, and what our obligations to other people or future generations are (questions of so-called ‘normative’ ethics), meta-ethics asks what morality actually is. 
• Meta ethics does not prescribe any particular action or values rather it determines the validity of theories advanced in Normative Ethics. 
• The task of Meta ethics is of analysis as it analyses with origin of the ethical concepts themselves. 
• It is purely descriptive and abstract. Thus, instead of asking what actions are good or bad, it asks a more basic question of what ‘Good’ is or ‘Bad’.

For example, when we talk of bioethics, meta-ethics will not answer the questions of right or wrong. Rather it tries to define the essential meaning and nature of the problem being discussed. So, it will examine ‘what does it mean to ask whether genetic research is morally permissible?’ ‘What are the sources that we should consider in determining the ethical nature of genetic engineering? – is it god or the human-made laws?’

Applied Ethics

Applied ethics is the branch of ethics, which consists of the analysis of specific, controversial moral issues such as abortion, animal rights or euthanasia. 

• It attempts to apply ethical theory to real-life situations. Thus it is a practical approach to ethics.

• It is concerned with how people can achieve moral outcomes in specific situations. 
• It helps to use knowledge of moral principles to present dilemmas.

In the following sections we will discuss various ethical issues in different areas:

1. Environmental Ethics
2. Ethics in technology such as in Biotechnology, AI etc.
3. Business Ethics and Corporate Ethics
4. Medical Ethics
5. Ethics in Administration
6. Media Ethics etc.

We will cover few of these topics in this chapter and the rest in the next few chapters.

FAQs related to Dimensions of Ethics