Justifying Murder Through Non-consequentialist Means

From a Utilitarian point of view it seems easy to kill people and save millions of lives. But since I dismiss resultantism, I think that it is not enough to morally kill the very ideal result, so I would like to unite with Kant 's framework. The President has elected to kill millions of people and choose to distinguish him from innocent people, that moral reasoning can prove his death and lead people to some form of retaliation It is right for a doctor to kill the president because he wants.

What? Resultualism and outcome not moral structuralism and non-resultivism are the two main concepts in moral research. Although results-oriented or "scopos theory" theory focuses on results, non-resultivism or "moral theory" theory does not care about results. The resultant's view is based on two major ethical theories, including moral egoism and utilitarianism. These theories agree that human behavior and behavior should produce favorable results.

Moral theories are generally divided into three types: i) resultant theory focusing on the ethical impact of specific actions; ii) widely in the intentions of people who make ethical decisions about specific behaviors Non-result theory tends to focus. Unlike results theory and non-reactive theory, agent-centered theory pays more attention to the overall moral status of individuals and agents, and does not pay much attention to the morality of specific actions. Each of these three categories contains a variety of ethical methods, some of which have characteristics common to each category. Here are some of the most important and useful examples of these ethical approaches.

The deterrence theory is often classified as a variant of the resulting punishment theory. Consensus theory is trying to prove that punishment is the best way to achieve a particular independent identifiable product (eg Bentham 1823; J. Wilson 1983; Walker 1991; legal penalty entry also reference). Various resultant theories describe the final benefit or goods to which all our actions are directed, but the most reasonable direct benefit that the penal system can bring is to reduce crime. For this reason, in the result-based theory, it is common to argue that punishment can reduce crime by deterring, slandering, or transforming a potential criminal. In particular, deterrence theory claims that punishment can serve a dual purpose: to prevent malicious or illegal acts of an individual (his or her own) punished in the future and to prevent others from doing similar behaviors To prevent taking things.