In the world of our joint production, food has not only supported us but also has come to be regarded as raising ethical concerns about its upkeep and consumption. The food ethics system is facing one of the challenges, which is centered on deciding on satisfying human needs and also considering the main ethical problems such as the welfare of animals, the environment, and fair relationships with people. Besides, on one side of the coin, there is a rising demand for affordable food that a dangerous and growing population is expectantly faced with to feed. Nevertheless, while it is not unethical to enjoy food, the way it is produced can result in animal suffering or lead to environmental issues. This moral challenge makes the public have lengthy conversations on how best to understand their ethical responsibilities towards animals, the environment, and nations most affected by food production.
Utilitarianism and Deontology: Ethical Lenses for Food Ethics
Utilitarianism: Maximizing Overall Happiness
Utilitarianism, which stands for a consequentialist ethical approach, contends that consideration of an action solely reflects the consequences that will follow. Utilitarianism is based on a moral principle that consists in maximizing the care total or the utility of the majority of the group (Nathanson, 2021). According to utilitarianism’s pioneer, Peter Singer, the consequence of our acts on all sentient beings’ well-being must be so rationalized.
On the basis of situationist rationality, decisions in food production and consumption will prefer outcomes that guarantee the largest overall benefits. Therefore, we believe that those kinds of behavior that lead to greater happiness or utility to a greater number of people are considered as more moral than the others. In a conversation with food consensus, utilitarianism is likely to support the ones that generate more good outcomes for a bigger community as a whole, for example, factory farming, which, to a large extent, causes wider access to affordable food.
To use the famous words of utilitarians, the biggest power of this philosophy is its practical tendency to solve ethical problems and look for results that are not virtual. Utilitarianism strives to deemphasize the argument of pleasure maximizing by creating a convenient and clear-cut mechanism to scrutinize the ethical aspects of actors in the food industry.
Nonetheless, utilitarianism too challenges ethics for its likely justifying the morally doubtful actions if they lead to greater generalized welfare, though it is a cost to be paid. Critics contend that this approach can bypass important ethical considerations, which might lead to putting such values as individual rights or intrinsic values in the background. Thus, the only thing remaining is a maximization of utility. Furthermore, the subjectivity of evaluations of happiness or utility has led to applying difficulties of a utilitarian method in practice.
Deontology: Upholding Moral Duties and Principles
In contrast to utilitarianism, the deontological theory of ethics is a no consequentialist view that pays to the moral duties and principles, which are inherent and right or wrong, no matter what outcome they bring. Such an approach is called deontology, as was developed in the works of philosophers like Immanuel Kant, who are concerned with whether or not actions are morally right according to their intrinsic value apart from their results.
Deontological ethics concentrates on duties or actions that are deemed obligatory from an ethical standpoint, for instance, regard for the inherent value of all creatures or positive conduct, such as morality (Alexander & Moore, 2007). On the other hand, in the arena of food ethics, deontology may prescribe principles like the welfare of animals and sustainability of the environment as well as exalt social justice even if they may contradict utility or efficiency.
An exemplary merit of this deontology is that it gives moral imperatives and principles, which is an unshakable foundation upon which ethical decision-making is made. Pursuing moral duties is what deontology makes it possible for ethical purity and universal values to be respected in the first place among all those involved in the processes of food production and consumption.
Nevertheless, deontology also suffers from accusations that, in peculiar cases, it is either too static and fixed or too flexible and open-minded. Detractors say following strict moral laws may lead to moral absolutism. At the same time, complex ethical decisions from the world of practice may be the reality of this fake morality (The death penalty v. human rights: Why Abolish the death penalty? 2021). Another area for improvement with deontological ethics is that some moral duties may overwhelm each other, and this will be difficult to achieve.
Navigating Food Ethics: Choosing the Appropriate Ethical Approach
The dilemma of food ethics is greatly assisted if both utilitarian technology and applied ethics are fully considered to enable the derivation of a sustainable and ethical food system. Utilitarianism, in that way, has mainly a pragmatic approach. However, it may omit or move ethics toward utility maximizing. While consequentialism creates a principle-based system for respecting moral principles, deontology proposes a framework of duties, integrity, and all stakeholders involved in food production and consumption.
Conclusion
The main pressing issue that always exists in food ethics is that there is a need to strike a balance between fulfilling the requirements for human needs and looking at the wider ethical issues. We are able to look at these issues from utilitarianism and deontology perspectives in order to make the choice finally with careful reflection. The real task will be to handle a central position between food necessity and the full set of ethical requirements in order to find a solution that is fair, environmentally sustainable, and ethically right for coming generations.
References
Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2007). Deontological ethics. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/#DeoTheKan
Nathanson, S. (2021). Utilitarianism, act, and rule| internet Encyclopedia of philosophy. Iep. utm. Edu. https://iep. utm. Edu/util-ar/. Accessed, 11. https://iep.utm.edu/util-a-r/
The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. Amnesty International. (2023, November 13). https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/
The death penalty. Human Rights Why Abolish the death penalty?Amnesty International. (2021, August 10). https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ACT51/002/2007/en/
write