Every day professionals and even laypeople are faced with complex situations that need guidance. In the professional world, codes of ethics are used to show the direction to the professionals on what needs to be done and how. Codes of ethics provide practitioners with self-regulation, address fiduciary relationships, identify practice standards and provide details of how particular services should be offered. Regulations are complex and can be tedious and can even be stultifying arrogant and therefore do not seem appreciable relevant to the daily operations. Professional codes appear to be virtually interchangeable, hatching from some sort of prototype that requires professionals to be honorable, faithful, true in practice, and compassionate towards everyone in whichever place. Many professions struggle with similar problems of conflicting moral obligations, for example, self vs. others, patient vs. family. There are also ill-defined codes, and others lack clarity on how to handle moral dilemmas. Many theories explain how to handle conflict situations, and each one follows the ones they feel inclined to either Christian ethical ideas and metaethical theories. The paper is a comparison and contrast of a Christian ethical theory and a competing ethical theory.
Similarities
Divine command theory asserts that ethics is reliant on upon God and that moral obligation involves obeying God’s commands, such as the Ten Commandments. The morality right action is that which God requires or commands[1]. It is a meta-ethical theory that proposes the status of an action is right if it equals what God commanded.[2]. Utilitarianism advocates that only those actions that lead to pleasure or happiness and oppose harm or unhappiness should be encouraged. An action is right according to utilitarianism if it brings happiness to a more significant number of the group or society.[3]. The two theories are similar in that they both focusing on doing good for the greater people, and they have a basis. Divine command theory requires that something is good if it is what God wants, and utilitarianism an act is good if it brings greater good to the society. The two theories influence how people conduct themselves and help shape their views and attitudes.
Differences
The two theories are different in that utilitarianism allows people to weigh their options in order to determine the best possible result, while on the other hand, demand command theory gives people the basis of determining if their activities are morally correct. Demand command theory is concerned with the act itself, while on the other hand, utilitarianism focuses on the outcome of an action.
The Stronger Ethical Theory
I believe in the consequences of an action, and therefore, in my opinion, the utilitarianism theory is a stronger ethical theory. Utilitarianism wants maximum good results and achieves a balance of the good outcomes over the bad effects. The actions of people are right as long as they produce happiness for the people who have been affected by the actions. Suppose actions create more satisfaction to the more significant population of the society or group. I prefer utilitarianism because it provides people with reason, and many people apply it daily in their lives, especially when they are doing an analysis of benefits and cost. It is a commonly used theory by many institutions and even government bodies in their reasoning when making decisions and establishing policies because they have to bring happiness to the most significant number of the society members.
[1] Jones, M.S. (2017). An Intentional Approach to Distinguishing Right from Wrong.
[2] McQuilkin, R & Copan, P. (2014). An Introduction to Biblical Ethics: Walking in the Way of Wisdom
[3] Schultz, B. (2017). The happiness philosophers: The lives and works of the great utilitarians. Princeton University Press.