Ethical theories in brief: duty, consequences, virtue, casuistry, care
- Theory
Ethical theories give different reasons for what is right: duty, consequences, character or similar cases.
What it is
Behind each principle there are moral theories that justify why something is right or wrong. Deontology looks at duties and the dignity of the person; utilitarianism at consequences; virtue ethics at the character of the one who acts; casuistry at similar cases already settled; the ethics of care at relationships and vulnerability. Principlism borrows from several of them. None settles every case on its own; knowing them helps understand the arguments on each side.
Core ideas
- Kant states the categorical imperative: treat humanity, in yourself and others, always as an end and never merely as a means.
- The classical utilitarians (Bentham, Mill) measure good by the pleasure or well-being an act produces.
- Virtue ethics asks what kind of person the doctor should be, rather than which rule applies.
- Modern casuistry in bioethics was defended by Albert Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin.
Ethical theories at a glance
| Theory | Core idea | Question it asks | Main criticism |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deontology (Kant) | Some duties and rights always bind | What is my duty here? | Rigid when two duties clash |
| Utilitarianism | The greatest good for the greatest number | Which option gives the best total outcome? | May sacrifice one person for the good of many |
| Virtue ethics | The agent's character: prudence, compassion, honesty | What would a good doctor do? | Gives little guidance in specific cases |
| Casuistry | Compare with settled paradigm cases | Which clear case does this one resemble? | Depends on which cases are chosen as models |
| Ethics of care | Relationships, dependence and vulnerability | What does this person need and who cares for them? | May neglect impartiality |
| Principlism | Four prima facie principles that are balanced | Which principles conflict and which weighs more? | Does not rank the principles |
In clinical practice
- Asking consent even when the outcome would be the same without it is a deontological argument.
- Public health and resource allocation decisions often use utilitarian arguments.
- Honesty and compassion when breaking bad news are virtues, not only rules.
- Ethics committees compare a new case with cases already analysed: that is casuistry.
Criticisms and limits
- No theory settles every case on its own; in practice they are combined.
- The weaknesses of one theory are often the strengths of another (firm rules versus outcomes, for example).
Test yourself
Think of the answer, then tap the question to see it.
Which ethical theory holds that a person must never be treated merely as a means?
Kant's deontology (the formula of humanity of the categorical imperative).
What is the classic criticism of utilitarianism in medicine?
It can justify sacrificing one person's rights if that yields a greater total good.
What question does virtue ethics ask?
What a good, prudent person, such as a good doctor, would do in that situation; it looks at character more than rules.
How does casuistry reason?
It compares the new case with settled paradigm cases and sees which it resembles most, as law does with precedent.
Connections
Educational content on ethics and health law; not legal advice. Laws and case law change: each page links the official text and says when it was last checked. For a real case, read the text in force and ask a lawyer or the medical ethics tribunal.
Sources: Kant's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2025); Consequentialism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2023); Virtue Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2026).
Spotted a mistake?We are always improving for the community. Tell us what is wrong and our team will review it.Report a mistake
Representative model, for educational purposes only.