Deontological Perspectives

We know and understand the purpose of HIV Alliance's Needle Exchange program. They want to prevent the spread of HIV through people who inject drugs and their partners. In order to do this they exchange used needles for unused needles. Now we will be looking at it from a deontological perspective.

The deontological perspective is a method of ethics that judges the morality of an act rooted in the action's devotion to a rule or rules. Deontological ethics are often compared to consequentialist or teleological theories, according to which the “rightness” of an action is determined by the consequences that follow.

Consequentialists would agree that HIV Alliance's program is morally okay, but if this program were to lead to the death of another person they would find it unmoral and be against it. If the Consequentialists looked at only the good consequences such as stopping the spread of HIV, it would most definitely be morally accepted. According Kant, whom believes in good will, HIV Alliance's program is very highly accepted without a doubt. Their intentions are only to help, and do good unto others.

According to Davis Alm,

"a defense of deontological restrictions need not

resort to what I call the 'Good/Bad asymmetry',

according to which it is morally more important

to avoid harming others than to prevent just such

harm. I replace this paradoxical asymmetry with

two non-paradoxical (if also non-obvious) ones."

These are the following: (1) We should treat an act of preventing harm to persons exactly as that (as a harm prevention), instead of as the causing of a benefit. Also, we should treat an action that does cause harm just as such (as harm causing), rather than as "the prevention of a benefit". (2) It is morally more important "not to cause harm than to cause benefit" (Alm).

I personally consider The Alliance's needle exchange program to be a "harm prevention program." The program is preventing more people from getting HIV. The organization has absolutely no intention of hurting anyone. I claim that Alm would definitely agree with that statement, along with many consequentialist.

I will continue on this subject and more, Thank you!

Works Cited

Alm, David. "Deontological Restrictions and the Good/Bad Asymmetry." Journal of Moral Philosophy, 6.4 (2009): 464-481.