Editing Teleology (section)

== Ethics ==
Teleology significantly informs the study of [[ethic]]s, such as in:
* '''Business ethics''': People in business commonly think in terms of purposeful action, as in, for example, [[management by objectives]]. Teleological analysis of [[business ethics]] leads to consideration of the full range of [[Stakeholder (corporate)|stakeholder]]s in any business decision, including the management, the staff, the customers, the shareholders, the country, humanity and the environment.<ref>Brooks, Leonard J., and Paul Dunn. 2009. {{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9x5Yj3nApN4C&pg=PT169|title=Business & Professional Ethics for Directors, Executives & Accountants|isbn=9780324594553|url-access=limited|last1=Brooks|first1=Leonard J.|last2=Dunn|first2=Paul|date=31 March 2009|publisher=Cengage Learning }} [[Cengage|Cengage Learning]]. {{ISBN|978-0-324-59455-3}}. p. 149.</ref>
* '''Medical ethics''': Teleology provides a moral basis for the professional ethics of medicine, as physicians are generally concerned with outcomes and must therefore know the ''telos'' of a given treatment paradigm.<ref>{{Cite book|author=Sugarman, Jeremy, and Daniel P. Sulmasy|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-5a0nza21ZMC&pg=PA78|title=Methods in Medical Ethics|publisher=Georgetown University Press|year=2001|isbn=978-0-87840-873-3|page=78|url-access=limited}}</ref>

=== Consequentialism ===
{{Main|Consequentialism}}

The broad spectrum of [[Consequentialism|''consequentialist'' ethics]]—of which [[utilitarianism]] is a well-known example—focuses on the result or consequences, with such principles as [[John Stuart Mill]]'s 'principle of utility': "the greatest good for the greatest number". This principle is thus teleological, though in a broader sense than is elsewhere understood in philosophy.

In the classical notion, teleology is grounded in the inherent nature of things themselves, whereas in ''consequentialism'', teleology is imposed on nature from outside by the human will. Consequentialist theories justify inherently what most people would call evil acts by their desirable outcomes, if the good of the outcome outweighs the bad of the act. So, for example, a consequentialist theory would say it was acceptable to kill one person in order to save two or more other people. These theories may be summarized by the maxim "{{Wikt-lang|en|the end justifies the means}}."

=== Deontology ===
{{Main|Deontological ethics}}
Consequentialism stands in contrast to the more classical notions of [[deontological ethics|''deontological'' ethics]], of which examples include [[Immanuel Kant]]'s ''[[categorical imperative]]'', and [[Aristotle]]'s [[virtue ethics|''virtue'' ethics]]—although formulations of virtue ethics are also often consequentialist in derivation.

In deontological ethics, the goodness or badness of individual acts is primary and a larger, more desirable goal is insufficient to justify bad acts committed on the way to that goal, even if the bad acts are relatively minor and the goal is major (like telling a small lie to prevent a war and save millions of lives). In requiring all constituent acts to be good, ''deontological ethics'' is much more rigid than consequentialism, which varies by circumstance.

'''Practical ethics''' are usually a mix of the two. For example, Mill also relies on deontic maxims to guide practical behavior, but they must be justifiable by the principle of utility.<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/onlibertyotheres00mill |url-access=registration |title=John Stuart Mill On Liberty And Other Essays |author=John Gray, Ed. |page=ix |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-283384-7 |year=1998 }}</ref>