PYQ – SepDec 2017 Q4 (Livermouth Water Authority)

Hello all, would like to have some discussion about deontology.

In the September/December 2017 sample questions pack, question 4(b) asks to use the Tucker’s 5-question model to assess the moral case for or against the Coombe Valley project. As we know, the “is it right?” question requires the decision maker to argue from his ethical stance, and the examiner’s answer looks at it from both the deontologist and teleologist perspectives.

The issue I found with the answer is that, it argues that from a deontologistic perspective, the proposal is not ethical because it would disrupt the lives of residents and damage the environment. Isn’t this already putting yourself in the shoes of a teleologist? Because now you’re thinking about the consequences of the project (i.e. “since these are adverse consequences, the project is not ethical”). I would say that from a deontogist’s view, simply the action of channeling water supplies from the most distant side would be ethically neutral. Nothing is ethically wrong with channeling water supplies even from a far place, right? Is not like we’re judging whether lying to a group of stakeholders is ethical, because clearly, without looking at the purpose, lying itself is not right.

Would like to hear some of your thoughts, if anyone has attempted this question. Would appreciate if any tutor could help as well.

Thanks!