The big idea: Someone gives their whole savings to a stranger. Was that good? To answer, you first have to decide what makes an act good in the first place — the question under every ethical argument.
Three possible answers
- The results it brought.
- The rule it kept.
- The kind of person it shows.
This part of philosophy is normative ethics. It doesn't report how people behave — it asks how we should, and gives reasons.
Hold onto this: Keep two questions apart. What should I do? (the answer to a particular case) versus what makes anything right? (the standard the answer relies on). Normative ethics is really about the second.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Faced with 'what makes an act right?', philosophers point at three different things.
The three big families
Character (virtue)
A right act is what a good person would do — it flows from virtues like courage and honesty.
Rules (deontology)
A right act keeps a duty or rule — some things are simply owed, whatever the results.
Results (teleology)
A right act brings about the best outcome — the most good, the least harm.
Character · Rules · Results
Feeling unprepared for exams?
Get a clear study plan, practice with real questions, and know exactly where you stand before exam day. No more guessing.
The three families usually agree — the interesting part is when they pull apart.
When the three collide: You can save five strangers only by breaking a solemn promise to one friend. Results say save the five — more people helped. Rules say keep your promise — you gave your word. Character asks what a wise, kind person would actually do here. Same situation, three honest answers — and you can't have all three.
Go further — higher-level insight: Notice each family answers a slightly different question. Virtue asks 'what kind of person should I be?', deontology asks 'what am I required to do?', and teleology asks 'what should I aim at?'. Spotting that they're not even asking the same thing is a sharp, top-band observation.
Checkpoint — the three families: In one line: character, rules, results. The rest of the topic takes each one in turn, argues it, then weighs all three. Hold this map.