Deontological vs. Utilitarian Ethics: The Moral Dilemmas of Security Officials in Crisis Situations

Abstract

This article aims to: 1) analyze the moral dilemmas between           deontological ethics and utilitarianism faced by security officials in crisis situations; 2) critique the ontological limitations of single-axis ethical paradigms affecting tactical decision-making; and 3) propose a crisis  situational ethical order integrated with Buddhist ethics to govern state discretion. The study reveals that strict adherence to Kantian deontology safeguards human dignity as an end in itself but induces operational  paralysis in the face of modern threats. Conversely, utilitarianism effectively limits macro-level devastation yet risks establishing a permanent state of exception that violates fundamental human rights and undermines the rule of law. Consequently, this paper advocates for the concept of strategic compassion, defined as an ethical practice grounded in wisdom and the pursuit of collective well-being according to the Great Compassion principle in Buddhist philosophy. This framework serves to balance absolute moral rules with societal survival. The findings suggest that restructuring ethics into a stratified modelóretaining deontological constraints while allowing                situational flexibilityówill enhance the operational standards of security officials. Such a transformation ensures alignment with global norms and sustains social order in an era of increasingly complex threats.