A Utilitarian approach to ethics is focused on the outcome of the action, with a desirable act often being described as the one which entails the greatest good for the greatest number. Principle-based ethics focus on the general theory behind the action, examining whether it is consistent with principles such as benevolence or justice. Virtue-based ethics also focus on the action itself rather than the result, asking whether this is an act that would be carried out by a person of good moral character.

Utilitarianism, therefore, is useful for assessing the consequences of an act but is of little use in discussing the intrinsic value of actions where the effects are unknown or doubtful. It can also be used to justify the cynical proposition that the end justifies the means.

Principle-based ethics are more useful for assessing whether an action is inherently desirable. However, they break down when two principles, such as justice and mercy, conflict, unless one principle is arbitrarily selected as being more valuable.

Virtue-based ethics are more flexible than principle-based ethics, but the reasoning can become circular, as the focus is on the character of the person acting. If this person is admitted to be virtuous, then their actions may be automatically accepted as the type of thing virtuous people do. Any objection that this is not the case must be justified by reference to some principle they are violating or to some undesirable outcome, which are each appeals to one of the other approaches to ethics.