Priority or Posteriority of Ross's Functionlism to Mill`s Consequentialism in Ethical Limitation

The subject of this paper is to examine and analyze the efficiency, or inefficiency, and the preference of functionalist theories, with an emphasis on Ross`s functionalism and Mill`s view in the field of ethical limitations. The authors have explained the standards for human deeds as being good or bad, right or wrong. The main question of the paper, performed with a descriptive-analytic method, follows as: when meeting ethical limitations, what is preferred, noting duty or its consequence? Achieving a stable and definite ethical criterion leading to the best consequence has necessitated the study. One important goal in the paper lies in explaining the failure of functionalism and conseque in deciding a standard for measuring the value of ethical deeds. One significant finding in the paper lies in the fact that regarding human intention, proximity and divine satisfaction in human deeds will cause both theories to be acceptable, in such a way that, in order to eliminate the limitation and to measure the correctness and inaccuracy of the acts, it may be regarded as the most decisive criterion.