Consequencetialists: make decisions depending on what they think will happen as a result of their decisions. this means they can make actions that may seem good or bad at the time, but their true moral worth cant be shown until all of the results have been played out. Non-consequencetialists: make decisions because they believe an action is right or wrong regardless of the outcome, or what the decision causes. i am trying to think of a pop-culture example but i cant. instead lets use this: someone who refuses to lie because lying is wrong, is a Non-consequencetialist, they make ethical decisions at the moment. someone who decides wether to lie or not because of a forseeable future circumstance is a consequencetialist, they make ethical decisions by looking forward.

"Consequentialism refers to those moral theories which hold that the consequences of a particular action form the basis for any valid moral judgment about that action. In other words, the ends justify the means. Thus, on a consequentialist account, a morally right action is an action that produces good consequences. Consequentialism is usually understood as distinct from deontology, in that deontology derives the rightness or wrongness of an act from the character of the act itself rather than the consequences of the action and virtue ethics, which focuses on the character of the agent rather than on the nature or consequences of the action itself. The difference between these three approaches to morality tends to lie more in the way moral dilemmas are approached than in the moral conclusions reached. For example, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong because of the negative consequences produced by lying — though a consequentialist may allow that certain foreseeable consequences might make lying acceptable. A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of any potential "good" that might come from lying. A virtue ethicist, however, would focus less on lying in any particular instance and instead consider what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character." "As was said above, the defining feature of consequentialist moral theories is the normative weight given to the consequences in evaluating the rightness and wrongness of actions. Apart from this basic outline, there is little else that can be unequivocally said about consequentialism as such. However, there are some questions that most consequentialist theories address: - What sort of consequences count as good consequences? - Who is the primary beneficiary of moral action? - How are the consequences judged and who judges them?" Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialist

12-29-2016 A good buzzword can obscure analysis for fifty years.

I haven't the foggiest idea what those words mean. I have never heard of either word in my life.