Interlocking Parts Cont.

This post elaborates on my last idea. During a debate practice a couple of days ago we talked about two of the major ideas of philosophy; utilitarianism and deontology. The two are complete opposites in many ways. The former, which was developed by John Stuart Mills and Jeremy Bentham, says that an action is right if it gets the greatest good for the greatest number of people. If it does not, it is wrong. The latter, mostly developed by Emanuel Kant, says that even if it does get the greatest good for the greatest number of people, it may be wrong. Under deontology, if something conforms with the duties of people, then it is right. An example of these two ideas conflicting is the example of killing a person to save 10 others. Utilitarianism says that it gets the greatest good for the greatest amount of people, so it is the right decision. Deontology says that, since we as people obviously have a duty not to commit murder, that it is the wrong decision. I personally agree with deontology. Just like notes in music, every part is important. Utilitarianism says that we should get the best for as many people as possible, but must make sacrifices. This is like having a really complicated melody without any harmony. Deontology says we need to get the best for everyone, even if that means we all have to make slight sacrifices. That is like have a simple melody and a simple harmony. Because every part is important, I agree with the latter. Which idea do you agree with?