Is there such a radical contrast between 'teleological' and 'deontological' as Keith proposed in his lecture?
The former seems to have suffered in his / Ricoeur's presentation: concern with the 'good' is static, conservative, rule-bound, and even at times violent. Concern with 'duty', instead, is concern with the right thing to do, and not merely the established 'good' thing.
I guess all these terms are so fluid that each philosopher can give his/her own meaning to them... So we would have to find out what really Ricoeur meant, before agreeing/disagreeing with him.
I would like to find out Ashley's comments on the matter. Virtue ethics seems to be a concentration on the 'good.'