Business Ethics Chapter 1 Saq Essay Example

Business Ethics Chapter 1 Saq Essay

AIMST UNIVERSITY BUSINESS ETHICS Chapter 1 (Individual) NAME: LIM EU JIN (1000121) INTAKE: BATCH 8 SEMESTER: YEAR 2 SEMESTER 1 PROGRAMME: BSc. BUSINESS & MARKETING LECTURER: MR. R. RAVINDRAN BUSINESS ETHICS(CHAPTER 1) Short Answer Questions TELEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORKS 1. Compare and contrast the Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism frameworks. Ethical Egoism, from the viewpoint of a business entity, maintains that companies should act strictly in line with their own interest. While this sounds like the direction that companies currently take anyway, pure pursuit of Ethical Egoism opens up a host of problems that deserve discussion.

For example, under pure Ethical Egoism, companies would essentially disregard product safety, ethical business practices good corporate citizenship, environmental respect and the like, as the pursuit of profit, market share, or any other strategic goal would be the only concern. Utilitarianism, in contrast to Ethical Egoism, from a business ethics standpoint, would be defined as the ultimate pursuit of whatever it is that the goal of a given business might be, ranging from maximum profitability to largest possible market share to industry award.

Overall, the main consideration is not the ethical, legal or moral consequences of the strategies and tactics undertaken by the company in question, but is the end result-whatever is gained in the process. Along these same lines, the utility of a business activity can be evaluated in terms of the benefit it provides versus the damage that it can cause to others along the way. 2. Is Sidgwick’s Dualism really a middle ground between Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism.

Sidgwick’s Dualism of the practical reason is the idea that since egoism and utilitarianism aim both to have rational supremacy in our practical decisions, whenever they conflict there is no stronger reason to follow the dictates of either view. The dualism leaves us with a practical problem: in conflict cases, we cannot be guided by practical reason to decide what all things considered we ought to do. There is an epistemic problem as well: the conflict of egoism and utilitarianism shows that they cannot be both self-evident principles.

Only the existence of a just God could, for Sidgwick, prevent the conflict and thus solve the dualism. DEONTOLOGICAL FRAMEWORKS 3. Compare and contrast the Existentialism and Contractarianism framework. Existentialism is the philosophical and cultural movement which holds that the starting point of philosophical thinking must be the experiences of the individual. Moral and scientific thinking together do not suffice to understand human existence, so a further set of categories, governed by a norm of “authenticity”, is necessary to understand human existence.

Authenticity, in the context of existentialism, is being true to one’s own personality, spirit or character. Contractarianism names both a political theory of the legitimacy of political authority and a moral theory about the origin or legitimate content of moral norms. The political theory of authority claims that legitimate authority of government must derive from the consent of the governed, where the form and content of this consent derives from the idea of contract or mutual agreement. The moral theory of contractarianism claims that moral norms derive their normative force from the idea of contract or mutual agreement.

Contractarians are skeptical of the possibility of grounding morality or political authority in either divine will or some perfectionist ideal of the nature of humanity. 4. Is Kant’s Ethics really a middle ground between Existentialism and Contractarianism. Kant’s Ethics is not a middle ground between Existentialism and Contractarianism because it is one of the three dominant deontological frameworks. Kant’s Ethics stands alone in this. Immanuel Kant discussed ethical decisions based on the free will of the individual. Kant argued that the free will to make decisions that were considered rational needed to be converted into a universal will.

Kant’s ethical view is considered a dualism only because it attempted to bridge the gap between the existentialist and contractarian points of view. The linkage Kant made was to consider his principle pertaining to free will based on the philosophy that an individual should act in a way in which one would expect everyone to act if it were a universal will and to treat other individuals as the end, not the means to an end. 5. Compare and contrast Teleological, Deontological and Mixed Frameworks. Teleology and deontology are two of the three major approaches to the study of ethics.

Deontological ethics is a rule driven system, with moral status contingent on adherence to rules. Teleology, frequently called consequentialism, bases morality on the end result of an action. Though there are many differences between these two ethical approaches the most significant is that deontology studies actions and rules while teleology studies consequences. The major difference between these two approaches lie in the topic of focus. Deontological ethicists focus on actions and rules. Deontological ethical systems have at their center a set of rules. These rules may differ from system to system.

For example, the Divine Command Theory states that an action is right if God has declared it to be right. In this instance, the rules are set by God or another relevant deity and only actions that comply with those commands are moral. Note that in this theory no weight is given to intention, desires or consequences of the actions in question. The deontological approach does not rely exclusively on a religious foundation. Other deontological systems are founded on the non-aggression principle which states that there is no moral justification for the initiation of force against another human being.

This principle precludes physical violence as well as political coercion such as taxation or abridgment of speech. Deontological libertarians such as Murray Rothbard championed this concept. Teleology does not focus on actions themselves or how closely they adhere to a system of rules. Teleological ethics, which is mostly referred to as consequentialism, is concerned with the end effect. The essence of all forms of teleological ethics is best stated by the founder of Utilitarianism, Jeremy Bentham: “the greatest good for the greatest number. ” Accordingly, the impact of society as a whole is what determines morality.

This approach differs from deontology in that there is no set of hard and fast rules in place. Actions may be moral or immoral depending on circumstance. Mixed Frameworks on the other hand, is the study of the mixture of all these frameworks. 6. Compare and contrast the guiding principles of the Global Business Standards Codex and the Mixed Framework principles. The authors suggest 8 governing ethical principles which taken together they call: the Global Business Standards Codex (GBS Codex). These 8 principles to create or evaluate a Code of Conduct and their most important aspects are:  1. The Fiduciary Principle (Diligence, Loyalty). . The Property Principle (Protection, Theft). 3. The Reliability Principle (Contracts Premises, Commitments). 4. The Transparency Principle (Thruthfulness, Deception, Disclosure, Candor, Objectivity). 5. The Dignity Principle (Respect for the Individual, Health and Safety, Privacy and Confidentiality, Use of Force, Associatiation & Expression, Learning & Development, Employment Security).

6. The Fairness Principle (Fair Dealing, Fair Treatment, Fair Competition, Fair Process). 7. The Citizenship Principle (Law & Regulation, Public Goods, Cooperation with Authorities, Political Noninvolvement, Civic Contribution, . . The Responsiveness Principle (Addressing Concerns, Public Involvement). Mixed Framework Ethics might also be called morality, since they reflect general expectations of any person in any society, acting in any capacity. These are the principles we try to instill in our children, and expect of one another without needing to articulate the expectation or formalize it in any way. Principles of Mixed Framework include: 1. Concern for the well-being of others 2. Respect for the autonomy of others 3. Trustworthiness & honesty 4. Willing compliance with the law (with the exception of civil disobedience) 5. Basic justice; being fair 6. Refusing to take unfair advantage 7. Benevolence: doing good 8. Preventing harm

REFRENCES http://www. ethics. ubc. ca/papers/invited/colero. html http://wiki. answers. com/Q/Components_of_the_global_business_standard_codex http://answers. yahoo. com/question/index? qid=20061119173527AA4h73L http://www. ehow. com/info_8286914_difference-between-teleological-deontological-ethics. html http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/contractarianism/ http://www2. units. it/etica/2008_2/ORSI. pdf http://www2. units. it/etica/2008_2/ORSI. pdf

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *