Business Ethics Test Essay
Ethics a branch of philosophy that studies the nature of right and wrong The Moral Formula An expression that would explain and define morality would let us be able to solve all current and future moral dilemmas an answer key to moral questions 1. 2 Ethical Objectivism belief that claims there is a universally valid moral code asically, if something is morally wrong for one person, than it should be morally wrong for all people cultural beliefs about morality vary, but cultural acceptance doesn’t make something morally correct morality is not a matter of opinion but fact Problem is that there is too much disagreement among cultures and people about what is right and wrong so much disagreement that it leads people to believe that there is not true right and wrong There is one complete set of morally right answers 1. 3 Ethical Relativism elief that claims there is no such thing as a universally valid moral code basically, there is no completely right answer Two types: Conventionalism and subjectivism Problem is that ethical relativism condones some very controversial cultural practices like slavery, human sacrifices, and nazism Also it is very rare for an entire culture of people to unanimously agree about whether something is right or wrong How does one even define culture? There is no one complete set of morally right answers 1. Conventionalism The belief that there is no universally valid moral code and that morality is relative to culture Morality itself is culturally defined If two cultures disagree about morality of an action, they can both be right When something is wrong, it is actually just wrong according to our culture -Cultural Imperialism What ethical relativists call ethical objectivism due to its habit of imposing moral code on other cultures Every culture has a different set of morally right answers 1. 5Subjectivism the belief that there is no universally valid moral code and that morality is relative to each individual each individual is the sole creator of his or her own morality our moral beliefs cannot possibly be mistaken condones murderers and rapists Every person has a different set of morally right answers 1.
6 Relativism about Truth the belief that there is no such thing as truth and everything is simply a matter of opinion the most extreme version of relativism there is no such thing as facts eople often confuse agreement of opinions with truth Nothing is true, everything is a matter of opinion, not fact 1. 9 Carr’s Poker Analogy Lying may be wrong in everyday context, however not in a game of poker or in the game of business where lying and bluffing is simply part of the business Situations or contexts alter what is morally right or morally wrong Problem is that the game of business the consumer is arguably not aware that there is any game States that people can pretty much be unethical in when dealing with business Contextualism he belief that morality is relative to a context in which an action is done basically it says that stealing bread may be wrong in most circumstances, but if you are stealing bread to feed your starving child it may not be wrong 2. 1 Immanuel Kant formulated Deontological moral theory 18th century German philosopher Deontological Moral TheoryThe belief that since some actions like murdering and raping are always morally wrong, we have the duty not murder or rape No one is every justified to ever perform an action that is always morally wrong under any circumstances strongly opposes the principle that the “end justifies the means” in other words completely disagrees with the beliefs in “Wanted” where they kill one to save a thousand People should never perform an action that is morally wrong because they know that it is wrong to do so, not because they are worried about how people and society will look at them intentions are importantThe problem is there really is no action that is wrong under every situation. Lying to save the lives of innocent people may be the moral thing to do The theory is simply to rigid and strict Sometimes duties contradict themselves No one should ever do anything morally wrong under any circumstances 2. 2 Jeremy Bentham/John Stuart Mill developed utilitarianism 19th century british philosophers Bentham believed results were weighed in pleasure/pain whereas Mill believed they were weighed in happiness Utilitarianism he moral theory that morality is defined by the results of an action basically the end result is what is important what counts as a good result varies everyone affected by the action should be have there interests taken into account An attempt to find the greatest good for the greatest number of people It is better to lie to someone and save their feelings than tell them the truth and hurt their feelings The problem is intentions are completely ignoredIf I attempt to kill someone and fail, my action was not morally wrong because I didn’t actually kill anyone Also it ignores accidents – the real criticism is that utilitarianism is too focused on results and not enough on intention The end result of an action determines whether the action was right or wrong 3.
1 Virtue Ethics The theory that our character determines our actions and whether or not they are morally right Formulated by Aristotle The problem is that virtue ethics does not actually say what is right or wrong Golden Means DoctrineEverything (with a few exceptions of universally wrong actions) should be done in moderation A man is virtuous when he is able to find the balance between too much of something and too little of something Avoiding danger at all costs is a vice but facing danger at any cost is a vice By doing everything in moderation we can build the right kind of moral character Aristotle’s Four Types of Character Virtuous A person who does what is morally right and enjoys doing it Continent A person who usually does what is morally right, however it is difficult for the person to make the morally right decisions IncontinentA person who usually chooses a morally wrong course of action, but experiences conflict in doing so Vicious A person who has no appreciation for virtue and consistently chooses to act in a morally wrong way 4. 1 Ethical Egoism The belief that we do not have any duties to help or assist others and that our only moral obligation is to promote our self interest we have do the obligation to not harm others, we don’t have the obligation to help them either Society would be better if everyone worried about themselves Ethical Altruism The belief that it is morally wrong not to help othersNormative Ethics The study of how people ought to act 4. 2 Psychological Egoism The belief that people at all times, always act to further their own self-interest There is no such thing as a selfless act Helping people is motivated by self interest it makes us feel good it makes others more likely to help us in the future The criticism is that morally wrong and morally right people are performing actions for virtually the same reasons Also psychological egoism justifies literally everything, you cannot prove it wrong 4.
4 The Prisoner’s Dilemma Prisoners debate whether or not to keep silent about a crime. 5. 1 Social Contract An agreement made among the members of society morally correct actions are those that are consistent with the agreement of the social contract, morally wrong actions are defined as violations of the contract 5.
2 Hobbes 17th century British philosopher believed huan nature was extremely negative a proponent of psychological egoism State of Nature The lawless state that people find themselves in when there is no social contract everyone is at war with everyone here is no such thing as a morally wrong action in the state of nature eventually people realize that it is not in their self interest to be in this state of nature, and decide to sign a social contract The only way to maintain a social contract is to have a strong government that enforces it 5. 3 Locke 17th century British philosopher agrees with Hobbes that there is a state of nature but disagrees with his opinions about human nature believes humans respect each other’s rights 5. 4 Natural Rights TheoryThe belief that humans have natural rights, and morally wrong actions are typically defined as actions that violate those rights Libertarianism The belief that the only wrong thing to do is to violate life, liberty or property of another human 6. 1 Ad Hominem the argument that someone’s claim must be false because the person is morally unjust comes from latin meaning “against the person” This argument attacks the person, not the claim, and therefore is an unjust argument 6. 2 Argument from Ignorance stating that something must be false simply because it cannot be proven true he lack of proof from one claim automatically constitutes sufficient evidence for the opposite 6. 3 False Dilemma Assuming that something is true because another thing is false without taking into account other possibilities 6. 4 False Cause Assuming that an event caused another event strictly because the former preceded the latter has to do with superstitions 6.
5 Hasty Generalization Assuming that an entire population is exactly like a small sample 6. 6 Slippery Slope Assuming that a single action will without a doubt lead to other actions 6. 7Fallacy of Composition Assuming that what is true of all members of the collection, must be true of the collection itself 6. 8 Fallacy of Division Assuming that what is true of the collection itself, is true of all the members of the collection 6.
9 Appeal to Force (or Reward) Accepting an argument or belief because of the consequences or rewards that come with accepting or not accepting the argument or belief 6. 10 Straw Man Twisting the words or beliefs of some person in a negative or even positive way that is not correct 6. 11 Appeal to Inappropriate AuthorityAssuming that an authority in one field is an authority in another unrelated or somewhat unrelated field 6. 12 Complex Question Formulating a question so that either answer condemns the person answering the question The only way out of a complex question is to deny the question itself 6. 13 Equivocation Taking a statement that uses an figurative term as literal 6. 14 Fallacy of Accent Emphasizing a part of an argument to change the meaning of the argument 6. 15 Circular Reasoning – Using one statement to defend another.
And then using the latter statement to defend the former
