Ethical Analysis Paper

Instructions of the paper:

1. Formulate the ethical dilemma to be resolved.

2. Identify the ethical issues and significant points of analysis.

3. Articulate a position to take, by introducing the directives that you will use to resolve this case.

4. Use either a deontological or character approach to ethical reasoning.

5. Use the Christian faith and Christian values explicitly, as you make your judgment in alignment with the chosen theory of ethics.

6. Explain the points of your analysis in language appropriate to the ethics theory’s view of ethical content and the Christian faith as you go over the case.

7. Provide persuasive arguments as to why your position is ethically good and good for business.

8. The essay should be well organized by the thesis and the introduced approach to your analysis.

9. Define terms and briefly explain the theories when you refer to them.

10. Insightfulness: elaborate on and develop your insights.

Diamonds Are Forever

One popular advertisement for engagement rings sponsored by the DE Beers Diamond Company poses the following question to men planning proposal: “Is two months’ salary too much to spend?”

Many suitors take “two months’ salary” as an unwritten rule of etiquette and as a measurement stick of how well they’ve faired in the jewelry aspect of courtship. However, “two-months” is not written in any well-known traditional books on wedding etiquette. It simply seems to be an extremely effective creation of De Beers Company, which controls a large share of the world diamond market.

While wedding rings were traditionally regarded as symbols of vows to lifelong commitment, they today symbolize wealth and, to some, how much the suitor loves his bride-to-be. Givers and receivers of the glimmering objects can be regularly comparing the caret weight, cost, and so on of their “symbols” with friends and family members.

This seems like a clear situation in which the diamond business has violated consumer autonomy by “creating” a new need through exploiting basic human needs to fit in and impress others. For some potential suitors, simply saying no in the face of social pressures to value his bride-to-be is difficult. Advertisers would probably respond that they are simply “fulfilling” latent human’s desires rather than creating them. Indeed, it appears that the “need” or desire to impress peers and the bride-to-be is already in existence.

Questions:

1. Is the prevalence of the belief of the “two months’ salary rule” proof of the power of advertisers to create needs by exploiting human insecurity? Why or why not?

2. If so, does this unjustly violate the autonomy of consumers?

3. Support your arguing using any of the theories of ethics (Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Trust-based, Divine Command, Utilitarianism) and then compare that view with another of the theories.