ethic 3 double spaced pages assignments

Provide an answer of approximately 3 typed double spaced pages in response to the question below

The Question: Using one of the philosophers we’ve studied, write a detailed account of both the philosophy and how that philosophy applies to your group’s presentation topic. (If you used outside sources, please cite them as appropriate

. This should be treated as a formal essay, meaning you should:

1. Have an introduction

2. Have a clearly defined thesis statement

3. Have a conclusion.

4. Use formal language and grammar.

5. Only use the resources that you used in the presentation

6. Include your name

7. Be stapled at the upper left-hand corner.

8. No fudging margins or font size in order to write more or less than required.

Failure to comply with any of these requirements may result in a lower overall grade.

Presentation Topic: Nepotism in its effects on the work place

The unfair practice of a powerful person by giving jobs and other favors to relatives or friends

Use only these resources Recourses:

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/nepotism-workplace-friends-13206.html

http://www.hrhero.com/hl/articles/2008/10/10/nepotism-and-its-dangers-in-the-workplace/

Class notes

Philosopher: Knat

Class Notes

Notes on Kantian Ethics

Deontological (or duty-oriented) theories of ethics (e.g., divine- command theory, Kantian formalism) assume that the first task of ethics is to determine what we are obligated to do.  By doing our duty, we do what is valuable (not the other way around).  Divine-command theory says that something is good for no other reason than that God commands it.  Kant's ethics is called formalism because it focuses on the form or structure of a moral judgment (the fact that all moral directives have the form "you ought to do X").  The fundamental aim of Kant's ethical theory is to determine how a command can be a moral command with a particularly obligating character.

Kant's Ethics

· According to Kant there are several problems with consequentialism

· According to the consequentialist, no act (no matter how evil or cruel) is right or wrong in itself

· If we are already inclined to do an act because we naturally seek to produce good consequences (e.g., pleasure, happiness), then we are not acting freely and therefore not morally responsibly

· Because of differences in their experiences and backgrounds, people differ as to what are good consequences; therefore, we can never achieve agreement on the end of moral behavior or on an ulitmate criterion for making such decisions

· The consequences of our actions are often out of our control, so we cannot be held responsible for those consequences or have our actions judged based on them