need help

Ethical Theories Introduction to Ethics Introduction Delta Chicken, Inc. is a chicken factory located in the midst of the Mississippi Delta. It employs approximately 85% of the local community. Recently, the fear of bird flu has reduced American consumption of chicken. Under normal circumstances, this would not be a problem; however, Delta Chicken, Inc. is already experiencing reduced profits because of the new enthusiasm about vegetarianism and veganism. The CEO of Delta Chicken, Inc., John Doe, and company executives realized in January of this year that a large portion of the employee workforce would have to be cut, but they did not give any indication of the problem to employees. From January through May, the company executives were trying to work out various strategies to avoid layoffs. However, in May, it was decided that no other measures could be taken to avoid a layoff of a large portion of the employees. In June, 50% of the employees received a 30-day notice indicating they were being permanently terminated from the company. Was it ethical for the Delta Chicken, Inc. executives to wait until June to give the employees notice of the situation? Defining Ethics and Ethical Theory For many, the concepts of ethics and morality are synonymous. Webster's dictionary defines ethics as "the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation" (Ethics, 2014). However, morality is defined by Webster as "conformity to ideals of right human conduct" (Morality, 2014). Although there is an intrinsic link between the concepts, they are not the same. Morality is concerned with the human conditions that are determinant factors in individual decisions of right and wrong while ethical theory focuses on the reasoning and explanation behind a moral point of view and/or system or procedure. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is often associated with John Stuart Mill. The primary concept of this school of thought is to devise a system in which our obligation is to perform the action that creates the greatest good for all involved. This process focuses on a particular purpose or utility. The focus of this theory is on the result, not the means to it—having good intentions is not sufficient justification under this theory. Kantianism Kantianism is attributed to Immanuel Kant whose philosophy appears to be in direct opposition to the theory of Mill. Whereas Mill looks to the result of a set of actions, Kant's theory looks to the intent of the individual. Under the Kantian school of thought, there is an emphasis on the good will of the individual. "A good will is one that acts in accordance with universal moral laws that the autonomous human being freely gives itself" (Immanuel Kant, n.d.). Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics, attributed to Aristotle, focuses on the individual and characteristics like honesty, friendliness, charity, and fairness. Aristotle believed that there are nine virtues and the goal of each was to achieve the golden mean—a state of being that lies exactly in the middle of two vices. Ethics and the Law When one considers all of the theories associated with ethics, it is clear that the determination of what constitutes right and wrong becomes very blurry. Currently in our society, many people make assessments of what is proper behavior based upon what is legal versus what is illegal from a legislative perspective. But just because someone does not break a law does not mean that he or she is considering the human condition when making determinations about right and wrong. Therefore, the new environment creates the question of whether a law-abiding citizen is an ethical one. References Ethics. (2014). In Merriam-Webster's online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethics Immanuel Kant. (n.d.). Retrieved from Answers.com Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/immanuel-kant Morality. (2014). In Merriam-Webster's online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/morality?show=0&t=1394642125 Moral and Ethical Principles Morals, ethics, and values are fundamental components when critically analyzing viewpoints, behaviors, and facts. These components lay down the foundations of how a person should behave and act and are even the precursor to knowing right from wrong. People learn these components consciously and subconsciously as they grow into society. Society prescribes a set of rules for how people conduct themselves, and it is each person’s responsibility to refrain from negative or unethical behaviors. Some of these influences stem from people's parents and religious upbringings, and some people form these themselves. Either way, it is each person's individual duty to form good characters and good judgments on how they conduct themselves. How can someone achieve a good character and good judgments and live a good life? Regarding moral character, there are several specific moral and ethical principles. Deontologists (formalism-Kantianism) believed that you should act with a solid understanding of moral principles; this brings forth moral actions. You have an obligation to act in a way that promotes positive conduct; you should behave this way because it is right (categorical imperative). Otherwise, you are not making a sound universal rule for all to follow. Likewise, it is not appropriate to act differently for one person from how you would act for someone else. You are supposed to treat everyone the same, no matter who they are (practical imperative). Kant believed in universal rules that should apply to everyone. However, one must never use someone else to achieve this, no matter the outcome. You should not hurt or harm someone to protect or save someone else, unlike the golden rule (Albanese, 2008). Consequentialism (utilitarian or teleological—Mill and Bentham) states that good results stem from good action. Consequences are the root of this ethical approach, in which the motivating factor is the pursuit of happiness and the avoidance of pain (hedonism). Of course, there are differences in how one would judge happiness; this would not be equal for all. Personal versus social happiness (utilitarianism) and selfishness are not options because happiness cannot be achieved if someone is selfish by nature. In this case, consequentialists believe in self-sacrifice for the good of others as prescribed in the golden rule. Moral virtue of educating oneself in what would allow for your happiness and the happiness of others is one of the distinct characteristics of consequentialism. What motivates a person is unimportant; it is more important to choose between acting in a manner that will bring forth a reward or positive consequence and acting in one that inflicts harm on a person. The decision should be beneficial to all parties (Albanese, 2008). Lastly, virtue ethics (Aristotelianism) centers on the notion of learning through experience and obtaining what is good—basically, the elements of life that people need, not want. For example, people need shelter, clothes, food, good health, knowledge, and civil liberties (apparent goods). To Artistotelians, happiness is the ultimate goal. To purse happiness, a person must possess moral virtue and may only be achieved by virtuous actions. Moral virtue is the internal process of being a good person, through positive means, to develop natural intellect and morality. You have and will continue to learn from experience, whether it is through education or through others; the difference will be what you take away from those experiences. You may learn courage, ambition, truthfulness, or even cowardice or vanity. You may be good, or you may be less than good; either way, you are building your moral character. What have you seen before in others that you find yourself doing now? What have you seen that you would never do for some reason? Through this knowledge and practice or avoidance, you have built your moral character (Albanese, 2008). Reference Albanese, J. S. (2008). Professional ethics in criminal justice: Being ethical when no one is looking (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Kantianism and Virtue Ethics Kantianism Kantianism is attributed to Immanuel Kant, whose philosophy appears to be in direct opposition to the theory of John Stuart Mill. Where Mill's theory looks to the result of a set of actions, Kant's theory looks to the intent of the individual. Under the Kantian school of thought, there is an emphasis on the good will of the individual: "A good will is one that acts in accordance with universal moral laws that the autonomous human being freely gives itself" (Immanuel Kant, n.d.). Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics, attributed to Aristotle, focuses on the individual and characteristics like honesty, friendliness, charity, and fairness. Aristotle believed that there are nine virtues and the goal of each is to achieve the golden mean—a state of being that lies exactly in the middle of two vices. Ethics and the Law When one considers all of the theories associated with ethics, it is clear that the determination of what constitutes right and wrong becomes very blurry. Currently in society, many people make assessments of what is proper behavior based upon what is legal versus what is illegal from a legislative perspective. But just because someone does not break a law does not mean that he or she is considering the human condition when making determinations about right and wrong. Therefore, the new environment creates the question of whether a law-abiding citizen is an ethical one. Reference Immanuel Kant. (n.d.). Retrieved from the Answers Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/immanuel-kant Ethical Relativism Ethical relativism may well be the ethical system of choice in Western culture in the 21st century. The ethical relativist is tied to the philosophy that different cultures have different prevailing ethical standards. In this case, all things are malleable, and even changing situations could create different responses. This attitude is an attempt to deny ethical absolutes (Shih, 2002). Ethical relativism is antithetical to universalism and creates a nonjudgmental, more pragmatic approach to business ethics (Prawda, 2009). This fluid ethical atmosphere can be problematic in the context of global business and does support multiple ethical standards. On the other hand, it is respectful of different cultures and not likely to create internal conflict in parts of the world where human rights are viewed from a different viewpoint. Ethical relativism is situational in nature and can allow ethical conduct to fit multiple situations. This may not be compatible with those who prize human rights above all else (Ball & Gready, 2007). Ethical relativism refers to the fact that ethics is not a scientific subject. The notion of morality differs from society to society. Are there certain actions which are universally right or wrong? Is murder universally wrong? If this is the case, how do we view the defense industry and projects related to defense? What about projects which have a deleterious effect on one’s health? Where do we draw the line? Is there a “slippery slope”? Do the ends ever justify the means? If so when? References Ball, O., & Gready, P. (2007). The no-nonsense guide to human rights. New York: Internationalist. Prawda, G. (2009). The cultural dimension of business ethics. Retrieved from the Philosophical Dialogues Web site: http://www.philodialogue.com/40.html Shih, C. (2002). Opening the dichotomy of universalism and relativism. Retrieved from the University of Denver Web site: http://www.du.edu/korbel/hrhw/volumes/2002/2-1/shih2-1.pdf Deductive Vs. Inductive Reasoning Deductive Reasoning A conclusion is reached through the logical synthesis of two or more true statements. Example: Premise 1: All rectangles have four sides. Premise 2: A square has four sides. Conclusion: A square is a rectangle. Inductive Reasoning A generalization is drawn by observing a number of specific examples. Example: Premise 1: All rectangles have four sides. Premise 2: A square has four sides. Conclusion: All rectangles are squares. Both methods attempt to solve a question. Introduction to Ethics Defining Ethics and Ethical Theory For many, the concepts of ethics and morality are synonymous. Webster's Dictionary defines ethics as "the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation" (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 2003). However, morality is defined by Webster as "conformity to ideals of right human conduct" (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 2003). Although there is an intrinsic link between the concepts, they are not the same. Morality is concerned with the human conditions that are determinant factors in individual decisions of right and wrong while ethical theory focuses on the reasoning and explanation behind a moral point of view and/or system or procedure. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is often associated with John Stuart Mill. The primary concept of this school of thought is to devise a system in which our obligation is to perform the action that creates the greatest good for all involved. This process focuses on a particular purpose or utility. The focus of this theory is on the result, not the means to it—having good intentions is not sufficient justification under this theory. Kantianism Kantianism is attributed to Immanuel Kant whose philosophy appears to be in direct opposition to the theory of Mill. Whereas Mill looks to the result of a set of actions, Kant's theory looks to the intent of the individual. Under the Kantian school of thought, there is an emphasis on the good will of the individual. "A good will is one that acts in accordance with universal moral laws that the autonomous human being freely gives itself" (Immanuel Kant, n.d.). Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics, attributed to Aristotle, focuses on the individual and characteristics like honesty, friendliness, charity, and fairness. Aristotle believed that there are nine virtues and the goal of each was to achieve the golden mean—a state of being that lies exactly in the middle of two vices. Ethics and the Law When one considers all of the theories associated with ethics, it is clear that the determination of what constitutes right and wrong becomes very blurry. Currently in our society, many people make assessments of what is proper behavior based upon what is legal versus what is illegal from a legislative perspective. But just because someone does not break a law does not mean that he or she is considering the human condition when making determinations about right and wrong. Therefore, the new environment creates the question of whether a law-abiding citizen is an ethical one. References Immanuel Kant. (n.d.). Retrieved from the Answers.com Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/immanuel-kant Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (11th ed.). (2003). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.