Chapter 2 Review
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Texas, Arlington *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
3304
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
8
Uploaded by joliembrown
Jolie Brown
Chapter 2 Review
Business Ethics
Dr. House
Overview
1.
Before answering the following questions, please read pages 74-76.
2.
Please summarize the overall dilemma regarding Caltex company’s business dealings in South Africa. (pp. 74-75) Do you think Caltex should do business in South Africa? Explain.
Caltex is an oil company that sold oil to and opened gas stations in South Africa during the Apartheid. This was a period in the 20th century that included systematic racism and
threat to life of all non-white South African residents. The dilemma was whether or not Caltex, an American company, should continue to do business in South Africa where there business was greatly helping the same South African government that was oppressing all non-whites in South Africa. The solution to pull all stores and business our seems simple until you consider the fact that Caltex leaving South Africa would hurt the non-white residents as well as the white residents. I think that Caltex should not do business with South Africa. This is because, although their business is helping those who are being oppressed, they are also enabling a government that is opressing people based on their race. If they continue to do this, it tells the government of South Africa that what they’re doing is okay and it doesn’t need to change. Discontinuing business may bring change that positively affects residents more than Caltex’s absence would negatively affect them initially. 3.
What is the ethical argument(s) made that Caltex should leave South Africa, using the Rights, Justice, and Ethic of Care theories? (pp. 75-76)
Caltex leaving South Africa would essentially put the South African government on notice. Their absence would not only cause a financial and resource strain on the government, but it would let the government know that this would behavior would not be
tolerated. It would also set a precedence for other companies about how the situation should be handled. This would be acting with an ethic of care for the non-white citizens of South Africa because it would be encouraging long term change. 4.
What is the ethical argument(s) made that Caltex should stay in South Africa, using the Utilitarianism, Ethic of Care, and Virtue Ethics theories? (p. 76)
Caltex leaving South Africa would place a bind on all of the non-white individuals they currently employ. It would also place a strain in the communities in which they operate as their absence would cause a hemorrhaging of money from that area. In this way, it
would be best for the greatest number of people to stay in the area. Also, it would be caring for individuals and communities to remain there instead of leaving.
5.
Ethic of Care is used to argue both leaving and staying in South Africa. How is this possible? What does this tell us about the effective use ethical theories? (74-76)
This is possible because sometimes the arguments of ethical theories are perspective based. This simply means that the argument will depend on what perspective you are arguing from. This tells us that ethical theories are extremely effective for not only telling
us the best decision to make in a situation based on the principles behind that theory, but also for showing us different sides of the same disagreement. It helps us to humanize other people we may see as horrible for making a certain decision. Utilitarianism
6.
Before answering the following questions, please read the Ford Pinto story, on pages 77-78.
7.
Please summarize the overall dilemma regarding Ford Motor Company and their development of the Pinto. (pp. 76-78) How does the concept of Utilitarianism apply? (p. 78)
Ford developed a car, the Pinto, that was up to factory and government standards (in other words, it was deontologically sound), the only issue with the vehicle was the propensity for combustion at accidents above 20 mph. Ford could fix the problem, but the cost to fix the Pinto was greater than the cost they would have to pay out in lawsuits should they deliver the car to market as is. They decided to release the Pinto, and as predicted, some people died because of the defect and others were left permanently marred with painful skin grafts. Utilitarianism applies here because although Ford saved money that they claimed society would have to pay for should they fix the Pinto, the number of lives affected by them releasing the car as it was was much greater. Not only did it affect the lives of those who were directly injured by the Pinto, but also their families, friends, employers, and community. Therefore the greatest good for the greatest number of people would have been to fix the Pinto initially. 8.
Please explain the concept of Utilitarianism? What are the three (3) common misunderstandings of Utilitarianism? (pp. 79-83)
As the book explains, utilitarianism is the act of considering an action as it relates to the
benefits and costs of everyone in society, and should generally be the action that produces the most good for the most amount of people.
The three common misunderstandings are; an action that produces the most utility for the majority of people is the right action even if it doesn’t produce the most utility for the one performing it (self-sacrificing), second is that we must consider both the immediate and future consequences of our actions from a utilitarian point of view, and finally the best option is not the one that best outweighs its own costs, but the one that produces the most utility overall. 9.
Please complete the case study, Should Companies Dump Their Waste in Poor Countries.
(pp. 80-81)
A utilitarian could reject points 1 and 2. This is because in point 1, the argument that wages are lost when people get sick from pollution can be applied to people in western and third world countries. This is not a valid argument for the greatest good for the greatest number. In point 2, spreading pollution to areas that are not already polluted will make those areas vastly worse for life than they were previously. In comparison, adding more pollution to already polluted areas has no great short term effects. Therefore it is not the greatest good for the greatest number to outsource pollution. A utilitarian must accept points 3 and 4. Point 3 claims that pollution will do more harm in a longer lifespan country because people can develop chronic terminal diseases that would not be developed in shorter lifespan countries. This is a valid argument and in this case outsourcing pollution would be the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The only reason why argument 4 is a utilitarian argument is because the poorer country would benefit financially from the outsourcing of pollution. Because both parties would benefit more than they would should the pollution stay in it’s home country, this argument is utilitarian. 10.Please describe the four (4) problems discussed regarding Rights and Justice, as they relate to Utilitarianism. (pp 86-88)
One problem is that utilitarianism looks at the utility in the whole of society rather than how that utility is distributed among members of society. This means that as long as the “right amount” of utility is being distributed, it doesn’t matter how it is being distributed which can cause lapses in justice. Another problem is that sometimes because of the principles of utilitarianism, the rights of individuals are stripped because utilitarianism deems it most proper. This becomes problematic because acts such as murder (without
cause) become proper as long as the utility for the majority is justified. Another issue is whether or not people have a right to know all of the details when an act is being performed that affects them, but increases the utility of a situation. Should they be informed? Is that their right? Finally, utilitarianism may strip the opportunity for all to share the same amount of cost, in favor of a few shouldering a great burden.
11.What are the key questions regarding the fundamental issue with the Utilitarian approach? (p. 88 – 1
st
paragraph) Any thoughts?
“Do people have the right to know what they are buying when they choose to purchase a product? Do people have a right to choose whether to have greater risk added to their
lives? Did the makers of the Pinto violate the basic right of customers to freely choose for themselves whether to accept a riskier car in return for a lower price?”
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
I do think people have a right to know about these decisions because they should have a right to choose if they want this greater risk in their lives. It is for this reasoning that I think the makers of the Pinto did violate the basic rights of the consumer to choose freely. There is a chance that some of the people who died or were injured because of the Pinto defect would have still bought the vehicle, but there is equal chance that some
of them would still be alive today if they had a choice. This alone makes it wrong that they were never given a choice when Ford knowingly sold them a vehicle with this defect.
12.What are the “two main difficulties” facing Utilitarianism? (p. 90 – 2
nd
full-
paragraph) Do you agree with the third issue mentioned? Explain. The first difficulty is that utilitarianism asks to answer questions that are extremely difficult to quantify and second that it has difficulty dealing with issues of rights and justice. The third issue presented is that utilitarianism does not deem it necessary for those making the decisions to inform those that the decision affects. I do agree that this is an issue because I think it is a right for people to know the reasoning behind what is happening to them. Especially in a democratic society like ours where the source of an effect may determine the way someone votes etc. Rights and Duties
13.Before answering the following questions, please read page 90-92. Note:
Please pay particular attention to the final paragraph, on pages 91-92.
14.Please define: Rights, Legal Rights, and Moral Rights. (p. 93)
Right- A right is someone’s entitlement to something, be that a tangible object, or entitlement to being treated a certain way by those around them. This includes the entitlment to be able to
act in a certain way. Legal Right- If this entitlement is derived from a legal system that enables an individual to act in a certain way, or requires other individuals to act in a certain way towards an indvidual, it is considered a legal right. Moral Right- Moral, or human rights, are rights that are considered inherent to human beings, and not rights that need to be explicitly stated in a formal form of legality. 15.Please describe and provide your thoughts on the two examples given – “Fun
Couple” and “Borrowed Diamond.” (p. 94)
The fun couple example described a couple who were engaged in an activity when they
thought they were in complete privacy. You somehow manage to see this activity, and if
they knew you saw it they would be extremely ashamed. You never tell them or speak to them again and they live the rest of their lives thinking no one has ever seen them do
the act. They are not injured by what you have done, but you have obviously violated their right to privacy. I think that this example is a great example of violating someone’s rights without causing injury to them. This is an obvious violation of privacy but did not injure the offended party. Even though they didn’t know, it was very wrong.
The borrowed diamond example described a situation in which you have a friend who owns a diamond worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. You borrow the diamond without his knowledge to use as collateral to secure a loan, and use the loan money to invest in the stock market. You then get a return on your investment multiple times what
you invested, you get the diamond back and return it without your friend ever knowing. This is another example of violating rights without causing harm to the other party. This is also an example where what was done was extremely wrong. In my opinion, the greatest wrong in this situation is that the return of the diamond was not guaranteed. If the stock market investment turned out to be a flop, as they often are, the diamond would have been lost, and the friend would have had nothing to do with its loss. 16.Please define: Negative Rights, and Positive Rights. (pp. 96-97)
Negative rights are duties we have to not engage in certain activities in order to preserve the rights of others. Positive rights imply negative rights with the addition that if
someone does not have the ability to properly engage in something considered a right, then society or institutions of society must assist them in achieving this right. 17.What are the key elements regarding Contractual Rights and Duties (See Quick Review 2.6)? (p. 97)
Contractual rights are specific, and only apply to the parties who agreed to them. They require inclusion of publicly accepted rules about what agreements are and what obligations the agreements demand. They describe the special rights and duties of what
going under contract with this authority will afford or impose. And they require that the parties in question are going under contract willfully, and that they fully understand what
they are going into contract for when they agree. 18.Why are Contractual Rights important? (See 4
th
full-paragraph, p. 97)
Contractual rights are imperative for a society with businesses to flourish. Business transactions require businesses to rely on the word of each other, so without contractual
rights, no one could rely on another doing what they said they would do (this would cause a devolution into chaos). 19.What are the four (4) kinds of ethical rules that govern contacts? (p. 98)
The four kinds of ethical rules that govern contracts are as follow. One, both parties must be fully aware of the kind of agreement they are entering into. Second, neither party can intentionally misrepresent the nature of the agreement. Third, neither party
can be forced under the contract. Finally, the contract cannot bind the parties into an immoral act. Moral Theory
20.Define Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative theory, in general. (p. 98)
Kant’s cetergorical imperative says that everyone should be treated like a free person equal to everyone else, and everyone should treat others as though they have this same right. ●
Define Kant’s “First Formulation” of his Categorical Imperative theory. (p. 99)
The first formulation was that one should not allows one’s own personal and private reasoning for committing an act to become law for the reason why everyone does a certain act. Rather, one should make a decision only if, to that person, the reasoning for that decision is the same reasoning everyone else would use to make that decision. ●
What are the two criteria for determining moral right and wrong, under this theory? (p. 99)
The first condition is universalizability, which means that a persons reason for acting should be able to be generalized to every person in a similar situation. The
second condition is reversibility which means the way that a person acts towards someone else should be the same way that they themselves would want to be treated in a similar situation. ●
Define Kant’s “Second Formulation” of his Categorical Imperative theory. (p. 100, last paragraph)
An action is right for a person if the action is not solely to advance a person’s own interests, but that they treat them as they have freely consented to be treated, and that the action contributes to their ability to pursue what they have freely chosen to pursue.
21.Please complete the case study, Working for Eli Lilly & Company. (p. 92)
1.
Eli Lilly’s practices are justified under the utilitarian point of view. This is because,
though their collection of subjects was not necessarily based on ethical reasoning, the purpose those subjects served was ultimately for the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
2.
I do not think the practice of using homeless alcoholics is morally appropriate. This is because they cannot make an informed, unbiased decision on their own. Their decision will ultimately be driven by their need to meet their basic needs and is therefore unjustified.
22.Please read pages 105-107, before answering the following questions:
23.Please define and explain
the following:
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
a. Distributive Justice, Retributive Justice, and Compensatory Justice (p.107)
Distributive Justice- This is the fair distribution of society’s benefits and burdens
Retributive Justice- This is the imposition of punishments and penalties on those who do wrong
Compensatory Justice- This is the just way of compensating people when something has been wrongfully done to them
b. Egalitarianism (pp. 108-109)- The belief that everyone should be given exactly equal shares of a society’s benefits and burdens. c. Capital Justice (Capitalism) (pp. 110-111)- Benefits should be distributed according to the contribution to society made by that individual
d. Socialism (pp. 111-112)- Work burden should be distributed based on ability and benefits should be distributed based on need
e. Libertarianism (pp. 113-114)- People are free to keep, and free to give as they see fit
f. Justice as Fairness (pp. 114-115)
●
Principle of Equal Liberty- each individuals liberties must be equal to that of others, and protected from invasion by others
●
Difference Principle- a productive society will incorporate the inequalities of others, and must work to balance these inequalities unless this balancing would burden society to the point that everyone was worse off than before.
●
Principle of Fair Equality of Opportunity- Everyone should have equal opportunity to achieve the privileged positions in society. This means that these positions should not discriminate based on race, gender, etc, and that each member in society should have equal opportunity to achieve the training
required for these positions. g. Retributive Justice (117-118)- Fairness when blaming or punishing a person for doing wrong
24.Briefly explain the general concepts of the Ethic of Care theory. (pp. 119 – See Quick Review)
First, claims ethics do not need to be impartial, even though traditional ethical theories assume ethics have to be impartial. Second, emphasis is placed on preserving and nurturing concrete valuable relationships. Third, we should care for those dependent on and related to us. Finally, since the self requires caring relationships with others, we should place value on and nurture those relationships. 25.Briefly review the general theory of the Virtue Ethics and then answer the following questions: (pp. 126-135)
●
Define “moral virtue.” (p. 128)- a disposition to behave in certain ways as defined by the characteristics of a good human being that are habitual character traits of the individual performing them. ●
Explain Aristotle’s Virtue Theory. (pp. 129-130)- A moral virtue is a habit that allows someone to lead a moral life. He goes on to say that leading a morally virtuous life entails making decisions that are neither too far or not far enough
in level of action. The proper decision is the one that lies between these two ideas.
●
Explain St. Thomas Acquinas’ theory. (p. 130) St. Thomas Acquinas subscribed to Aristotle’s moral virtue theory adding that one should not just pursue what makes one happy in life, but also what pleases God. As a Christian, he felt it necessary to include this aspect of moral virtue. ●
Explain Alasdair MacIntyre claims regarding Virtue ethics. (p. 130-131) Virtues are aspects of humanity that are highly regarded because of their nature that encourages man to do good. This not only includes a positive good, but a negative good as well.
●
Explain the author’s general definition of “virtue theory.” (p. 132) This theory posits that the goal of leading a moral life is to establish, grow, and practice virtuous morals over the course of your lifetime.