Case Study
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Windsor *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
03-60-305
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by ChefFlyMaster953
Case Study #1: Volkswagen Scandal
1)
The activities conducted by Volkswagen involved intentional deception, the manipulation
of emissions data, and fraud, all of which directly violated ethical norms across a range of
ethical theories. One disputed view that may, nevertheless, support the corporation in
question is ethical egoism. Ethical egoism is an ethical theory that suggests individuals
should act in their self-interest. From an ethical egoism standpoint, it can be argued that
Volkswagen’s priorities and duties are to its shareholders as well as the financial well-
being of the company thus the company’s actions to manipulate emissions data are
justified as it allowed the company to maintain profitability and protect the interests of its
shareholders, including investors and employees who depend on the company’s success
for their livelihood. Another argument that could be made from an ethical egoism
perspective is that in a competitive marketplace, companies have a moral obligation to do
whatever it is to gain a competitive advantage. Volkswagen’s actions may be viewed as
strategic in order to gain an advantage in the market by offering vehicles that claim to be
more environmentally friendly, potentially attracting more customers and increasing
sales. However, these actions resulted in significant harm to the environment and public
health, which ethical egoism does not adequately address as the theory has many
limitations in addressing the rights and well-being of others.
2)
One ethical theory that can be used to refute the ethical justification of Volkswagen's
actions in the emissions scandal is utilitarianism. According to utilitarianism, acts are
evaluated based on how much happiness (or utility) and how much suffering they cause.
The morally appropriate course of conduct maximizes overall utility. In this case,
Volkswagen's actions had significant negative consequences, making it ethically
defenseless from a utilitarian perspective. Volkswagen’s actions involved intentionally
manipulating emissions test results to make their vehicles appear more environmentally
friendly than they were[ CITATION Rus15 \l 1033 ]. As a result, vehicles emitted higher
levels of pollutants into the environment than they were supposed to, contributing to air
pollution and potential health risks. Therefore, Volkswagen’s actions did not maximize
overall utility but instead resulted in a net decrease in happiness or well-being. The
negative consequences, including environmental harm, financial losses, potential health
risks, and damage to trust, far outweighed any potential short-term gains for the company.
These actions have led to a decrease in overall societal utility due to violating the trust of
consumers and regulators in companies to provide accurate information.
Case Study #2: Boeing 737 Disasters
1)
The Boeing 737 disasters are considered to be cases of ethical failure violating all ethical
theories as they involved issues related to safety, transparency, and corporate
responsibility.
2)
Deontological ethics focuses on the moral duty and principles that guide actions, rather
than solely considering the consequences of those actions as well as emphasizes the
importance of adhering to moral duties and principles. However, the Boeing 737 MAX
violated several moral duties and principles. While developing and operating the aircraft,
the engineers, executives, and employees at Boeing failed to prioritize the safety of
passengers and crew throughout the decision-making process. Additionally, the Boeing
737 also failed to attend to the duty to truthfulness as they concealed safety issues from
the public. Focusing on a cost-efficient approach, Boeing remodeled one of their planes
as MCAS was designed to address stability issues but had critical design flaws as the
designers produced blueprints twice as quickly as usual, frequently sending incomplete or
inaccurate schematics to the production floor. Boeing's failure to address these issues
adequately and its decision to provide limited information to pilots about MCAS
compromised the safety of the aircraft[ CITATION Rob22 \l 1033 ]. Furthermore,
deontological ethics requires individuals and organizations to take responsibility for their
actions and rectify any harm caused when mistakes arise. Boeing did not admit fault for
their actions until four days after receiving many requests for the same information.
Although they had come clean with admitting to their faulty design, they continued to
defend themselves for not clarifying with their operating team and pilots the potential
risks that could occur [ CITATION Dar19 \l 1033 ].
References
[1] R. Hotten, “Volkswagen: The Scandal explained,” BBC News,
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772 (accessed Sep. 28, 2023).
[2] R. Prentice, “Engineering ethics and the Boeing scandal,” Ethics Unwrapped,
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/engineering-ethics-and-the-boeing-scandal (accessed
Sep. 29, 2023).
[3] D. Campbell, “Redline,” The Verge, https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/2/18518176/boeing-
737-max-crash-problems-human-error-mcas-faa (accessed Sep. 28, 2023).
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