Could someone please help me with a reply to my classmate reponse. Here is the question: Learning Activity #1 One of the most important items that we have discussed over the course of the semester is the concept that ethics are constantly changing and shifting. This week think about some of the material in the readings, and discuss if it is fair for a company to have one set of ethics when you join, and later force you to agree to a different ethics policy later on in your tenure? Taking this concept one step further, should the ethical decisions that one makes 10, 20, or even 30 years ago, which at the time may have been ethical, but now appear to be unethical be used as a way to make that individual (or company) appear to be an unethical actor? Make sure you support your answers. Students should plan on having initial postings completed by Thursday evenings, and submit responses to at least two other student postings by Sunday evening. Here is my answer: These two ethics theories help to define the ethical action as below. Utilitarian Theory – The utilitarian theory stats that a action which has a maximum utilization impact or which helps to utilize for various people (maximum) is known as an ethical action. So basically the ethical tag on an action can be put based on the outcome of the action. Thus an action which results maximum use, then the action is known as ethical action. Kantian Theory – Kantian theory states that an action is ethical if the action is performed with meeting the moral, means it should be right action, without considering whether it has maximum utilization/ benefit or happiness among the people. It purely depends upon the nature of the action and it should be morally correct. The action should meet rights of human being and should not utilize any person for business purposes. Business Code of Ethics – Business code of ethics is defined as the code of conducts being used at the organization level, to ensure the ethical culture in the organization. These business codes planned to achieve the ethical environment in the organization. These are the well written statement of codes, which guides the employees during the ethical scenario in the organization. The purpose of these codes of conduct is to have well-written codes which needs to be followed by all the employees to develop the ethical culture and ethical environment in the organization. One set of ethics at joining and later another set of ethics:- The company ask to sign one set of ethics when an employee joins the organization. These set of ethics are basically the ethics standards of the organization which develops the right culture at the organization. The employee understands that these ethics will be for long term and the company will follow and use these ethics only. The employee thinks that the ethics do not change over time and the ethics will remain same for the long duration of the organization. But if some organization wants to have double standards of ethics at their organization, then they may ask the employee to sign another set of ethics later during the employee’s tenure. So this double standard of ethics of an organization is not a good approach and they are doing the wrong practices at their organization. In general, the ethics standards should be remains common and should not be change over time. The organization cannot keep two sets of ethics standards; one for new joinee employees and other for old employees. This inappropriate approach will dilute the culture of the organization. This will lead to major issues in the organization and the organization will not run for long time. The ethical decisions that one makes 10, 20, or even 30 years ago, which at the time may have been ethical, but now appear to be unethical be used as a way to make that individual (or company) appear to be an unethical actor. This does not look sound and meaningful. The ethics do not change over time. The degree of changes in ethics is not so much that it will be just opposite to the initial ethics values. The ethics do change, but the changes will be very minor and this will be expanding the explanation of the ethics so it will be used for right purpose and avoid the misleading part of the ethics. So we cannot say that the ethical decision on one day looks to be ethical, but later after 10,20,30 years of time, the decision does not look to be ethical and we cannot blame that the persons involved in those decision were unethical actors. The ethical changes can be based on the changes in the legal laws as per land government. So these changes needs to be incorporated in the company ethics value. So we cannot see such a major changes in the ethics value. The organization should keep the same ethics standards at the organization. Many corporations follow the codes of conduct adequately and use it as a tool for developing the right culture and environment at the organization level. Though some of the corporations simply pays lip services to their codes of ethics. So by doing this they also suffer a lot in terms of their employees management. The employees are not satisfied and will have adverse impact on the productivity(Magloff, 2017). So codes of ethics are essential and vital for the organization and not for lip service. The ethical codes is a tool which helps the organization for long term survival. The organization needs right code of conducts which can develop the right environment which can last for long time. The organization which does not follow ethical code of conduct will not be able to survival in long term. References: Magloff, L. (n.d.). What Is the Code of Business Conduct? Retrieved December 15, 2017, from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/code-business-conduct-2732.html Here is my classmate response: Although I disagree with you that “ethics do not change over time” but it seems I could agree that changes in ethics may have influenced the legality of what the law may deem what is right and wrong. The core value of our moral principles have been pass down by our ancestors whether it is cultural, religious or heritage, I do believe that it does constantly improve for the better over time to include what was not considered in the old days. Professor Calman noted that changes in ethics is a result in changes or expansion of our knowledge, social and cultural awareness (values and norms) and life experience (2002) that the society today must take into these changes into account society’s ethical standards has to improve as well. As an example, euthanasia is illegal in most countries but here in the U.S, some states have already legalized euthanasia or assisted-suicide. The latest state that was legalized the Right to Die issue was here in California when Brittany Maynard gain national attention due to terminal brain cancer that she wanted to die with dignity rather waited for the disease to take over. During that time, euthanasia or assisted death was still not legal in California that she and her family had to move to Oregon where the “Death with Dignity Act” was already a law (CNN, 2017). California did not pass this law until after her death but California Governor Brown explained the tough ethical dilemma he had whether to sign the bill into law. Then he thought about himself “dying [with] prolonged and excruciating pain” and thought about it would be a relief if he has the option to die comfortably (CNN, 2017). I would believe that his value and principles says life is precious for another to take away but I also believe that he made a lot of research, pros and cons, and society’s tolerance before he signed the bill. We have already been exercising it with our pets so morally speaking; I do not think that a pet’s life is much less precious than ours when looking at it in the perspective of quality of life.
Could someone please help me with a reply to my classmate reponse.
Here is the question: Learning Activity #1 One of the most important items that we have discussed over the course of the semester is the concept that ethics are constantly changing and shifting. This week think about some of the material in the readings, and discuss if it is fair for a company to have one set of ethics when you join, and later force you to agree to a different ethics policy later on in your tenure? Taking this concept one step further, should the ethical decisions that one makes 10, 20, or even 30 years ago, which at the time may have been ethical, but now appear to be unethical be used as a way to make that individual (or company) appear to be an unethical actor? Make sure you support your answers. Students should plan on having initial postings completed by Thursday evenings, and submit responses to at least two other student postings by Sunday evening.
Here is my answer:
These two ethics theories help to define the ethical action as below.
Utilitarian Theory – The utilitarian theory stats that a action which has a maximum utilization impact or which helps to utilize for various people (maximum) is known as an ethical action. So basically the ethical tag on an action can be put based on the outcome of the action. Thus an action which results maximum use, then the action is known as ethical action.
Kantian Theory – Kantian theory states that an action is ethical if the action is performed with meeting the moral, means it should be right action, without considering whether it has maximum utilization/ benefit or happiness among the people. It purely depends upon the nature of the action and it should be morally correct. The action should meet rights of human being and should not utilize any person for business purposes.
One set of ethics at joining and later another set of ethics:- The company ask to sign one set of ethics when an employee joins the organization. These set of ethics are basically the ethics standards of the organization which develops the right culture at the organization. The employee understands that these ethics will be for long term and the company will follow and use these ethics only. The employee thinks that the ethics do not change over time and the ethics will remain same for the long duration of the organization. But if some organization wants to have double standards of ethics at their organization, then they may ask the employee to sign another set of ethics later during the employee’s tenure. So this double standard of ethics of an organization is not a good approach and they are doing the wrong practices at their organization. In general, the ethics standards should be remains common and should not be change over time. The organization cannot keep two sets of ethics standards; one for new joinee employees and other for old employees. This inappropriate approach will dilute the culture of the organization. This will lead to major issues in the organization and the organization will not run for long time.
The ethical decisions that one makes 10, 20, or even 30 years ago, which at the time may have been ethical, but now appear to be unethical be used as a way to make that individual (or company) appear to be an unethical actor.
This does not look sound and meaningful. The ethics do not change over time. The degree of changes in ethics is not so much that it will be just opposite to the initial ethics values. The ethics do change, but the changes will be very minor and this will be expanding the explanation of the ethics so it will be used for right purpose and avoid the misleading part of the ethics. So we cannot say that the ethical decision on one day looks to be ethical, but later after 10,20,30 years of time, the decision does not look to be ethical and we cannot blame that the persons involved in those decision were unethical actors. The ethical changes can be based on the changes in the legal laws as per land government. So these changes needs to be incorporated in the company ethics value. So we cannot see such a major changes in the ethics value. The organization should keep the same ethics standards at the organization.
Many corporations follow the codes of conduct adequately and use it as a tool for developing the right culture and environment at the organization level. Though some of the corporations simply pays lip services to their codes of ethics. So by doing this they also suffer a lot in terms of their employees management. The employees are not satisfied and will have adverse impact on the productivity(Magloff, 2017). So codes of ethics are essential and vital for the organization and not for lip service. The ethical codes is a tool which helps the organization for long term survival. The organization needs right code of conducts which can develop the right environment which can last for long time. The organization which does not follow ethical code of conduct will not be able to survival in long term.
References:
Magloff, L. (n.d.). What Is the Code of Business Conduct? Retrieved December 15, 2017, from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/code-business-conduct-2732.html
Here is my classmate response: Although I disagree with you that “ethics do not change over time” but it seems I could agree that changes in ethics may have influenced the legality of what the law may deem what is right and wrong. The core value of our moral principles have been pass down by our ancestors whether it is cultural, religious or heritage, I do believe that it does constantly improve for the better over time to include what was not considered in the old days. Professor Calman noted that changes in ethics is a result in changes or expansion of our knowledge, social and cultural awareness (values and norms) and life experience (2002) that the society today must take into these changes into account society’s ethical standards has to improve as well. As an example, euthanasia is illegal in most countries but here in the U.S, some states have already legalized euthanasia or assisted-suicide. The latest state that was legalized the Right to Die issue was here in California when Brittany Maynard gain national attention due to terminal brain cancer that she wanted to die with dignity rather waited for the disease to take over. During that time, euthanasia or assisted death was still not legal in California that she and her family had to move to Oregon where the “Death with Dignity Act” was already a law (CNN, 2017). California did not pass this law until after her death but California Governor Brown explained the tough ethical dilemma he had whether to sign the bill into law. Then he thought about himself “dying [with] prolonged and excruciating pain” and thought about it would be a relief if he has the option to die comfortably (CNN, 2017). I would believe that his value and principles says life is precious for another to take away but I also believe that he made a lot of research, pros and cons, and society’s tolerance before he signed the bill. We have already been exercising it with our pets so morally speaking; I do not think that a pet’s life is much less precious than ours when looking at it in the perspective of quality of life.
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
