2. Ethical perspectives: (Utilitarianism, Rawls’ justice and fairness and deontologist)
It is essential to evaluate the three most relevant ethical perspectives which are utilitarianism, Rawls’ justice and fairness and deontologist, before explaining them, it is important to know that there are many ethical perspectives which can be implicated in ethics therefore they have connection with business as well.
Let me explain the meaning of them, before knowing how each ethical perspective is applied in business. Firstly, utilitarianism which is one of the most common ethical theories in the XIX century besides that it was “used to explain the importance to get the maximum benefit considering the greater number of individuals, as a result, the
…show more content…
John Rawls is the philosopher who led the principle of justice and who involved two matters: liberty and equality therefore he wanted to show how important is to have social justice, so, that is why he designed the simple structure of the society as a principal subject of the justice besides that he identified justice like the most significant value for the society. “Rawls begins his work with the idea of justice as fairness. He identifies the basic structure of society as the primary subject of justice and identifies justice as the first virtue of social institutions. He considers justice a matter of the organization and internal divisions of a society.” (A theory of justice summary, enotes). As it seems, this theory can be applied in business, in many companies because he created the basic structure of the society and it is clear that anywhere we can find it as regulation of equality and …show more content…
Kant is the philosopher who changed it because in the beginning that meant god can determine what is right and wrong, but Kant did not believe in god therefore he developed this theory. (James’ notes, 2015). In deontological ethics an action is considered morally good because of some characteristic of the action itself, not because the product of the action is good. Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare. (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, the deontological ethics). Kant argued, people should do always the correct thing without taking into account the consequences because the people always know what is right and wrong therefore they make a right choice however Kant remarked that it is not enough to believe that you are doing something correct because you have the intuition so you are following it. Duties and obligations must not be subjective. In deontological ethics, there is not space for subjective feelings for that reason we have to be objectives as much as possible. It seems that this philosophy is ambiguous because many problems around the world such as corruption, fraud, robbery and etc. can be justified with this fact saying that they have the reason for doing a good action hence it is really important to be
German philosopher Immanuel Kant popularized the philosophy of deontology, which is described as actions that are based on obligation rather than personal gain or happiness (Rich & Butts, 2014). While developing his theory, Kant deemed two qualities that are essential for an action to be deemed an ethical. First, he believed it was never acceptable to sacrifice freedom of others to achieve a desired goal. In other words, he believed in equal respect for all humans. Each human has a right for freedom and justice, and if an action takes away the freedom of another, it is no longer ethical or morally correct. Secondly, he held that good will is most important, and that what is good is not determined by the outcome of the situation but by the action made (Johnson, 2008). In short, he simply meant that the consequences of a situation do not matter, only the intention of an action. Kant also declared that for an act to be considered morally correct, the act must be driven by duty alone. By extension, there could be no other motivation such as lo...
Although there are countless moral theories that have been accepted throughout the all of human history, American philosopher John Rawls’ contractarian approach stands out from the rest. Whereas most of the other widely recognized theories, such as Consequentialism or Utilitarianism, focus primarily on the results of the action in question, Rawl’s theory has a different basis. The focus of contractarianism is predominantly on the original position the debating parties were in, which happens to be behind a veil of ignorance. Contractarianism seems as though it would be a perfect moral theory that would solve all the world’s problems, including the problems raised by Harry Gensler toward cultural relativism. However, as the cliché goes—it’s just too good to be true.
John Rawls is considered one of the most important political philosophers of the 20th century. His most famous work is on his theory of justice, which was later made into the book Justice as Fairness edited by Erin Kelly. In his work, Rawls sets out to discover what set of principles would best govern a just society. Rawls looks at the idea of a social contract, a concept first developed by philosophers John Locke and Kean Jacques Rousseau. Rawls, however, sets out to revive the social contract to create a realistic utopia that embodies the fair principles of justice. This approach holds that the society is in some sense an agreement among all those within the society on what constitutes a just society. Rawls believes that the fairest society would agree on his two principles of justice. Through his work, Rawls illustrates how and why a fair society would come to agree on these fair principles of justice, and at exactly what restrictions and presuppositions.
Imagine that all of the sudden memories of your life and everyone you’ve ever known suddenly disappeared. In this scenario, all knowledge you had of your talents, social status, financial standing, physical ability, intelligence and the other characteristics that you viewed could to definitively set yourself apart from others. In other words, everything that made you who you are through years of socialization all of the sudden vanished. To the John Rawls this scenario is called the original position, one where your consciousness has been placed under a “veil of ignorance”. As a thought experiment, Rawls argues that if individuals of a society discuss and define their system of social justice from the original position, the result of the discussion
INTRODUCTION John Rawls most famous work, A Theory of Justice, deals with a complex system of rules and principles. It introduces principles of justice to the world, principles which Rawls argues, are meant to create and strengthen equality while removing the inequality which exists within society. These principles are both meant as standalone laws and regulations, but they can be joined as well. The main function of the first principle is to ensure the liberty of every individual, while the second principle is meant to be the force for the removal of inequality through what Rawls calls distributive justice. I will begin this paper by making clear that this is a critique of Rawls and his principle of difference and not an attempt at a neutral analysis.
More often than not, a person will encounter themselves in a difficult and problematic situation. Life is not a walk in the park when it comes to making decisions. Making choices may not be feasible when under pressure and stress. Ideally, this applies to those choices that are not black and white. In relation, this is where a person's morality comes into play which reveals their
John Rawls’ Theory of Justice attempts to establish a fair and reasonable social account of social justice. To do this, he discusses two fundamental principles of justice, which if implemented into society, would guarantee a just and fair way of life. Rawls is mostly concerned with the social good (what is good and just), and his aim with the Theory of Justice is to provide a way that society could be one that is fair and just, while taking into consideration, a person’s primary goods (rights and liberties, opportunities, income and wealth, and the social bases of self-respect). The usage of these principles will lead to an acceptable basis of self-respect. That saying, if the two principles are fair and just, then the final primary good,
The social contract theory of John Rawls challenges utilitarianism by pointing out the impracticality of the theory. Mainly, in a society of utilitarians, a citizens rights could be completely ignored if injustice to this one citizen would benefit the rest of society. Rawls believes that a social contract theory, similar those proposed by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, would be a more logical solution to the question of fairness in any government. Social contract theory in general and including the views of Rawls, is such that in a situation where a society is established of people who are self interested, rational, and equal, the rules of justice are established by what is mutually acceptable and agreed upon by all the people therein. This scenario of negotiating the laws of that society that will be commonly agreed upon and beneficial to all is what Rawls terms "The Original Position and Justification".
Kant theory is saying that everyone must do things for the right reasons. According to Deontological ethics theory, an action is considered favourable sometimes because of some good aspect of action in itself without considering its good result from the action. This theory is much based upon the one’s morals and values which expresses the “sake of duty” and virtue. Deontology tells us to be fair and not to take advantage of others while teleology tells about doing whatever we want and it gives us a result that is good to us. [17]
John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.
Deontology is when an action is considered morally good because of the action itself not the product of the action ("Deontological Ethics"). When applying Kant’s theory one also has to take into account the two aspects in determining what exactly the right thing in any situation is. They include universality and respect for persons. Universality states that you must “act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law”(Manias). Respect for person’s states that one must “act so that you treat humanity, weather in your own person or that of another; always as an end and never as a means only” (Manias). With this being said one must apply both of these to any option they are
Ethics in business is a highly important concept, as it can affect a company’s profits, salaries paid to employees and CEOs, and public opinion, among many other aspects of a business. Ethics can be enforced by company policies and guidelines, set a precedent when a company is faced with an important decision, and are also evolving thanks to new technology and situations that arise due to technology usage. Businesses have a duty to maintain their ethical responsibilities and also to help their employees enforce these responsibilities in and out of the workplace. However, ethics and the foundation for them are not always black and white. There are many different ethical theories, however Utilitarianism, Kant’s Deontological ethics, and Virtue ethics are three of the most well known theories in existence. Each theory is distinct in that it has a different quality used to determine ethicality and allows for a person to choose which system of ethics works best with both the situation and his or her personal ethical preferences.
This essay will provide two actual case studies: one of positive ethical principles and the other of poor ethical principles. Ethics are the driving force behind good business. Every ethical choice made by a professional can and will have a much different outcome than any unethical choice. Bad ethics can ruin many aspects of a business and as Gaye-Anderson, 2007 states, quite easily the lives and professional reputation of the employees can even be severely damaged. 3.
& nbsp; Take Home Exam # 1: Essay-2 John Rawls never claimed to know the only way to start a society, but he did suggest a very sound and fair way to do so. He based his scenario on two principles of justice. His first principle of justice was that everyone should have the same rights as others.