More handpicked essays just for you.
Elucidate the ethical theory of Deontological Ethics
Limitations of deontology ethics
Elucidate the ethical theory of Deontological Ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
At the heart of the bailout outrage was a sense of injustice. Even before the bonus issue erupted, public support for the bailout was hesitant and conflicted. Americans were torn between the need to prevent an economic meltdown that would hurt everyone and their belief that funneling massive sums to failed banks and investment companies was deeply unfair. To avoid economic disaster, Congress and the public agreed. But morally speaking, it had felt all along like a kind of extortion. The two possible reasons the public thought the executives receiving the bonuses didn’t deserve them are — greed & failure. I’ll be writing this paper on the basis of — Did they do the right thing? According to Deontologists — There is a difference between right …show more content…
The idea of acting freely is not to choose the best means to a given end, but to choose the end itself, for its own sake. We shouldn’t be doing something for the sake of something else. When we act autonomously, according to a law we give ourselves, we do something for its own sake, as an end in itself. The question here now is, should the AIG executives be getting the bonuses? The deontologists would say, they’re doing it as a means to an end, because they will only continue doing their jobs if they get the bonuses. What matters most is doing the right thing because it’s right, not for some ulterior motive. According to Kant, acting morally means acting out of duty — for the sake of the moral law. The moral law consists of a categorical imperative, a principle that requires us to not violate people’s autonomy, to treat people with respect, and as ends in themselves. Though this way of thinking criticizes Utilitarianism because morality is dependent on …show more content…
If a few executives will feel the pain, for the taxpayers to feel the pleasure, then that’s following the route of an Act— one way of approaching the greatest happiness principle. In the short-term, the tax payers will be happy, so that means everyone is happy, maximizing the good at the end of the action at the very moment. Jake DeSantes was one of the employees that decided to keep the bonus and he made his decision known publicly. He tendered his resignation by publishing a letter addressed to Edward Liddy in The New York Times. His letter stated that he was asked to work for an annual salary of one dollar and he agreed because he felt a sense of loyalty to the company. He worked between ten and fourteen hours per day, completing tasks that would lead to a successful termination of his responsibilities. He felt that the company lied to him and failed to recognize his sacrifice when it requested the money be returned. He decided to donate the entire amount to organizations that were dedicated to helping those that are suffering as a result of the poor economic times. “Rule” utilitarianism is brought into play here because it’s indirect, and its effect is definitely long term. This idea disagrees whether or not certain actions actually maximize happiness in the short
The PBS Frontline Documentary The Untouchables shined light on the claim that wealthier people in today’s society get off easier when they break the law. During the financial crisis of 2008, it was said that fraud was committed when many mortgage bankers and high-end executives on Wall Street knowingly bought loan portfolios that didn’t meet their policy credit standards. Even with the evidence in place, no one was arrested and held responsible for a stock crash that nearly destroyed the entire financial system of the United States. With a powerful justice system and justifiable evidence in place, no was prosecuted. Did the justice system not take the necessary steps to ensure that justice was served
...l sources of utility or consequences, but about his moral identity and integrity. Jim is presented with a situation that challenges to who he is, and not just simply what he should do. Granted, is tricky to decide on the “right” action in this case because by not partaking in the deal, Jim is staying true to his personal moral beliefs; yet he is still left with the burden of knowing that all twenty of the Indians would be killed without his interference. One could also argue that Jim would only be contributing to the problem if he too committed such acts against these innocent people and it is his duty as a moral being to not partake. It seems that Kant’s theory passes the standard of internal support and explanatory power. This is because his principles are able to fit with considered moral beliefs and are able to help individuals identify a right and wrong action.
Jake Clawson Ethical Communication Assignment 2/13/2014. JPMorgan Chase, Bailouts, and Ethics “Too big to fail” is a theory that suggests some financial institutions are so large and so powerful that their failure would be disastrous to the local and global economy, and therefore must be assisted by the government when struggles arise. Supporters of this idea argue that there are some institutions that are so important that they should be the recipients of beneficial financial and economic policies from government. On the other hand, opponents express that one of the main problems that may arise is moral hazard, where a firm that receives gains from these advantageous policies will seek to profit by it, purposely taking positions that are high-risk, high-return, because they are able to leverage these risks based on their given policy. Critics see the theory as counter-productive, and that banks and financial institutions should be left to fail if their risk management is not effective.
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...
In the midst of the current economic downturn, dubbed the “Great Recession”, it is natural to look for one, singular entity or person to blame. Managers of large banks, professional investors and federal regulators have all been named as potential creators of the recession, with varying degrees of guilt. No matter who is to blame, the fallout from the mistakes that were made that led to the current crisis is clear. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the current unemployment rate is 9.7%, with 9.3 million Americans out of work (Bureau of Labor Statistics). Compared to a normal economic rate of two or three percent, it is clear that the decisions of one group of people have had a profound affect on the lives of millions of Americans. The real blame for this crisis rests on the heads of the managers that attempted to play the financial system through securitization, and forced the American government to “bail out” their companies with taxpayer money. These managers, specifically the managers of AIG and Citigroup, should be subject to extreme pay caps for the length of time that the American taxpayer holds majority holdings in their companies, as a punitive punishment for causing the Great Recession.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act’s policies haven’t really been implemented to the extent that regulators would have liked. Although the legislation takes many steps in addressing systematic risks in the United States financial system and improving coordination among regulators, some critics believe that alternative options might have been more effective. The coming years will give us a better understanding of how well the Dodd-Frank Act addressed these concerns.
In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).
...ple of the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, in fact, he defended the principle of personal gain or personal benefit. The main law of nature in utilitarianism is the desire for personal happiness and the very continuation of the human race depends on the implementation of self-love. Kantian ethics is different. When we treat approvingly to another act, we are guided not mind public benefit or harm from these actions. We are aware of how these actions would have responded to us, and in us because there is consent or not consent to our own feelings. This is the property of our organization, and it has evolved from public life. We just experience with other people what they are going through and criticize the one who caused any suffering, then we attach ourselves to the same condemnation if they themselves cause of suffering to another person.
...t be in business very long. But, for instance, what if RGIS was offered the chance to perform one “test” inventory for a company that had many stores and the inventory went extremely well because of the customer service levels provided? RGIS would have the opportunity to service this customer’s other stores not because of the data, but because of the service they received. This human factor played huge role in garnering business for the RGIS and yet their employees have no chance in earning any more compensation than they would have for simply putting data into a machine. Let’s look at other ethics principles and see where an example like the one above would fit in.
Kantians believe that we should avoid treating others as mere means.(877) In other words we should not make false promises, physically force a person to do what we want, use threats, or take advantage of someone’s desperate situation and make unjust offers.(877-878) These are examples of treating people as mere means because these people will not have the opportunity to make a reasonable choice for themselves. Either because they don’t have the complete information, their wellbeing is on the line, or simply because there is no just offer on the table. We are also to treat others as an end in themselves(878), meaning that we have to respect their autonomy, and their freedom to make choices for themselves. But according to O’Neil it’s not enough to treat others as an end in themselves. In her duty of beneficence she argues that we cannot treat others as end in themselves if they have limited rationality or autonomy (878-879). She derives her idea from Kant’s idea of imperfect duty which aims to promote helping others to reach their potential.(). Therefor based on these principles it makes sense for us to help reduce world famine, because the people affected by this issues are very venerable, and their autonomy is undermined. The only way to ensure that they are treated as rational human beings is if we helped them. It’s important to
...company workers being affected by the financial crisis. We don’t want to point fingers here only assess the ethical dilemmas that these companies face. Subjective human judgment opens up for the possibility of undesirable human biases and manipulation. However, with or without human judgment, financial models of credit risk are subject to manipulation, both legally and fraudulently.
In previous years the big financial institutions that are “too big to fail” have come to realize that they can “cheat” the system and make big money on it by making poor decisions and knowing that they will be bailed out without having any responsibly for their actions. And when they do it they also escape jail time for such action because of the fear that if a criminal case was filed against any one of the so called “too big to fail” financial institutions it...
...e consequences, as a utilitarian would. While Liang 's decision was immoral, he never treated anyone as simply “mere means.” One could argue that the people who bought the affected vehicles were used as “mere means” to an end. From Liang’s decision, those customers are part of the consequence, so they are not considered. However, the company Volkswagen as a whole did use the customers as a “mere means” to an end as they assumed that a simple cash settlement would have been enough to make up for the customers’ disappointment. From Kant’s moral theory, Liang’s decision to create the illegal software to cheat the EPA emission tests was morally wrong, even if it was due to necessity. While it can be argued that it is also morally wrong from a utilitarian’s point of view, it is important to realize that both theories reached the same conclusion through different processes.
The principle of utility is based on the greatest amount of happiness an action results in to the largest quantity of people who are affected by the consequences (Mill 89). Mill believes people should sacrifice as much as they can from their own possible happiness so that more people may obtain equal happiness that is sufficient. In doing so, those who are aiding others are creating a society of ultimate happiness where everyone is content. Thus, Mill argues for quantity over quality to the extent where everyone has just enough contentment that they do not feel pain or deprivation. For example, according to the principle, if in the future there is an unbiased computerized system for selecting organ donors, those who are selected to donate their organs to two or more people are obligated to do so. In doing so, the single individual is saving the lives of a greater number of people, and thus creates more happiness than if he alone lived and the two or more people died.
Eight years ago, the world economy crashed. Jobs were lost, families misplaced, hundreds of thousands of people left shocked and confused as they watched the security of their world fall to pieces around them. In, “The Big Short,” a film directed by Adam McKay and based on the book written by Michael Lewis, viewers get an inside perspective on how the financial crisis of 2008 really happened. Viewers learn the truth about the unethical actions and irrational justifications made by those who unwittingly set the world up for failure. Two main ethically tied decisions are brought into question when watching the film: how could anyone conscionably make the decision to mislead investors by misrepresenting mortgage backed securities (MBS), and why