More handpicked essays just for you.
Relationship between ethics and leadership
Deontology versus utilitarianism
Analysis of ethics in leadership
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Relationship between ethics and leadership
With the many ethical and social issues faced during the Everest simulation, came with many tough decisions that had to be made. As mentioned above, a specific example was the decision I as the leader was faced with in decision set 2. To take the utilitarian approach, which was to keep going and the photographer was to catch up with the group – resulting in the highest number of points for the team. Or the deontological approach which was to wait for the photographer but risk even more members of the group being recued. As stated above, Conway and Gawronski outlined that people immediately experience a negative emotional response to the idea of an individual getting hurt. In the case of the simulation it was leaving the photographer behind
In the article, “Finding Your Everest” by Robert Medina, the Romeros reveal that they believe that parents cannot go too far to support their children’s dreams. For example, Mr. Romero claims that he is fully aware of the risks Jordan might face while climbing/mountaineering, yet he believes that Jordan isn’t being forced to keep going, wants to keep going, and is nowhere near the point where he’s mentally and physically exhausted. This shows that Mr. Romero believes that parents cannot go too far because he mentions that it’s Jordan’s call on whatever expedition they go on. Also, he believes that they’re not doing anything super crazy because he feels that his son is perfectly wired for the conditions of mountain climbing. The biggest hint
In the memoir Within Reach: My Everest Story by Mark Pfetzer and Jack Galvin, the author Mark Pfetzer is faced with an extremely amazing yet scary challenge of climbing Mount Everest. Each event is the story has something to do with the nature that is around them at that moment but Pfetzer shows the readers that nature can be a way of life.
Kidder’s Ethical Checkpoints is going to be applied to analyze the case of Mike Nolan’s ethical decision. The recognized problem for this case is a passenger has suffered a heart attack, so Nolan needs to decide to follow Denver’s orders or demand a landing for medical evacuation.
If Krakauer, Hall, Hansen, and the other climbers were not loyal to each other, death would have been inevitable for everyone. While the team is climbing, one of the more experienced climbers and sherpa, Lopsang, decides to clip himself to Sandy. When asked why he did so, he responded, “because Scott wants all members to go to summit, and I am thinking Sandy will be weakest member, I am thinking she will be slow, so I will take her first.” (Page 222). Lopsang knew that the climb was beyond difficult, and he showed loyalty to Sandy by assisting her when she was weak. Another example of loyalty from the novel was shown by Hutchison. Even though the men were suffering from exhaustion, frostbite, and fear, “Hutchison organized a team of four Sherpas to locate the bodies of Weathers and Namba, who had been left on the far side of the Col when Anatoli Boukreev brought in Charlotte Fox, Sandy Pittman, and Tim Madsen.” (Page 322). This shows extreme loyalty because these men were dying, but showed respect to the dead by finding their bodies in attempt to bring closure to their families. Hutchison created a strong bond between himself and others, and he showed loyalty to people even after they died. In addition to the teammates showing loyalty to each other, the Sherpas created bonds with the climbers. Hall recognizes the immense impact the Sherpas have on the team and says, “I want you all to remember we would have absolutely no chance of getting to the summit of Everest without their help.” (Page 68). Hall showed loyalty to the Sherpas by respecting them, and only allowing them to climb to certain heights if they were not properly trained. Overall, loyalty was shown throughout the novel, and Krakauer could not have survived without the bonds he created with the other men and
This became the deadliest expedition to ever climb, with 15 people losing their lives. Krakauer explains his intrinsic motivations to accept this challenge and many of the mistakes that helped lead to the disasters of that day. He includes himself, and explicitly blames himself for at least one person's death. The experience affects him profoundly, and in addition to telling the story, the book focuses on how Krakauer is forever changed as a result of what happened. All of the clients have difficulty adjusting to the altitude, tiring easily, losing weight and moving slowly.
1. Identify the dilemma you are discussing and describe the choices the decision maker is facing.
In the book Into Thin Air, Jon Krakauer describes his ordeal on one of the deadliest, if not the most deadly, climb to the summit of Mt. Everest. The book begins with a short summary of the events that Krakauer went through on the mountain, after this he then explains his journey in greater detail. Krakauer’s original story of his experience on Mt. Everest was not a book, but a article for Outside magazine. Krakauer mentions this in the beginning of his book, for Outside magazine he was to write a piece on the commercialism on Mt. Everest. The storm that hit Mt. Everest that day just barley affected Krakauer, however his team did not fair so well. Krakauer talks about trust in the other climbers, they have to watch each others backs on the
A study was conducted in which participants were presented with three dilemmas. One dilemma was called the Trolley Dilemma: a trolley is headed toward five people standing on the track. You can switch the trolley to another track killing only one person instead of five. Subjects were asked to decide between right and wrong.
People have opinions and ideas when it comes to ethical dilemmas. There are many examples: The debate on abortion, the trolley problem, and moral absolutism, to name just a few. In all of these examples it appears that emotion and feelings will, at some point, override an important ethical decision that needs to be made. An important factor of an ethical dilemma is how and when it might appear. Some dilemma's, like the debate on abortion, can appear in a way that there is time to talk through all options and available ethical concepts. In this type of dilemma it is possible to see how moral rules and ethical theories can be discussed and a decision made through compromise. In contrast, when a situation that poses dire ethical consequences calls for a moral action there must be a solution that is grounded in moral principle and that can be accessed quickly and efficiently producing the most desirable results. The principal that would seem the best candidate in these situations is consequentialism.
Climbing makes for a difficult expedition, you need to give up the wrappers when you was ascending. You need to give up the heavy things, you need to give up your wrappers, and you need to give yourselves. Sometimes we need to give up our lives to climb the mount Everest. According to snow storm, the energy, the oxygen and the people who desired prove themselves the spring’s 96s expedition to mountain Everest was destined to be the most tragic.
Imagine feeling guilty for making it out alive on a journey. In the nonfiction novel, Into Thin Air, by Jon Krakauer, he documents his journey to the summits of Mount Everest and ultimately accuses himself of holding responsible for the disaster on the mountain. After realizing only one-fourth of the people that climbed to the summits on May 10, 1996, made it back down to base camp alive, Krakauer theorizes why that was so. He attributes most of the reason for the disaster to the erratic weather, along with hubris, who wanted the thought of leading a group to the mountain. Despite those reasons, there is no ultimate reason for the deaths documented in the book, but bottom line the climbers that died didn’t thoroughly comprehend the danger they were going to encounter as a consequence that contributed to the disaster.
What Shakespeare might call the fatal flaw of Fischer’s expedition seemed to be a collective lack of humility amongst his team, stemming of course from the top with Fischer himself, the “face” of the organization. Fischer was an ambitious man who was desperate to earn the respect of his peers, and came across as nothing short of overconfident when he was quoted in Krakauer's Into Thin Air as saying, "Experience is overrated. […] We've got the big E figured out, we've got it totally wired. […] (W)e've built a yellow brick road to the summit." (pp. 85-86) Even Fischer's experienced guide, Anatoli Boukreev, was not immune from pride, opting to make the climb without the use of supplemental oxygen, a decision that was not only completely unnecessary, but arguably ended up costing the lives of members of his team at the summit. Indeed, as Krakauer noted, there was a palpable lack of a team dynamic, a result of the Attraction-Selection-Attrition Theory; the team felt more like a bunch of individuals, all "in it for himself or herself." (Krakauer, p. 213) In a life or death situation, having a strong team dynamic is more important than ever. But Fischer was more interested in the parts, than the whole. As part of Fischer's ambition, he had made an effort to recruit high-profile clients, including a New York socialite who wrote for Allure magazine, and Krakauer himself, who could lend the expedition some heavy publicity, but brought very little by way of experience when it came to summiting a mountain as extreme as Everest.
The Everest group simulation was an exercise that required five students to immerse themselves into a team of hikers. Each role is unique and vital to the survival of the team in the attempt to reach the summit of Mount Everest. The simulation effectively encapsulated the concepts and theories learnt in the course.
Given this obvious challenge within the field of psychology, several ethical decision-making models have been postulated as an additional guide to the American Psychological Association’s Code of ethics in assisting psychologists in appropriately resolving ethical dilemmas. Psychologists ethical decision making is guided by constructs including values, morality, community standards, reasonableness and professionalism (Corey, Corey & Callanan, 2006). Ethical decision making can be carefully evaluated through models such as that of Tymchuck (1981), Kitchener (1984) and Day (1996). According to Tymchuck’s model, a detailed description of the situation containing information derived from all relevant sources must first be obtained to identify critical issues (Freeman, 2000). The ethical decision is then calculated through a thorough evaluation of the critical issues outlined using an analogous process where consequences are carefully assessed (Freeman, 2000). Similarly, Kitchener outlined a critical evaluation model demonstrating the role of virtue ethics in ethical decision
The basis of ethical decisions involves evaluation and equilibrium; it is the way that we adopt correct choices over bad ones. So, the immediate dilemma is usually to ask one’s self “what would a good person do when confronted by this dilemma?” For a decision that is not so easy to answer then people can ask themselves the following three questions.