Furthermore in advocating that one treat others in differently when there are no factual differences is unjustifiable and makes this an arbitrary doctrine. Since there is no relevant factual difference between oneself and others, thus no real logic or reason, then the needs of others are equally important, which goes against the main principle of conduct for ethical egoism. Yet still the theory would not see the need to regard other individuals who may be affected by one’s actions, which again fails the minimum
But to grant that rule-responsibility is socially essential does not grant that it is the essence of morality. QE is flawed as it reduces the topic of moral character to the topic of conscientiousness or rule-responsibility, but it gives no account of the role of the character as a whole in moral deliberation and it excludes questions of character that are not directly concerned with the resolution of problems. Taking into account the criticisms of modern ethical theory I have discussed, it is clearly evident that an ethical theory shaped in light of these criticisms would be very similar to virtue ethics, emphasizing character and centering around the question, "how should I live? ".
The underpinning principle of deontological ethical theory is the categorical imperative that refers to an inherent absolute and unconditional command that tells people what they ought to do in a particular situation or should do in their present situations, (Braswell, McCarthy & McCarthy, 2011). The deontological ethical theory is against the treating of individuals as means to an end and supports the need to treat individuals as ends in themselves, (Braswell, McCarthy & McCarthy, 2011). Justifications and Objections to Normative Ethical Systems in Law Enforcement Most often than not, law enforcement agents use some techniques that may be regarded as morally right or wrong depending on the ethical framework from which one approaches such
This is not the point of Kant’s theory however, because he does not look at consequences for determining moral law, but rather at maxims. In order to determine what may produce more or less harm, it is true we would need to know the consequences of our actions. But, sometimes we cannot be sure of our consequences, and thus when we look at our intentions we can know if we are acting fairly (without deception or coercion) and decide on an action that would be moral based on a maxim of good will. O’Neil does point out that it is possible for a society to endure more pain in effort to protect individuals from being used as a mere means, yet they are doing so in a way to be the most fair, and therefore their actions can still be applied to the theme of giving everyone a fair value in life
It is a system that says that people should not be treated as a means to an end, but rather as ends in themselves. (Ethics Theories). With those aspects of deontology I agree completely. Personally, I do not think that following a strictly utilitarianism system, or deontology system is reasonable. I think that often times it is situation based, for there are promises that need to kept for the greater good, and promises that need to broken.
Action Based Ethical Systems One criticism would be that Action- Based Ethics lack a motivational component. Critics claim that action based ethics are uninspiring and very negative. They would say that it fails to inspire someone to action. Most of the commandments and rules in such systems are innately negative "Thou shalt notâ€¦" There is something unfit about a morality which is so unevenly defined in terms of "Thou shalt nots", emphasising innocence instead of an "energetic pursuit of the Good". The only sure principle is a reciprocal duty to do no harm.
Moreover, virtue ethics focuses on the moral agents rather than right action. Virtue ethicist believe that right action is one that acts on virtues. “If you want to do what is right, and doing what is right is what a virtuous agent would do in the circumstances” (Hursthouse, 648). Unlike other philosophical views, virtue ethics does not tell us what we should do. Based on the situation and the virtues, right action is not fixated to one action.
Breaking an agreement with your employees – true integrity is based on keeping to your agreements Promoting self at the expense of others. You can also lose trust by : Not taking appropriate action when others engage in unethical behavior. Not living the Corporate standards of your firm. Not following through on commitments Not communicating openly - even the simple act of being vague and ambiguous can build confusion which creates mistrust. Do you trust me?
Ethics deals with internal values that are a part of corporate culture and shapes... ... middle of paper ... ... present performance evaluations that shows that employees are actually better at their jobs than they actually are. This managerial global decision-making process is often affected by ethics since a manager feel ethically wrong to disapprove and terminate an employee. Discipline is another vital part of the global managerial decision-making process which is affected by ethics. Many managers adapt methods of discipline in the hope that situations will improve on their own. This decision-making process is morally get effected because lack of discipline leads to slacking off.
Workplace ethics engages in judgements and collective agreements regarding a suitable guide of behaviour. The ethical decision making framework (EDM) presents, business decision is ethical or unethical.EDM provides an indication of traditional decision making process and issues that manipulate ethical decisions. Employees tend to fraud because they can experience the unfair treatments or situation that they face. Manages may ask employee to work long hours, and then they can take additional time off. Good performance leads to remunerations and appreciation managers than workers.