-Meaning of ethics-Its classifications-Law & ethics-Ethics in the world of business

What is ethics?The word ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, meaning character or custom.Difference of ethics & morality?Morality refers to human conduct & values.Ethics a study of the area of morality

Morality: The standards that an individual or a group has about what is right and wrong or good and evil.Ethics: The discipline that examines ones moral standards or the moral standards of a society.

Ethics denotes an academic subject, but in everyday parlance, ethical & moral are interchangeably used.Ethical and moral to describe people we consider good and actions we consider rightWe interchange unethical and immoral to describe what we consider bad people and wrong actions.The study of ethics concerns questions of right & wrong, duty & obligation, & moral responsibility.

Ethical behaviour can vary from one person to another; it is relative, not absolute.Factors influencing individual ethics: family, peer, life experience, personal values & morals and situational factors.

Consequentialists

Nonconsequentialist

Philosophers argued that the moral rightness of an action is determined solely by its results. If its consequences are good, the act is right; if they are bad, the act is wrong.They determine what is right by weighing the ratio of good to bad. Q: Consequences for whom? For oneself or everyone affected? Answer depends on 2 theories:EgoismUtilitarianism

Thomas Hobbes & Adam Smith.The guiding principle is an individual self-interest.individual can refer to single person or to a particular group or organization; An act is morally right if it best promotes the individuals long-term interest, i.e. defines right behaviour in terms of the consequences for the individual.

Defines right or acceptable behavior in terms of the consequences for the individualEgoists believe that they should make decisions that maximize their own self-interest; no sacrifice or obligation are owed to others.In an ethical decisionmaking situation, an egoist will probably choose the alternative that contributes most to his or her self-interest.

In early 90s the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company announced that it was discontinuing its controversial 500 steel belted radial, which according to a House sub committee had been associated with fifteen deaths and thirty one injuries. Newspaper interpreted the Firestone announcement as an immediate removal of the tires from the market, whereas Firestone intended a rolling phase out

A House subcommittee later found that Firestone had in fact continued making the steel belted 500 radial, despite earlier media reports to the contrary. Immediately thereafter, newspaper reported a Firestone spokesperson as denying that Firestone had misled the public. Asked why Firestone had not corrected the media misinterpretation of the companys intent, the spokesperson said that Firestones policy was to ask for corrections only when it was beneficial to the company to do so i.e. when it was in the companys self interests

Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill (earlier thinkers to develop this theory). Laws should be crafted so as to produce the best consequences. Seek consequences, but for the greatest happiness/good of the greatest number of people.

Concerned with consequences, but seeks the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people.Bentham- interest of community are simply the sum of interest of its members Utilitarian believe they should make decisions that result in the greatest total utility, i.e, achieve the greatest benefits for all those affected by a decision.

Action or practice is right if it leads to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our action. Therefore, actions are right if they promote the greatest human welfare, wrong if they do not.Maximize the good and minimize the harm/evil.E.g. the prison systemutilitarianism associated with social improvement

Right & wrong is determined not only by the consequences of the act but because of the nature of the action.Bribery is unethical not because of its consequences but because we have a duty not to bribe; bribery is wrong by its nature, regardless of the consequencesBreaking promise (it is wrong because of the inherent character of the act itself apart from it might hurt others feeling) Nonconsequentialist Kants Ethics

Immanuel Kant and Ronald Dworkin. Laws should protect individual autonomy, liberty or rights. Universal accepted principles such as the right of freedom, a person has the right to choose how to live, etc.

Focus on the rights of individuals and on the intentions associated with a particular behavior rather than on its consequences.If an act in a particular manner is suitable to become a universal accepted principle guiding behavior, then committing that act is ethical.

e.g: universal accepted principles such as the right of freedom, a person has the right to choose how to live Nonconsequentialists believe that conformity to general moral principles determines ethicalness.

According to Kant, the clerk who returns the ten dollar to the customer is doing the right thing. But if his action is motivated by self interests (perhaps if he wants to get a reputation for honesty) then it does not have moral worthIf the clerk does the right thing out of instinct, habit or sympathy for the other reason, then the act still does not have moral worth.Only if it is done out of sense of duty does the clerks action have moral value.

Is utilitarianism really workable?Suppose a dying woman has asked you to promise to send RM50,000 under her bed to her brother. She dies without anyone knowing of the money & the promise that you made. Now, you know that her brother is a spendthrift & a drunkard. If the money delivered to him, it would be wasted. At the same time, an orphanage in your town needs such a sum to improve its recreational facilities, something that would provide happiness to many children.Discuss your answer according to utilitarian grounds. Give your comment whether you agree or disagree with this view.

The government may appropriate private property for public use, usually with compensation to the owner. Thus, the govt may legally purchase your house & land from you to widen a highway, even if you dont want to sell the house. The public interest is served at your expense. Is this just? Comment based on utilitarianism.

THINK!An airplane manufacturer has spent a great deal of money developing a new airplane. The company badly needs cash because it is financially overextended. If it does not get some large orders soon, it will have to close down part of its operation. Doing that will put several thousand workers out of jobs. The result will be disastrous not only for the workers but also for the town in which they live.

The president of the company has been trying to interest the government of a foreign country in a large purchase. He learns that one of the key governmental ministers in charge of making the final decision is heavily in debt because of gambling. He quietly contacts that minister and offers him $1 million in cash if he awards the contract for five planes to his firm. The money is paid and the contract is awarded.

The president argues that his action is justifiable because the business, the workers jobs and the town were all saved, the minister was able to pay his debts and the foreign country received the planes it needed. The good produced he argues is greater than any harm done by the payment to the minister. Is he correct?

The relationship between law & morality is a complex one.Their relationship can be presented as follows:MORALITYLAW

The shaded area represents the area of common ground where law enforces morality; but the size of the shaded area is constantly changing.The legality of an action does not guarantee that the action is morally right.Conformity with law is not sufficient for moral conduct; nonconformity with law is not necessarily immoral.

Law undoubtedly reflects changes in a societys outlook, in its view of right & wrong, good & bad. But it is a mistake to see law as sufficient to establish the moral standards that should guide the individual & group conduct.

Why does law insufficient to establish the moral standard in the world of business?(1) The law is inappropriate for regulating certain aspects of business activity for not everything that is immoral is illegal.Murder, fraud?Cheating?

(2) The law is often slow to develop in new areas of concern.

(3) The law itself often employs moral concepts which are not precisely defined.E.g. good faith, fiduciary duty, etc.

(4) The law is often unsettled, so whether some course of action is legal must be decided by the courts. In making decisions, the courts are guided by moral considerations.(5) The law is an inefficient instrument as some practical aspects are unnoticed.

There are still good reasons for using the law as a guide for moral action:(1) the law embodies many of our common moral beliefs & is often an adequate guide to right action.There is scarcely an ethical issues in business that had not been addressed by the legislature & courts.

(2) the law provides a clearly defined set of rules.Morality alone could never regulate business activities.Eg. Law for the sale of property.(3) The law consists of enforceable rules that apply to everyone.Everyone play by the same rules.

(4) the law represents a consensus arrived at thru long experience & extensive deliberation.Eg. The morality of advertising tobacco products - different moral views.(5) The law is not wholly impartial.Business executives vs consumer protection, issues of worker health & safety, the environment, etc.

Generally, legislatures & the courts are reluctant to intervene in ordinary business decisions unless significant rights & interests are at stake.The law is inappropriate for regulating certain aspects of business activity for not everything that is immoral is illegal.Murder, fraud?Cheating?

Many factors may influence law; morality is one of them.Moral values social values lawLaw on abortion, child marriage, child labour, etc.Generally, morality is not ignored while making the law because the law cannot be against the will of the people.*

Some people hold that the law is all that is morally required in business. The motto is, if it is legal, then it is morally okay. Do you agree with this statement? Why or why not?

Law & ethics are closely related, both reflecting moral judgments. However they are fundamentally different".Do you agree with the above statement? Discuss.

***********