i. Consequential Theory
In the ethical and normative theory, the principle or principle of distinguishing the correct behavior from the wrong behavior is put forward. These theories can be divided into consequentialism and non-consequentialism.
Consequentialism is an important theoretical category in normative ethics. Consequentialism theory means the moral right or wrong of an action is ultimately determined by the consequences of the act. If its consequence is good, the act is right; if the result is worse then the act is bad. Therefore, this kind of theorist called consequentialists and they like to use or take this type of method to determine an act is a right or wrong base on the result or benefits or we can say that the result will be …show more content…
But it has its own advantages and disadvantages. There are some advantages of Kant’s Ethic. First, the categorical imperative enables us to follow strict rules in moral decision-making and it provides a solid standard for setting rules for any business environment. Second, Kant accentuates the full worth and respectability of the personal. Third, Kant accentuate the importance of acting on the right intentions and if a behavior is motivated by a sense of responsibility, then it has moral value - it is for its own sake and wants to do the right thing. Here are some disadvantages of Kant’s Ethic. First, Kant's ethical moral is too intense, because it excludes the affection of moral decision-making and puts responsibility first. Second, in ruling out the distinction between himself and the rule, Kant can't distinguish it and base the rule as an omission. Third, it is not always clear when people are used for a purpose and only as a means.
For Mr. Ali case, Mr. Ali bribe to to Mr. Micheal to secure the contract with China Medical Ltd, the purpose of Mr. Ali is just want to settle the RM1.5 million debt of ABC company and he want to protect his employees won’t face the risk of lose their work. However, according Kant’s Ethic in this case, this action is not ethical, it is because bribery is a quite serious illegal action although it can solve the problem and get a good
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
For instance, if a person were to ask me if his car was nice but I thought it was junk, Kant would disregard his feelings because telling him the truth is more important. Therefore, it is okay to perform illegal or unethical actions because morality and loyalty are more important. The problem would then arise: “What if everyone did this? What if everyone acted on impulse and did whatever they wanted? There would be no need for moral choices and
Consequentialism is a class of ethical theories stating that the consequences of one’s actions are the superior judge as far as to what is right or wrong, moral or immoral. The doctrine of Utilitarianism falls under the umbrella of consequentialism and suggests that actions are right if they are deemed as useful or are for the benefit of the majority. Alongside that, Utilitarians argue that everyone counts and everyone counts equally. This imposes that each being, belonging to the moral community, is owed a certain amount of respect and acknowledgment of needs. As far as who “everyone” truly is and who belongs in the moral community, Utilitarians believe that all beings that can suffer deserve a home in the moral community. Therefore humans and non-human animals, who are both susceptible to suffering, are morally equal.
The modern theory of utilitarianism is a type of consequentialism--"the view that normative properties depend only on consequences;" that is to say, in other words,
Its general outline is the moral rightness of an action is determined by outcomes. For example, a student was struggling to help an old lady who has fallen on ground while other people do not even care about it and a student had to leave in a hurry. However, he helped her and a lady offered cordial thanks. As the example is illustrated, the act is good if its consequences are good, but if its consequences are bad then the act is wrong. Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) emphasizes that consequentialists determine what is right by weighing the ratio of good to bad that an action will produce. According to consequentialists, the decision of the Dean of Harvard Business School is simply explained as the result of decision which rejected all applicants who attempted to access the information derive a conclusion which Dean Clark observed their belief, principles and it shows making own decisions is always with responsibility for actions. In addition, utilitarianism will be applied on this case because this theory is in contrast with egoism which can be defined by Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) as egoism contends that an act is morally right if and only if it best promotes an agent’s long term interest.’. It means self-interesting is most important key point whether going into action or not. However, Utilitarianism is focused on more about ‘achieving the
Normative ethical subjectivism is an ethical stance that attempts to specify circumstances under which an action is morally right or wrong using four distinct arguments that try to prove this claim. Normative ethical subjectivism claims that an act is morally right if, and only if, the person judging the action approves of it. Stemming form this view on ethics a normative ethical theory has been made. An ethical theory is a theory of what is right and wrong. This stance on ethics is the opposite of another ethical stance called methethical antirealism. Methethical antirealism is centered on the idea that because there is no right and wrong actions, just personal preferences there is no such thing as morality. It also states that morals are
Kant duty of ethics, Close the debate by Hector: 1 moral decision-making: he decides to avoid people because he is aware that he is a misanthrope. 2 Humanistic dimensions into business decisions: another person does not influence him no matter gender, race, age etc., he would hired the best qualified person for a job. 3 Importance of motivation: in business, threating everyone with equity will bring more motivation in the team people would know that any person could get to managerial position by hard work.
Consequentialism and non-consequentialism are both action based ethical frameworks that people can use to make ethical judgments. Consequentialism is based on examining the consequences of one’s actions as opposed to non-consequentialism which is focused on whether the act is right or wrong regardless of the outcome (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006). The three sub-categories of consequentialism are altruism, utilitarianism and egoism.
As opposed to the deontological account, the consequentialist believes in the prior conception of the good. If something is good then it is right to promote something good according to consequentialism (Lillehammer, 2011, p. 90). Moreover, the actions with the best end results or consequences are what are to be evaluated as good. It must be clear that good intentions are not, at all, of value to consequentialists. Further, it is important to note that in decision-making, a consequentialist must hold to the demands of impartiality. Consequentialism upholds the idea that no one person is worth more than another (Lillehammer, 2011, p. 90).
Consequentialism refers to the idea that what is morally good or bad is all based on the consequences of one’s actions. It is derived from the Theory of Right Action which is a part of
Consequentialism is ordinarily distinct from deontology, as deontology offers rightness or wrongness of an act, rather than the outcome of the action. In this essay we are going to explore the differences of consequentialism and deontology and apply them to the quandary
We have learned about different kinds of theories, consequentialist and non-consequentialist we are going to see if these theories are accountable for its principles in terms of the standard ethical principles such as truth telling, generosity, misconduct, keeping promises, not offending people, etc. To me not all these theories are not 100% perfect and does not fully account for its principles.
1. Consequentialist moral theories see the moral rightness or wrongness of actions as a function of their results. If the consequences are sufficiently good, the action is right; if they are sufficiently bad, the action is wrong. However, nonconsequentialist theories see other factors as also relevant to the determination of right and wrong.
Two examples or branches of consequentialism are egoism and utilitarianism. The definition of utilitarianism is simply, doing the most good for the most people. The definition of egoism is the habit of valuing everything only in reference to one's personal interest; selfishness. Egoism is simply about you and you’re self-interest compared to utilitarianism is looking at others interests. There are pros and cons to each branch; however I personally think egoism is the better model. Both represent or contain an aspect of ethics but, egoism I believe is reflected or more related to the average person in everyday life.
These theories are used to evaluate ethical dilemmas that we face on our day to day life,