The Energy Cooperative Case

1483 WordsFeb 2, 20186 Pages
Kant theory is unique in the fact he believed “that certain types of actions (including murder, theft and lying) were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative” ( ). Kant believed making a choice to act on something, rather an individual pursues that action does not depend on the consequences but rather if it fulfills our mission or personal fulfilment. In Energy Cooperative case one of the directors is asking for approval to use the non-profit organization name and there title when making calls to personal potential clients. Kant theory’s states “that a person is good or bad depending on the motivation of their action and not on the goodness of the consequences of those actions” ( ). The director that is asking for permission to use the name of a non-profit organization rather than the name of his own business is due for question. According to Kant the directors alternative motivates need to be evaluated along with the director’s moral worth of the situation. The director has signed a statement agreeing they are self employed consultants with no joining connections to any particular company. By this director signing this document and then turning around asking to use the originations name for his own self well being is unethical. Kant’s theory on “a person’s actions determine your moral worth, but there is more to this than merely seeing if the actions are right or wrong” ( ). This director may believe
Open Document