The Energy Cooperative

1800 Words May 5th, 2014 8 Pages
In case study number one, a board member of The Energy Cooperative would like to call his own personal potential clients and be able to state, “I am calling as a director of The Energy Cooperative.” The following paper will analyze the ethical issues surrounding the use of such a statement from five different ethical theories. These particular theories come from Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, John Locke, John Rawls, and Lawrence Kohlberg. Finally, there will be a solution that the board should take with the issue, ethical, or otherwise. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) had an ethical theory dubbed the Categorical Imperative. Within this theory he discusses the morally right and morally wrong ways to go about an action based on experience, …show more content…
(Janaro, 2009). John Locke (1632-1704) may not have personally written The Declaration of Independence, but his Theory of Rights undeniably helped to inspire some of the most important words and the understanding behind it. Referring to the part of The Declaration of Independence that states “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (USHistory.org, 2014). As long as the unalienable rights were not harmed and were always protected, then from an ethical standpoint the act was to be considered ethical (Powell, 1996). Looking at the scenario, the right of life goes uninterrupted by the choice to claim oneself as a director of The Energy Cooperation. Next, the right of liberty also goes uninterrupted by the scenario choice, because no liberties are given up. Lastly, the right to pursue happiness goes uninterrupted because of the generalization put forth in actually pursuing that happiness. Upon further investigation a person will find that The Bill of Rights also exists and there are numerous unalienable rights found within. There is one right that could be argued, which is the right of freedom of speech. This right could be upheld to the entire board for not letting the one board member say what he wants to say. However, the rest of the board of directors also have a freedom of speech and are also
Open Document