preview

Under Utilitarian Thinking From The Cost-Benefit Analysis Pinto

Decent Essays
Open Document

They are competitors with Volkswagen and Japanese imports. In 1971, Pinto, a subcompact type vehicle is introduced in the means to compete with the stated car brands. Pinto unexpectedly received many inquiries regarding its safety given that it actually met several safety standards. These inquiries are due to the fact that they design it in a way it would have less than 2000 pounds in weight and cost not more than 2000 dollars. The cost and the weight had definitely attracted people’s doubt in its safety. Not long after that, users of Pinto were involved in many cases of casualties, injuries and even fatal. Pinto’s major design flaw was said to be its fuel tank prone to rupturing with moderate-speed rear-end collision. Under Utilitarian Thinking, …show more content…

They could miss out several tiny details as they were designing the vehicle, blinded by their goal to release the vehicle in their planned time-frame that they ended up producing one that is not safe enough as long as it meets the safety standard. In other words, prior to its release, Pinto was not thoroughly tested and inspected. That is why cost-benefit analysis is also known as risk–benefit analysis as it contains a lot of risks if used in engineering perspective that design a vehicle or machine or anything similar and could cost people’s …show more content…

Generally, people cannot be killed, deceived, denied their freedom or otherwise violated simply to bring about a greater total amount of utility. It would have been ethically better if Ford consider the Rights of Persons as they were making decisions for the Pinto design. They must identify the basic obligations, values, and interests at stake, noting any conflicts that could be encountered by their potential customers. The action or rule that is to be taken must be analysed so that options and what rights are at stake will be clear. Next, the audience of the action must be determined, in this case, be the drivers and passengers that would be riding Pinto. Then the seriousness of the rights infringement must be evaluated. This way the tier level of rights and the number of violations involved will be coherent. Lastly, Ford can come to decision that seems more reasonable to give an outcome with least serious rights infringements. If we compare the rights for person approach and the utilitarian one, it is almost obvious that the earlier is better and more ethically professional. This approach focuses a little bit more than just benefits and costs. It has more content to be determined and analysed to help making a decision that would grant people the rights they deserve protect them from harm. Harm can be defined as an invasion of a person’s well-being. Engineers have techniques

Get Access