Volkswagen's Emission Scandal: Utilitarian Philosophy Of John Stuart Mill

Throughout Philosophy, morality is a central theme. Although each scholar views the definition of morality differently, the goal of people to be better and think for themselves is the main focus. Many philosophers have defined and categorized utilitarianism in different ways. In normative ethics, Jeremy Bentham believes an action is right if it promotes happiness and wrong if it produces the reverse of happiness but not just the happiness of a person who performed the action but also everyone that was affected by it (Duignan). Utilitarianism is the view that the morally right action is the action that has the most good (Driver). The foundation of morality in utilitarianism comes from utility or intrinsic value (Skorupski 256). In utilitarianism actions are evaluated by their utility instead of intrinsic properties of the actions (Skorupski 256). Utilitarianism says certain acts are right or wrong in themselves making us perform them or do not do them at all. On the contrary, concepts of the good go hand and hand with that of rights and obligation causing obligation to be determined by intrinsic value (Skorupski 256). John Stuart Mill theory of utilitarianism reveals what is utilitarianism, the morality, proof of validity, and the connection between justice and utility in the study of thinking.

Under Mill’s Theory of Utilitarianism George’s decision to schedule the bulk of production at night to evade the Environmental Protection Agency in order to save jobs would be considered ethical based on whether or not the good outweighs the bad. In this case the good would be, if George decided to Schedule mass production at night, is that the Environmental Protection Agency’s emission readings would be low, there

Volkswagen is one of the largest automakers in the world and it has a global reputation as a high-quality German auto brand. Social responsibility is included in VW’s corporate culture and it seems that Volkswagen made some advances in Corporate Social Responsibility because the corporation was ranked 11th 2015 in the Global CSR Rep Track 100, which listed companies by reputation (Reputation Institute, 2015).However, the company has been threatened by an emission scandal which broke in September 2015, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disclosed that Volkswagen had installed defeat devices on diesel cars which were sold in the US. These devices equipped on VW cars cheated regulators in such a way that it could detect

Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human

“Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God” (Romans 13:1). This verse provides the spiritual rule, that when followed, prevents many negative incidents and their consequences. However, the engineers broke this command and made conscious decisions to design, develop, and produce vehicles that violated established law. In fact, the emissions produced were, “…as much as 40 times what is allowed by the U.S. standard defined by the Clean Air Act” (Mercuri & Neumann, 2016, p. 24).

The mistrust between the Volkswagen Company and their customers developed after the scandal associated with the incorrect emission of data and cheating of the system unfolded.  The scandal occurred on the eighteenth of September 2015 when it was found that the company had made a car with a turbo that released emission directly into the real word atmosphere. The allegations were genuine and were proved by the Environment Protection Agency in the United States (EPA) (Hotten, 2016).The chief

Kantian ethics and rule utilitarianism disagree on the morality of creating a “defeat device.” This device determined when its engine was undergoing emissions testing then switched from its normal operating mode into a lower emission mode. The normal emission mode was 40 times the limit dictated by the Clean Air Act [1]. By creating a dirty engine, Liang contributed towards the destruction of the atmosphere. This will negatively impact the quality of life for many future generations of people. Because damaging the environment negatively impacts millions of people, rule utilitarianism declares it to be morally wrong. The prosecution of six executives of Volkswagen, including the head of engine development, indicate that Liang’s superiors were involved in this conspiracy from the beginning [2]. The most applicable maxim to this situation is “I shall fulfill

Both Susan Wolf’s article “Moral Saints” and John Stuart Mill’s book “Utilitarianism” will be discussed here. These works offer expositions of and opinions on the philosophical issue of the moral worth of adhering to a certain set of values, and how a person’s motivations for doing so can change their worth and the desirability of their way of life. Wolf offers the position that leading an extremely morally good life is undesirable, while Mill’s opposing position is that if morality leads to happiness, then that behavior is preferable. To determine which of these stances on the value of morality has the most pertinence, these two arguments will be outlined and consequently analyzed. Their differences and similarities will be enumerated and described, and consequently their merit will be discussed. Finally, Wolf’s moral theory will be proven to be inferior to Mills’s, due to its prejudice, lack of supportive evidence, and its inability to be universally applicable.

As a multinational corporation, the implication of the scandal determines the fate of numerous stakeholders both internal and external. Internal stakeholders comprise of the board, managers and employees while external stakeholders subsume shareholders, customers and suppliers. The economic, political and social impacts of the dishonest practices would shape the fate of Volkswagen and affect the future prospects of the automotive industry. Common shareholders whilst not involved in the day to day running of the business placed faith and belief in the firm by providing capital had suffered severe economic loss as share prices (get something for stat). Despite the callous deception in advertising the defeat device displayed no signs of disturbing vehicle performance, however, customers of Volkswagen and its subsidiary vehicles suffer from lower resale value. In addition, even though the scandal was global, European consumers were the most affected with diesel cars accounting for 41% of all European cars (Fontaras, 2016). This high percentage in respect to other nations is a result of incentives provided by the European Union for the purchase of diesel vehicles such as subsidies towards the production process resulting in lower premiums compared to petrol counterparts (Vidal, 2015) In additional with sales falling suppliers of Volkswagen would likely lose future contracts or have current contracts downgraded as less parts are required. Thus, this loss of future

How do we apply aged philosophies to present day problems? Like his forefather John Stuart Mill, modern thinker Peter Singer approaches moral philosophy from a utilitarian perspective. In this paper, I will argue that Singer’s and Mill’s utilitarian philosophies share numerous similarities but also differ. Singer and Mill agree that selflessness can end human suffering. In addition, their views concerning the significance of consequences align; however, they conflict on the relevance of motivation. I contend that Singer improves upon Mill’s utilitarianism by accurately recognizing the discrepancy between absolute affluence and absolute poverty and also by considering the intricate concept of motive.

On September 9, 2016, a veteran engineer of Volkswagen AG by the name of James Robert Liang pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud the government, committing wire fraud, and violating the U.S. Clean Air Act. While working in Germany in 2006, Liang was part of a team charged with producing a new fuel-efficient diesel engine that satisfied new U.S. regulations on vehicle emissions. He and his team eventually came to the conclusion that their engine could not satisfy these new regulations while maintaining consumer expectations of engine performance. Their solution to this dilemma was to implement illegal software (known as a “defeat device”) into newly produced vehicles sold in the U.S. The purpose of this software was to detect any emissions test being performed on a vehicle and alter the results to show cleaner emissions on the onboard computer. Nearly 500,000 vehicles with this defeat device were sold in the U.S.; by 2008, consumers began to experience issues in their vehicles (not knowing it was due to the emission test software), and Liang worked to refine the device even further. The entirety of the scandal eventually came into the public spotlight in 2015 (Guess, 2016, p.1). The subsequent paragraphs of this essay will first discuss Kantian duty ethics and rule utilitarianism, and focus on analyzing the moral implications of Liang’s actions in reference to these moral theories.

In today’s society we often come to many debates on several issues that go on in our world today. Recently there was an ethical debate on whether or not it is ethical to release vehicles with software that defeats emission testing by the EPA. Volkswagen is being accused of using illegal software designed to hide emissions during testing by installing cars with a software. The EPA accused Volkswagen of using the device in nearly over a half a million cars (Davenport). The cars are reportedly to have been installed with a software that had the ability to turn off the emissions controls when driving normally and turns them on when the vehicle is undergoing an emissions test. With all of these assumptions of Volkswagen cheating the emissions testing does that question their ethical corporate responsibility?

In his essay, Utilitarianism Mill elaborates on Utilitarianism as a moral theory and responds to misconceptions about it. Utilitarianism, in Mill’s words, is the view that »actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.«1 In that way, Utilitarianism offers an answer to the fundamental question Ethics is concerned about: ‘How should one live?’ or ‘What is the good or right way to live?’.

This work has probably received more analysis than any other work on utilitarianism available. However, I seek to do here what many others have been unable to accomplish so far. I hope to, in five paragraphs, cover each of the chapters of Utilitarianism in enough depth to allow any reader to decide whether or not they subscribe to Mill's doctrine, and if so, which part or parts they subscribe to. I do this with the realization that much of Mill's deliberation in the text will be completely gone. I suggest that anyone who seeks to fully understand Mill's work should read it at length.

It is not hard to see that the scandal would cause a horrid blow to VW’s image. Until the incident, VW had, like many other German companies, the reputation of “German engineering” (Robertson, 2013). However, instead of using that innovation to develop diesel-fueled cars compliant with U.S. standards, it decided to try to scam its way in the market. Not only did the company admit to having 11 million cars with software intended to cheat tests (Gates, Ewing, Russell & Watkins, 2017), it also plead guilty to “destroying evidence in an elaborate cover-up” (VW Admits Emissions Cheating and Cover-up, 2017); building further distrust among its consumers.