Question Details

[answered] 1Ethical Principles and Business DecisionsWavebreak Media/T

Hello, I need assistance with my discussion in PHI445: Personal & Organizational Ethics. Please see the requirements below and the chapter one attachment that must be referenced. ?I believe I will need a total of 1000 words. Thank you!

Write:?Start your initial post by identifying two characteristics of utilitarianism, two characteristics of virtue ethics, and two characteristics of deontology. Organize this part of your post so that it is clear which characteristics belong to which ethical theory. You can do this by means of subtitles, or by presenting a table. You should aim to write one complete and clear sentence for each characteristic rather than just one or a few words.

Then, take the position that Starbucks is guided by utilitarianism and analyze how the notion of the moral good in utilitarianism leads to a unique approach to ethical problems. The way to do this is as follows:

  • First, present an ethical problem confronted by Starbucks. You can choose one such ethical problem from the video.
  • Then, apply the characteristics of utilitarianism that you identified for this discussion in the attempt to solve this problem.
  • After this, analyze how the notion of the moral good present in utilitarianism, and the characteristics that you identified in particular, shape the approach to solving this problem.

Revise:?This is your chance to correct any oversights or errors in your initial post, or show your improved understanding of the ethical theories and their applications. Start by reading the feedback provided by your professor to your initial post, either directly to you or to your fellow students. Use this as an opportunity to learn from your professor, especially with regard to the best ways to apply the course material and your research to your analysis. On the basis of what you have learned in this process, post an improved revision of your initial post that applies the additional knowledge that you have gained.

Remember that your grade depends on the quality of your initial and revised responses, not just on the submission of an attempt at improvement. It is thus to your advantage to post the best initial post you can and then to also improve that best effort as much as you can through revision. Taking this process seriously will help you develop the skills you need to do well on the final project.


Requirements for Your Initial Post:

  • Your initial post should be at least400 wordsin lengthand have citations and references in APA notation. It should address the prompt in its entirety. This means that you should not split your response to the prompt in multiple posts. Your examination should be both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands time and thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise.
  • Please be advised that until you post, you will not see what your fellow students are posting. Once you submit your post, you will be able to view the posts from your other classmates. You can then proceed to reply to at least two different threads based on the required material for this discussion on virtue ethics and deontology.
  • Your list of references for your initial post should include the video and the other required material for this discussion, including Section 1.3 of the textbook on Starbucks, as well as the Instructor Guidance and any other announcements presented to you by your professor. Use all of the material presented to you in the course and by your professor, in addition to any other sources that you consulted to inform yourself about Starbucks (but not Wikipedia or similar sources).
  • Your initial post for this discussion should be submittedno later than the end of Thursday (11:59 pm, U.S. Mountain time).

Fieser, J. (2015).?Introduction to business ethics?[Electronic version]. Retrieved from

1Ethical Principles and Business DecisionsWavebreak Media/ThinkstockLearning ObjectivesAfter reading this chapter, you should be able to: Describe moral objectivism, moral relativism, and divine command theory. Explain the theories of moral psychology, including psychological egoism, psychological altruism, and the relation between gender and morality. Explain how virtue theory, duty theory, and utilitarianism provide standards of morality. Describe the relation between morality and government in social contract theory, human rights theory, and the four principles of governmental coercion. Close-up of a businessmans hands in handcuffs. 2 Introduction Chapter Outline Introduction 1.1 Where Moral Values Come From Moral Objectivism and Moral Relativism Religion and Morality 1.2 Ethics and Psychology Egoism and Altruism Gender and Morality 1.3 Moral Standards Virtues Duties Utilitarianism 1.4 Morality and Government The Social Contract Human Rights Principles of Governmental Coercion Conclusion Introduction National surveys are routinely conducted to reveal public attitudes about various professions; some jobs have higher moral reputations than others. One poll asked people to rate the honesty and ethical standards of people in different fields. The results of the survey are shown in Figure 1.1. It is important to understand that these survey results only report peoples perceptions of professional ethical behavior and are not evaluations of actual professional behavior. But business is an area where perception is often everything, and businesspeople in advertising and public relations certainly know this. Figure 1.1 shows a clear pattern: The highest-ranking professions involve helping people, and nurses, who are at the very top, are clear examples. Among the lowest-ranking occupations are those associated with the business world: bankers, business executives, advertisers, and, near the very bottom, car salespeople. What is it that makes us have such low opinions of the moral integrity of the business world? Part of it may be that, in contrast with nurses, businesses have the reputation of caring only for themselves and not for others. Part of it may also be that the competitive nature of business pushes even the most decent of people to put profits above responsibility to the public. Businesses, of course, respond to these negative perceptions in creative ways. For example, 3 Costco, Walgreens, Kroger, and other retailers now provide inexpensive flu shots to customers. This performs a genuine social service and at the same time bolsters their ethical reputation by reinforcing their link with health care. Figure 1.1: Perceptions of ethical professions, 2014Numbers indicate the percentage of those surveyed who ranked the respective vocations very high in terms of honesty and ethical standards. Of the 805 adults surveyed, 80% rate nurses highest. Source: Based on Riffkin, R. (2014). Americans rate nurses highest on honesty, ethical standards. Gallup. Retrieved from http://www NursesMedicaldoctorsPharmacistsPoliceofficersClergyBankersBusinessexecutivesAdvertisingPractitionersLawyersCarsalespeopleMember of Congress The concept of business ethics is by no means new; in fact, some of the earliest written documents in human civilization wrestle with these issues. The Mesopotamian Code of Hammurabi, from almost 4,000 years ago, had this to say about the responsibility of building contractors: If a builder builds a house for someone, even though he has not yet completed it, if then the walls seem toppling, the builder must make the walls solid from his own means. . . . If a shipbuilder builds a boat for someone, and does not make it tight, if during that same year that boat is sent away and leaks, the shipbuilder shall take the boat apart and put it together tight at his own expense. (King, n.d., sections 233 and 235) This book is devoted to understanding the ethical challenges that businesses face and what can be done to meet those challenges. In this chapter, we will explore several basic and time-tested principles of morality. Ethical theory is a complex field of study, and, within the limited space of this chapter, we can only introduce some of the main principles, illustrating them with examples from the field of business. Introduction A bar chart that shows the perceptions of the ethics of certain professions, with nurses coming in highest at 80% and members of Congress coming in lowest at 7%. The other vocations rated are as follows: medical doctors at 65%, pharmacists at 65%, police officers at 48%, clergy at 46%, bankers at 23%, lawyers at 21%, business executives at 17%, advertising practitioners at 10%, and car salespeople at 8%. 01020304050607080 NursesMedicaldoctorsPharmacistsPoliceofficersClergyBankersBusinessexecutivesAdvertisingPractitionersLawyersCarsalespeopleMember of Congress Where Moral Values Come From Section 1.1 Some of historys greatest minds have reflected on the nature of morality and devised theories of where morality comes from and how moral principles should guide our conduct. As we examine these theories, several will be associated with famous figures like Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Mill. Although these thinkers may have provided the classic expressions of these concepts, in many cases they did not invent them, nor did they single-handedly integrate them into notions of morality. We find these principles important today because each reflects a way that we naturally think about moral issues. This chapter provides not just a lesson in the history of ethics but an examination of the features that we currently believe are relevant to ethical behavior. 1.1 Where Moral Values Come From A good definition of ethics is that it is an organized analysis of values relating to human conduct, with respect to an actions rightness and wrongness. Ethics is not the same as etiquette, which merely involves customary codes of polite behavior, such as how we greet people and how we seat guests at a table. The issue in ethics is not what is polite, but what is obligatory. Ethics is closely related to morality, and although some ethicists make subtle distinctions between the two, they are more often used interchangeably, as will be done throughout this book. One of the most basic ethical issues involves understanding where our moral values come from. Consider the moral mandates that we should not kill or steal, which most of us adopt. If I asked you where you got those values, youd likely answer that they were passed on to you from your parents, friends, teachers, and religious institutions. Indeed, we are all products of our surroundings: If you hunt, you probably do so because your parents do; if you like country music, that may also be because of your parents. However, when it comes to understanding why we have values like we should not kill or steal, we need to examine not just our immediate social influences but also ask where society itself got those principles. Are these universal and unchanging truths that are somehow embedded in the fabric of the universe, or are they changeable guidelines that we humans have created ourselves to suit our needs of the moment? The question of where our moral values come from often involves two issues: The first is a debate between objectivism and relativism, and the second concerns the relation between morality and religion. Lets look at each of these. Moral Objectivism and Moral Relativism Some years ago, the Lockheed Corporation was caught offering a quarter of a billion dollars in bribes overseas. A major U.S. defense contractor, Lockheed had fallen on economic hard times. The U.S. government commissioned the company to design a hybrid aircraft, but after one crashed, the government canceled orders. Because of this and other mishaps, Lockheed believed that the solution to its financial woes was to expand its aircraft sales into foreign countries. In order to get military aircraft contracts with foreign governments, it made a series of payoffs to middlemen who had political influence in West Germany, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and several other countries. The company was eventually caught and punished with a heavy fine, and its chairman and president were forced to resign. Where Moral Values Come From Section 1.1 A consequence of this event was the creation of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which includes an anti-bribery provision that involves stiff fines and prison terms for offenders. The message of the law is that, when in Rome, you should not do as the Romans do. There are overarching standards of ethical conduct that businesses are expected to follow, regardless of where they are in the world and what the local business practices are there. When Lockheed engaged in systematic bribery, did it violate a universal standard of morality that is binding on all human societies, or did it just violate a standard of morality that is merely our personal preference in the United States? On the one side of this question is the theory of moral objectivism, which, in its classic form, has three key components: 1. Morality is objective: Moral standards are not created by human beings nor by human societies. According to many objectivists, they exist in a higher spirit realm that is completely apart from the physical world around us. 2. Moral standards are unchanging: Moral standards are eternal and do not change throughout time or from location to location. No matter where you are in the world or at what point in history, the same principles apply. 3. Moral standards are universal: There is a uniform set of moral standards that is the same for all people, regardless of human differences such as race, gender, wealth, and social standing. The classic champion of the moral objectivist view is the ancient Greek philosopher Plato (424 BCE347 BCE), who argued that moral truths exist in a higher level of reality that is spiritual in nature. According to Plato, the universe as a whole is two-tiered. There is the lower physical level that consists of rocks, trees, human bodies, and every other material object that we see around us. All of this is constantly changing, either decaying or morphing into something else. Within this level of the universe, nothing is permanent. On the other hand, Plato argued, there is a higher level of the universe, which is nonphysical and is the home of eternal truths. He called this the realm of the forms, which are perfect patterns or blueprints for all things. Mathematical principles are good examples. They are completely unchanging and in no way dependent for their existence on the changing physical world. Even if the entire physical universe were destroyed and another emerged, the principles of mathematics would remain the same, unchanged. According to Plato, moral principles are just like mathematical principles in that respect, and they also exist in the higher realm of the forms. Just as the principle that 1 + 1 = 2 exists permanently in this realm, so too do moral principles of goodness, justice, charity, and many others. The greatest appeal of Platos theory is that it gives us a sense of moral stability. When someone is murdered, we often believe that an absolute and unchanging moral principle has been violated that goes well beyond the shifting preferences of our particular human community. On the other side of this issue is the theory of moral relativism, which has three contrasting key features: 1. Morality is not objective: Moral standards are purely human inventions, created by either individual people or human societies. 2. Moral standards are not unchanging: Moral standards change throughout time and from society to society. 3. Moral standards are not universal: Moral standards do not necessarily apply universally to all people, and their application depends on human preference.Someone accessing a database of drug stock on a computer in a pharmacy. Wavebreak Media/ThinkstockIs stealing something, like a drug, as this nurse is demonstrating, always wrong? Would your answer change if you knew the person stealing the drug needed it for her cancer treatment? What if she were stealing it for her child? Defenders of moral relativism are typically skeptical about the existence of any higher realm of absolute truth, such as Platos realm of the forms. Although notions of eternal moral truths are appealing, the fact is, says the moral relativist, we do not have any direct experience of such higher realms existence. What we know for sure is the physical world around us, which contains societies of human beings that are always changing. The moral values that we see throughout these societies are ones that are created by human preference and change throughout history and with geographical location. Simply put, morality is a human creation, not an eternal truth. Which is rightmoral objectivism or moral relativism? Some philosophical questions are not likely to be answered any time soon, and this is one of them. However, we can take inspiration from both sides of the debate. With the Lockheed bribery incident, the position of the U.S. government was that there is a standard of integrity in business that applies worldwide, not just within U.S. borders. This is a concession to moral objectivism. On the other hand, some business practices are culturally dependent and rest on deeply held moral or religious convictions. In Japan, new businesses typically have an opening ceremony in which a Shinto priest blesses the company building. U.S. companies operating in Japan often follow this practice, and this is a concession to moral relativism. Religion and Morality An organization called the Center for Christian Business Ethics Today offers a Christian approach to ethical issues in business. According to the organization, God is the ultimate source of moral values: Gods standards as set forth in Gods Word, the Bible, transcend while incorporating both the law and ethics (Center for Christian Business Ethics Today, n.d.). This view is by no means unique, and is in fact part of a long history of efforts to ground morality in some aspect of religion. According to the classic view of religious ethics, true morality Someone accessing a database of drug stock on a computer in a pharmacy. does not emerge from human thought processes or human society alone. It begins with God establishing moral truths, instilling moral convictions within human nature, and reinforcing those moral truths through scripture. Religious believers who follow Gods path will be motivated to follow Gods established moral truths, perhaps more so than non-believers who view ethics as a purely human invention. This classic view of religious ethics raises two questions: 1. Is God the creator of moral values? 2. Do religious believers have better access to moral truth than non-believers? Regarding the first questionwhether God creates moral valuesa position called divine command theory answers yes: Moral standards are created by Gods will. In essence, God creates them from nothing, not even basing them on any prior standard of reason or logic. God pronounces them into existence through a pure act of will. There are two challenges that divine command theory faces: 1. It presumes in the first place that God exists, and that is an assumption that non-believers would reject from the start. Many religious believers themselves would hold that belief in God is a matter of personal faith, not absolute proof, and so we must be cautious about the kinds of activities that we ascribe to God, such as creating absolute moral truths. 2. The moral standards that God creates would be arbitrary if they were made purely as an act of the will without relying on any prior objective standard of reason. What would prevent God from willfully creating a random set of moral values, which might include principles like lying is okay or stealing is okay? God could also willfully change his mind about which moral principles he commands. Maybe he could mandate that stealing is wrong on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, but that stealing is okay during the rest of the week. Many ethicists throughout historyeven ones who were devout religious believershave rejected divine command theory for this reason. To avoid arbitrariness, it seems that morality would need to be grounded in some stable, rational standard, such as with Platos view of absolute moral truths. That is, God would merely endorse these absolute moral truths because they seem rationally compelling to him; he does not literally create them from nothing. If morality, then, is really grounded in preexisting objective truths, then we humans can discover them on our own and do not need to depend on God for our moral knowledge. Again, the second question raised by the classic view of religious ethics is whether believers have better access to moral truth than non-believers. The answer to this throughout much of history was yes: Religion is an essential motivation for moral conduct. To behave properly, people need to believe that a divine being is watching them and will punish them in the afterlife for immoral conduct. The French moral philosopher Voltaire (16941778) famously stated that if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him, precisely because moral behavior depends so much on belief in divine judgment (Voltaire, 1770). In more recent times, this position has fallen out of favor, and there is wider acceptance of the view that believers are not necessarily more moral than non-believers. One reason for this change in attitude is that our society as a whole has become much more secularized than Voltaires was, and, from our experience, non-believers do not appear to be particularly bad citizens. Also, it appears that believers fall into the same moral traps as everyone else. The upshot is that both components of classic religious ethics are difficult to establish: It is not clear that God creates moral values, assuming that God exists, and it is not clear that believers have a special advantage in following moral rules. It is undeniable that, for many believers, religion is an important source of moral inspiration, and that fact should not be minimized. Undoubtedly, this is true for the above-mentioned members of the Center for Christian Business Ethics Today. At the same time, however, there are plenty of nonreligious motivations to do the right thing, such as a fear of going to jail, a desire to be accepted by ones family and friends, or a sense of personal integrity. In the business world there are additional motivations to be moral, such as the desire to avoid lawsuits, costly fines, or tarnishing the company name. What Would You Do?One of the consequences of religious ethics in the workplace is the shaping of company policy in ways that sometimes clash with secular social norms. Retail arts and crafts supply chain Hobby Lobby is a case in point. The company, based in Oklahoma City, opposed on religious grounds a Federal government requirement to provide emergency contraception as part of its employee healthcare benefits. Defending his companys position, company founder and CEO David Green stated; Were Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles . . . Being Christians, we dont pay for drugs that might cause abortions (Green, 2012). The case went to the Supreme Court, which, in a landmark decision, ruled in favor of the company on the grounds that the Federal law posed a substantial burden on the companys exercise of religion (Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 2014).1. Suppose that you were a Supreme Court Justice deciding this case. One factor in the case involved balancing Hobby Lobbys religious interests against societys larger interest in allowing women access to emergency contraception. How would this affect your decision as a Supreme Court Justice?2. One of the issues in this case was whether corporations are entitled to religious freedom in the ways that individuals are. How would this affect your decision as a Supreme Court Justice?3. In this case, the Supreme Court recognized that its decision in favor of Hobby Lobby could lead to a host of claims made by litigants seeking a religious exemption on other religion-related issues. How would that affect your decision as a Supreme Court Justice?4. Suppose that you are a female cashier at Hobby Lobby and did not share David Greens religious convictions on the issue of emergency contraception. Would you protest, or quit, or just live with it? Be sure to provide a rationale for your answer. 1.2 Ethics and Psychology An important set of ethical issues involves our psychological makeup as human beings. There is no doubt that our personal expectations, desires, and thought processes have an impact on what motivates us to behave morally. Thus, the question of where does morality come from? might be at least partially answered by looking at human psychology. In this section, we will look at two central issues of moral psychology: One focuses on our psychological inclination to be selfish, and the other on how gender shapes our moral outlook. Egoism and Altruism When Hurricane Sandy pounded the U.S. East Coast, the home improvement company Lowes teamed up with the Red Cross to deliver financial assistance and disaster relief to stricken areas. Lowes CEO stated Our thoughts are with all the families who have been impacted by this historic storm, and were focused on working closely with our partners in the days and months ahead to deliver funding, supplies and volunteer support to the hardest-hit areas. . . . Were proud to stand by the Red Cross as they continue to respond to the needs of local communities (Business Wire, 2012). Some years earlier Lowes provided similar disaster relief to areas impacted by Hurricane Katrina. Why does it do this? Is it purely from a sense of goodwill towards those in need, or does the company expect to get some benefit out of it, such as free publicity? We can ask this same kind of question about our conduct as individuals: Are we capable of acting solely for the benefit of others, or do we always act in ways that ultimately benefit ourselves? There are two competing theories that address this question: Psychological egoism: Human conduct is selfishly motivated and we cannot perform actions from any other motive. Psychological altruism: Human beings are at least occasionally capable of acting selflessly. Both of these theories are psychological in the sense that they are making claims about what internally motivates human behavior.Pfizer employees wearing Advil shirts work to rebuild houses after Hurricane Sandy. Diane Bondareff/ASSOCIATED PRESSDo companies like Pfizer Consumer Healthcare, whose employees worked to rebuild homes destroyed by Hurricane Sandy as part of the compa- nys Advil Relief in Action campaign, act charitably out of a sense of goodwill towards those in need, or do they expect to get some other benefit out of it? Psychological egoism maintains that all of our actions, without exception, are motivated by some selfish drive. Even when I am doing something, like donating to charity, that appears to be purely for the benefit of someone else, there are hidden selfish motives at work within me and I am only acting to benefit myself. Maybe through my charitable action I secretly hope that I will receive a Citizen of the Year award; perhaps I desire to hear the recipient of my charity thank me with gushing words of appreciation so that I can feel good about myself. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (15881679) argued that all acts of charity could be reduced to our private desire to exercise control over Pfizer employees wearing Advil shirts work to rebuild houses after Hurricane Sandy. other peoples lives. For Hobbes (1650/1811), I am the one who decides whether a poor person will have enough food to eat today, and I am on a private power trip if I help that person out. A psychological egoist would look at Lowes with similar suspicion: The companys public acts of charity are great public relations tools that associate their name and products with social responsibility. Through press releases and advertisements, Lowes spreads the news of its charitable work far and wide. The rival theory of psychological altruism concedes that much of our human conduct is indeed motivated by selfish desire. But, according to the altruist, there is more going on with us psychologically than just that. We have the capacity to break free of the grip that selfishness has on us and at least occasionally act purely for the betterment of other people. Perhaps we have an instinct of human kindness that exhibits itself when we see people who are truly in need. Our hearts go out to them and we want to help, regardless of whether there is any benefit to ourselves. Maybe some of that is be...


Solution details:

This question was answered on: Sep 18, 2020

PRICE: $15 (25.37 KB)

Buy this answer for only: $15

This attachment is locked

We have a ready expert answer for this paper which you can use for in-depth understanding, research editing or paraphrasing. You can buy it or order for a fresh, original and plagiarism-free copy from our tutoring website (Deadline assured. Flexible pricing. TurnItIn Report provided)

Pay using PayPal (No PayPal account Required) or your credit card . All your purchases are securely protected by .

About this Question






Sep 18, 2020





We have top-notch tutors who can do your essay/homework for you at a reasonable cost and then you can simply use that essay as a template to build your own arguments.

You can also use these solutions:

  • As a reference for in-depth understanding of the subject.
  • As a source of ideas / reasoning for your own research (if properly referenced)
  • For editing and paraphrasing (check your institution's definition of plagiarism and recommended paraphrase).
This we believe is a better way of understanding a problem and makes use of the efficiency of time of the student.


Order New Solution. Quick Turnaround

Click on the button below in order to Order for a New, Original and High-Quality Essay Solutions. New orders are original solutions and precise to your writing instruction requirements. Place a New Order using the button below.


Order Now