1.) According to Kant’s categorical imperative, is your action not to present Le
ID: 399689 • Letter: 1
Question
1.) According to Kant’s categorical imperative, is your action not to present Leslies alternative ethical?
2.) According to utilitarianism, is your action not to present Leslies alternative ethical?
3.) Assume:
a. You were right. Had the company embarked on Leslies alternative, it would have driven the company into bankruptcy. Does this fact make your actions more ethical? Explain you answer.
b. You were wrong. Leslies alternative would have been far superior to yours for the company’s future. Does this fact make your actions less ethical? Explain your answer.
4.) In your opinion, do the intended consequences or the actual consequences have more bearing when assessing ethics from a utilitarian perspective?
I KNOW WHAT'S BETTER, REALLY Suppose you work for a small startup company involved in the innovative application of 30D printing technology, like AlIRoad Parts. Your company is 2 years old, employs 50 people, and, like many startup companies, is short of money. Even though you're relatively junion you've impressed the company's founders, and they have asked you to take a leadership role on a number of special projects. Recently, the company has been investigating developing an information system to store 3D printing designs and make them available to customers for purchase. You've been assigned to a committee that is developing alternative IS solutions for consideration by senior management. You and a coworker, Leslie Johnson, have developed two different alternatives for consideration by the committee. You believe that Alternative Two is vastly preferable to Alternative One, but Leslie believes just the opposite. You think if Leslie's alternative is chosen, the result will be a major financial loss, one that your young startup company is unlikely to survive. Even if that does not occur, so much time will be lost pursuing Leslie's alternative that your company will fall behind the competition in your dynamic, developing market and will lose substantial market share to the competition as a result Unfortunately, Leslie is called away due to a family emergency on the day the two of you are to present your alternatives. You so strongly believe that Leslie's plan is likely to cause irreparable harm to the company that you decide to present only your plan. While you never outright, you lead the committee to believe that both of you strongly support your plan. The committee adopts your plan and Leslie never learns that the committee saw only one alternative Is your behavior ethical? The Ethics Guide in Chapter 1 introduced Kant's categorical imperative as one way of assessing ethical conduct. This guide introduces a second way, one known as utilitarianism The basis of this theory goes back to early Greek philosophers, but the founders of the modern theory are considered to be Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, as you will learn in your business ethics class According to utilitarianism, the morality of an act is determined by its outcome. Acts are judged to be moral if they result in the greatest good to the greatest number or if they maximize happiness and reduce suffering. The prior sentence contains a great deal of subtlety that has led to numerous flavors of utilitarianism, flavors that are beyond the scope of this text. Here we will work with the gist of those statements. Using utilitarianism as a guide, killing can be moral if it results in the greatest good to the greatest number. Killing Adolf Hitler would have been moral if it stopped the Holocaust. Similarly, utilitarianism can assess lying or other forms of deception as moral if the act results in the greatest good to the greatest number. Lying by telling someone with a fatal illness that you're certain he or she will recover is moral if it increases that person's happiness and decreases his or her sufferingExplanation / Answer
1. According to Kant’s categorical imperative, is your action not to present Leslie’s alternative ethical?
According to Kant's categorical imperative, my action to not present Leslie's alternative was definitely not ethical, because regardless of what my perspective is on both the project alternative, it is not necessary that only my project can bring success and Leslie's can't. It could've been the other way around if it was presented, tested put by experienced perspectives. I also think it is not only unethical but also is unfair and very selfish of me to not present my partners work to be determined whether it would bring a success or not to the company.
2. According to utilitarianism, is your action not to present Leslie’s alternative ethical?
Although according to utilitarianism it is moral and ethical to present my project because, i am only thinking from my perspective. In my own point of view, my project is best to me, while i forget that my partner (Leslie)may think the same when it comes to her own project as well.
3. Assume: a. You were right. Had the company embarked on Leslie’s alternative, it would have driven the company into bankruptcy. Does this fact make your actions more ethical? Explain your answer. b. You were wrong. Leslie’s alternative would have been far superior to yours for the company’s future. Does this fact make your actions less ethical? Explain your answer.
If I were to assume that I was right to only show my project and that brings the company to success, my action would still be unethical of the act that I did not bring out Leslie's alternative to the presentation. It was unethical and unfair to only see from my perspective when there was more than one option. Along with my perspective, I should've also thought about the fact that, Leslie's alternative could've been a success to this particular assignment instead of mine.
Nevertheless, if I presented my project and it turned out to be wrong, this action would be even far more unethical to the point where now I would look bad for not showing Leslie's contribution.
4. In your opinion, do the intended consequences or the actual consequences have more bearing when assessing ethics from a utilitarian perspective?
I personally think that, whether its intend consequences or actual consequences, either way it would be ethical because it would be being fair. However, according to utilitarianism, either consequences that bring positive goodness to a large group and brings benefit to a large group would be considered as moral.
ANSWER AS THUMBS UP. THANKS A LOT.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.