Kant's Categorical Imperative In Business Ethics

2367 Words10 Pages
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
In Business
Business Ethics

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Letter of Acknowledgement 3
Abstract 4
Introduction 6
Objectives 11
Analysis 12 Letter of Acknowledgement

We have made this report to submit for our group project in our Business Ethics course.
We would like to express our whole hearted thanks to Almighty Allah by whose grace and blessings we have the knowledge; insight and opportunity to this complete this report.
I would also like to thank all other personnel who assisted and supported us during analysis.
Especially, please allow us to dedicate our acknowledgment of gratitude toward a significant advisor and contributor: Mr. Irfan Muhammad.
Finally, we sincerely thank our parents, family,
…show more content…
Borowski tried to explain what an employee – employer relation is, he pointed it out that employee-employer usually have an “adversarial” relation which is full of tension and mistrust and that is no way to conduct a business. He uses various principles and examples which we are going to discuss further, but the main principle which he applies is the Kant’s Categorical Imperative.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative:
A categorical imperative indicates a total, categorical requirement that must be obeyed in all state of affairs and is acceptable as an end in itself. It is best known in its first formulation:
“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.”
Kant say that every human being is a rational being and this fact entitles everyone the same level of respect, humans are not to be used as means but as ends if this relation is implied on the workplace it defines a workplace relation which is not hostile, according to Kant; in order to make business morally acceptable, all people are to be treated with mutual respect because they deserve
…show more content…
It doesn’t go deep enough into creation of a general ethics upon which organizations in general can be held accountable. This is so because his moral doctrine cannot make sense of collective responsibility, when this doctrine depends on strict criteria for what counts as a moral agent. Does this conclude that Kant is absolutely lame in so far as business ethics is concerned? A person would therefore seek a different application for Kant’s categorical imperative in business and only one option is left: the Individual responsibility within the organization, to which an employee
Open Document