The action of lying to protect my cousin may have made the outcome of the situation better. Mill states, “If some act of lying or stealing maximizes the good, act-utilitarianism will consider it to be obligatory (Ethics Theory and Issues, “John Stuart Mill (1806-1873): Revised Utilitarianism 127).” Mill will argue that by using an act-utilitarian approach you would need to examine whether telling a lie creates greater happiness than telling the truth or in my case keeping silent. Because it does, then it is morally right. If it did not, then it is morally wrong. However, if Mill choices to look at my situation as a rule utilitarian’s then he would most likely disagree with my lying.
2013, p74). In this case, the motive of Takata to hide the data and remove some test results is to reduce the cost on the test and shorten the time to market that is immoral. Because they don 't consider that distort and controlled test data whether bring a security risk to the customer. Although there was not enough evidence to show that Takata 's behavior is directly related to the Ms. Mincey 's accident and injuries, but there were still 15 deaths which caused by the defective Takata air-bag (Trudell 2016; Tabuchi & Ivory 2016). And In order to reduce the cost and maximize the profit, Takata used the cheaper propellant which would combust violently (Lee 2016).
Kant’s categorical imperative as known as The Formula Of The End In Itself states that people should act in a certain way that you always treat humanity and always consider them as an end but never as mere means. This moral theory opposes to Utilitarianism, which supports the “greatest happiness principle”. According to “greatest happiness principle” people ought to act in such a way that produce the greatest amount of happiness for the
Without strict product liability, the reality of the capitalist market tend to be caveat emptor which means “Let the Buyer Beware!” where an injured consumer could not sue the manufacturer and recover damages caused by a defective product. By complying with this theory, manufacturers will make effort to enhance safety of products that are free from dangerous
Answer 2: 1) Consequentialism, it says that an action can be judged as ethical or unethical based on the consequences it creates, practices which bring in a person cannot predict consequences beforehand, an art which could be gained with experience. Consequentialism has its types to evaluate morality, here it is by the human practices based on their act, the rules, the motives behind a specific practice and the character traits of a person who decides. Classic Utilitarianism is regarded as a generally accepted version of consequentialism. An action is considered moral based on the Utility, which is personal satisfaction, commonly stated as “happiness” minus the pain. Thus, an action is morally good or bad is based upon the rise and fall
Trouiller and colleagues’ (2002) evidence supports the claim that the pharmaceutical industry’s intent is to profit from research given their reluctance to develop new therapies that would help millions due to costs and risk of investment. Consequently, subjects are then merely a means. Given this, it seems relevant to consider a deontological perspective. When the intent of the research is to produce therapies for profit, the intent ignores the social duty to help and only benefits a few. Moreover, when intention is to profit, people become means and not the ends.
Utilitarianism makes ethical decisions based on the results that the action will cause. However, for the Kantian theory, it is believed that human reason is the only pure good, and they disregard the consequences. Kant discusses that the mentioned human reason should be devoid of the influence of desires or emotions. This opposes the Utilitarian view that ignores motives of an action as not important and approves the consequences. According to Kant, a purely good act is performed due to the person’s obligation to the categorical imperative.
In Utilitarianism the standard of morality is set on the basis of what is good for most and not just for one person. John Stuart Mill stated that: “The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of
Harmful with respect to unwanted discharge of the employee, and beneficial for the organization to be drug free or provision of treatment for those who tested positive. However, this is often neglected during the process. Social aspects include the impact of these decision on outside parties like the suppliers, distributers, and customers. Drug testing may not have such an adverse impact on the people outside the organization but when it comes to other dilemmas, the more productivity of the workers, the more competitive it is which eventually benefits the suppliers, distributers and customers. Personal factors may not be affected much in drug testing but in other ethical dilemmas like downsizing or closure, adequate consideration should be given to the employees or else it can have an adverse impact on the manager’s
One can attempt to get drug users non-physically addicted repeatedly, however if there’s no effort to address why people do drugs in the first place- it won’t do anything. These people would go back to dealing drugs, and want to exploit them. The dealer profits, and only continues to try and get more addicted so they can profit further off of exploiting the mentally ill and the physically addicted.Instead of putting all the pressure on eradicating drugs, people's needs should be met. If they are engaged and part of a proper democratic community, it should be gauged as to how likely they are to use drugs- to a point