Happiness, pleasure and the absence of pain, is the only thing universally desirable. Some actions can be justified on utilitarian principles as being morally justified if it obtains the maximum overall happiness. Blake Mycoskie, the founder of Toms shoes, uses child poverty as his business model. Poverty will always be a part of this world. He based his business knowing that it always will be. He started the famous “one for one” slogan. This alone makes it clear he needs both the clientele to make his business successful. His idea was to give away a pair of shoes for every pair that has been bought. He has …show more content…
No one truly knows Blake Mycoskie’s intentions except Blake Mycoskie himself, but, even so, as his business grows so does the amount of children he helps. Weather it is true or not, it is still effective. In Confucian Ethics Ren is said to be the equality of moral worth. Ren must have human’s co-existence and co-identity to work. Toms recognizes both classes of people and that they need each other to work. Neither are more important, they are all people, it does not matter which ones have money or not. Without the people buying shoes the people in poverty would not be receiving them and without the people in poverty the people buying them would have no one to help. I think his “one for one” mantra implies this well. It makes it seem like both parts are completely equal and important. In the Normative Ethics book, it also talks about compassion and empathy as a way to form a bond with other humans. Mycoskie recognizes the pain and the need the children have; he does what he can to help and change their lives for the better. He plays on the emotions of the people buying the