Nearing the conclusion of the Business Ethics module I feel, as I had hoped, that I have become well versed in the subject. Though, I mainly agree with the assertions in my first two entries, my feelings on the issues have changed and the module has been different from my expectations. Also, though I have partially achieved the goals outlined in the first entry, by being able to better articulate myself when discussing ethical matters; I have not found a theory which I ‘agree’ with. In this final log entry I will expand upon these issues.
Initially, my expectations were that I would learn the multitude of ways in which businesses are unethical and the negative impact businesses can have. However, the course was holistic, all stakeholders were …show more content…
This is because I place more value in the motivation of an action, rather than the outcomes. A key problem with consequentialism, which I reflected on in this previous entry, is moral luck. Personally, I find the notion incongruous; it sets a dangerous precedent considering that it can be applied to justify morally questionable acts as for the ‘greater good’ (Woodcock, 2010). Additionally, a further issue I have with consequentialism is the lack of distinction between intentional and unintentional outcomes (Lenman, 2000). I feel unpremeditated outcomes should have less bearing when appraising the morality of a decision, unless said outcome was a glaring omission. Similarly, as with moral absolutism, human individuality renders the practical application of consequentialism extremely difficult, as it requires individuals to consider the needs of others as having the same value as their own (Smart and Williams, 1973). Whilst being idealistic in theory, in practice individuals are much more likely to act egoistically, in that they value their own interests and desires first and other second (Moseley, n.d.). To summarise, whilst consequentialism is somewhat idealistic, it would require humanity to be all-knowing in their decision-making and completely altruistic, thus the practical application of the theory is …show more content…
The elements I subscribed to non-consequentialism and that humans do not need organised religion to determine morality. Though I still believe this, I find it hard to support Kant’s theories due to his bizarrely harsh views on animal ethics. Upon further reading of Kant I learnt that he believed that humans “have no direct duties to animals” and feels they are “things we may dispose of as we will”(Wood, 1998). This disregard of value in the life of animals is symptomatic of speciesism in wider society, which I feel is an under-represented issue within business ethics and by proxy the business ethics
Initially, my expectations were that I would learn the multitude of ways in which businesses are unethical and the negative impact businesses can have. However, the course was holistic, all stakeholders were …show more content…
This is because I place more value in the motivation of an action, rather than the outcomes. A key problem with consequentialism, which I reflected on in this previous entry, is moral luck. Personally, I find the notion incongruous; it sets a dangerous precedent considering that it can be applied to justify morally questionable acts as for the ‘greater good’ (Woodcock, 2010). Additionally, a further issue I have with consequentialism is the lack of distinction between intentional and unintentional outcomes (Lenman, 2000). I feel unpremeditated outcomes should have less bearing when appraising the morality of a decision, unless said outcome was a glaring omission. Similarly, as with moral absolutism, human individuality renders the practical application of consequentialism extremely difficult, as it requires individuals to consider the needs of others as having the same value as their own (Smart and Williams, 1973). Whilst being idealistic in theory, in practice individuals are much more likely to act egoistically, in that they value their own interests and desires first and other second (Moseley, n.d.). To summarise, whilst consequentialism is somewhat idealistic, it would require humanity to be all-knowing in their decision-making and completely altruistic, thus the practical application of the theory is …show more content…
The elements I subscribed to non-consequentialism and that humans do not need organised religion to determine morality. Though I still believe this, I find it hard to support Kant’s theories due to his bizarrely harsh views on animal ethics. Upon further reading of Kant I learnt that he believed that humans “have no direct duties to animals” and feels they are “things we may dispose of as we will”(Wood, 1998). This disregard of value in the life of animals is symptomatic of speciesism in wider society, which I feel is an under-represented issue within business ethics and by proxy the business ethics