The Categorical Imperative Framework Essay

1719 Words Oct 31st, 2016 7 Pages
That is indeed an uncomfortable situation. You could jeopardize your reputation by vouching for your friends fluffed up resume, or you could tell your friend you don’t think you will be able to put your reputation on the line for to support his falsified background. This is a super difficult decision to make, so let’s look at it from a few different perspectives. First we should look at this through the lens of the categorical imperative framework. If every applicant had a person within the company vouching for their friend’s exaggerated résumé, would it be beneficial? When it comes down to it, this would be beneficial only to the friends who are looking for a job. The company would have a falsified selection pool and would only be able to select an applicant based on how extravagant and believable their résumé’s were. This could be problematic. For instance, if everyone took this way of applying, I would be hired because I had the most impressive lie. I would not have the be the expertise expected of me as an employee, and due to not having the knowledge to work successfully, my shortcomings as an employee would affect the company overall. In short, if everyone did it businesses would crumble and/or résumés would be more like background checks. Also, if you think about it, vouching for the lying friend takes away from the virtue framework, or the equitable hiring process. You supporting the friend gives them an unfair advantage because they can get away with the…

Related Documents