Two Articles of Morality Compared
The comparison of the two articles in question is one of ethics, morals and public opinion. While the article by Bailey, (2014), argues that traditional morality, treat others as you would want to be treated, is a norm for business, with a counter argument of a situational morality being the norm for business; the article by Choy, (2012), argues that public opinion is that major companies are not ethical. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast these two articles.
Morality: Self-serving or Traditional
The example set forth in the article by Bailey (2014), is that while self-serving actions may seem to promote benefits, in the long run, those self-serving actions will only diminish the benefits. Take for example the illustration of the women reading and discarding the newspaper on the ground when she is finished (Bailey, 2014). The self-serving benefit is that she does not take the time to find proper disposal of the paper, while the long-term …show more content…
While traditional ethics can play a role in business and life, situational ethics, which is the foundation of Bailey’s (2014) argument may have a place in business. For instance, it is wrong to take a life of another human being, but in times of war, it is mandated on the battle field. The third argument by Choy (2012), is that the public sector will make an ethical judgment on a company when that company is not forth right in doing so itself. While Johnson and Johnson voluntarily recalled Tylenol brand acetaminophen, and set itself up as a moral company by this act (Choy, 2012). Enron shredded valuable legal documents which ended in government sanctions. Thus, we can surmise that while a moral decision may be right for one situation, it may be wrong for another, and the public will force companies to be ethical or pass negative judgment upon those
The comparison of the two articles in question is one of ethics, morals and public opinion. While the article by Bailey, (2014), argues that traditional morality, treat others as you would want to be treated, is a norm for business, with a counter argument of a situational morality being the norm for business; the article by Choy, (2012), argues that public opinion is that major companies are not ethical. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast these two articles.
Morality: Self-serving or Traditional
The example set forth in the article by Bailey (2014), is that while self-serving actions may seem to promote benefits, in the long run, those self-serving actions will only diminish the benefits. Take for example the illustration of the women reading and discarding the newspaper on the ground when she is finished (Bailey, 2014). The self-serving benefit is that she does not take the time to find proper disposal of the paper, while the long-term …show more content…
While traditional ethics can play a role in business and life, situational ethics, which is the foundation of Bailey’s (2014) argument may have a place in business. For instance, it is wrong to take a life of another human being, but in times of war, it is mandated on the battle field. The third argument by Choy (2012), is that the public sector will make an ethical judgment on a company when that company is not forth right in doing so itself. While Johnson and Johnson voluntarily recalled Tylenol brand acetaminophen, and set itself up as a moral company by this act (Choy, 2012). Enron shredded valuable legal documents which ended in government sanctions. Thus, we can surmise that while a moral decision may be right for one situation, it may be wrong for another, and the public will force companies to be ethical or pass negative judgment upon those