Using is an action, not a failure to act. A Catholic Response, W.
And if so, then is it not odd to condemn acts that produce better states of affairs than would occur in their absence? It disallows consequentialist justifications whenever: Moreover, there are some consequentialists who hold that the doing or refraining from doing, of certain kinds of acts are themselves intrinsically valuable states of affairs constitutive of the Good.
On such familiar deontological accounts of morality, agents cannot make certain wrongful choices even if by doing so the number of those exact kinds of wrongful choices will be minimized because other agents will be prevented from engaging in similar wrongful choices.
Enron Company had been built to a world class company for 16 years. After the bankruptcy filing, all the people involved in this fraudulent practices were put in a trial with Arthur Andersen bearing the greatest burden.
However, greed, deception, and extreme pressure brought the company down to its bankruptcy within 24 hours. Consequentialism is frequently criticized on a number of grounds.
However much consequentialists differ about what the Good consists in, they all agree that the morally right choices are those that increase either directly or indirectly the Good.
Also, we can cause or risk such results without intending them. In Trolley, on the other hand, the doomed victim is not used. Agent-centered theories famously divide between those that emphasize the role of intention or other mental states in constituting the morally important kind of agency, and those that emphasize the actions of agents as playing such a role.
The deontologist might attempt to back this assertion by relying upon the separateness of persons. This narrowness of patient-centered deontology makes it counterintuitive to agent-centered deontologists, who regard prohibitions on killing of the innocent, etc. These theories are rights-based rather than duty-based; and some versions purport to be quite agent-neutral in the reasons they give moral agents.
Employees freedom to act n a moral way is not guaranteed since they want to look good. The remaining four strategies for dealing with the problem of dire consequence cases all have the flavor of evasion by the deontologist.
The Weaknesses of Deontological Theories On the other hand, deontological theories have their own weak spots. Williams tells us that in such cases we just act. Patient-centered versions of deontology cannot easily escape this problem, as we have shown.
In the time-honored example of the run-away trolley Trolleyone may turn a trolley so that it runs over one trapped workman so as to save five workmen trapped on the other track, even though it is not permissible for an agent to have initiated the movement of the trolley towards the one to save five Foot ; Thomson Deontological theories have been termed formalistic, because their central principle lies in the conformity of an action to some rule or law.
Just like Lay, Jeffrey Skilling is another executive whose unethical behavior contributed to the bankruptcy of the company. Worse yet, were the trolley heading for the one worker rather than the five, there would be no reason not to switch the trolley, so a net loss of four lives is no reason not to switch the trolley.
Second, it is crucial for deontologists to deal with the conflicts that seem to exist between certain duties, and between certain rights. For and Against, J. Preventing Future Enron Enron case study is a very emotional situation where investors and employees suffered immensely as a result of increased unethical behaviors in the organization.Nor is it clear that meta-ethical contractualism, when it does generate a deontological ethic, favors either an agent centered or a patient centered version of such an ethic.
Deontological Theories and Kant. If any philosopher is regarded as central to deontological moral theories, it is surely Immanuel Kant. Deontological ethics and virtue ethics played a major role in what happened within the Enron corporation.
Doing the right thing because one’s character dictates it results in. Almost a decade later: Have we learned lessons from inside the crooked E, Enron? Deontology The second paradigm of ethics, deontology, is arguably the most complex and comprehensive Analysising Enron’s Code of Ethics Enron’s page code (Enron )reveals.
Under deontological ethics, it is this breaching of duty that made Enron's actions unethical--not the inherent character of the agent, as in virtue ethics, or the results of the bankruptcy, which would be considered under consequentialism.
The events leading to the collapse of Enron can be analyzed using the ethical frameworks suggested by consequentialist theory, deontological theory, and virtue ethics.
Such an analysis can provide an explanation of the failure of Enron’s directors, mangers, and auditors to adhere to their ethical duties to the shareholders, employees, customers and suppliers of the firm.
Introduction Business ethics is a major are of the major concerns in the corporate world. Most business executives must be taught on how to make ethical decisions on matters about the organizational performance.
Despite the sole obligation of profit maximization, executives have a moral duty as they exercise their rights. This should be in accordance [ ].Download