0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)
243 vues14 pages
The document discusses Immanuel Kant's views on morality and ethics. Kant believed that morality should be based on reason and universal principles. He developed the categorical imperative, which holds that people should only act according to moral rules that could become universal, and that people should never use others merely as a means to an end. Kant suggested humans have the capacity to rise above self-interest and make ethical choices in line with universal moral norms.
The document discusses Immanuel Kant's views on morality and ethics. Kant believed that morality should be based on reason and universal principles. He developed the categorical imperative, which holds that people should only act according to moral rules that could become universal, and that people should never use others merely as a means to an end. Kant suggested humans have the capacity to rise above self-interest and make ethical choices in line with universal moral norms.
The document discusses Immanuel Kant's views on morality and ethics. Kant believed that morality should be based on reason and universal principles. He developed the categorical imperative, which holds that people should only act according to moral rules that could become universal, and that people should never use others merely as a means to an end. Kant suggested humans have the capacity to rise above self-interest and make ethical choices in line with universal moral norms.
Western Management Indian Management More human approach Focus on overall development
Western management Human factor ignored Complete focus on figures
IMMANUEL KANT (1724-1804).
The German philosopher Immanuel Kant believed that morality in all spheres of human life should be grounded in reason. His renowned "categorical imperative" held that: (1) people should act only according to maxims that they would be willing to see become universal norms (i.e., the Golden Rule); and (2) People should never treat another human as a means to an end. The categorical imperative is easily demonstrated:
Kant's theory implied the
necessity of trust, adherence to rules, and keeping promises (e.g., contracts). When people elect to deviate from the categorical imperative, they risk being punished by the business community or by government enforcement of laws.
More importantly, Kant suggested
that certain moral norms that are ingrained in humans allow them to rise above purely animalistic behavior. People have the capacity to forgo personal gain when it is achieved at the expense of others, and they can make a choice as to whether they will or will not follow universal norms.
Theories of Business Ethics
Concept of virtue Virtues are values you are identified with Promoted by Indian ethical thinkers
Fidelity- Keep promises and tell the truth
Reparation- Compensate people for injury and loss Gratitude- Return the favour Justice- Benefits are distributed according to merits Beneficence- Do activities which help others Self improvement- Improving our own virtue Non Violence- Avoid injury to others
Theories of Business Ethics
Deontological Theory Developed by Immanuel Kant Do what is right without bothering about the results Importance to universal truth and goodwill Reach the destination step by step Look at your self before criticizing others Acquire wealth by rightful means Similar to religious approach
Theories of Business Ethics
Conventional ethics of Albert Carr Believes in conflict between individuals ethics and business realities Business is like a poker game where bluffing and deception are essential for winning Lawyers job is to save his client; not to defend the truth Play to win and bluff is part of the game
Theories of Business Ethics
Doctrine of Mean by Aristotle Goodness is measured in terms of performing the purpose Motive is important as much as suitability of action to the circumstances Knowledge and action are together and can not be separated Equal importance to knowledge and experience
Heinz Steals the Drug In Europe
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug.
The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to
everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife.
Should Heinz break into the laboratory
to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
Kohlberg used moral dilemmas to
determine which stage of moral reasoning a person uses. The dilemmas are short stories in which a person has to make a moral decision. The participant is asked what this person should do. A dilemma that Kohlberg used in his original research was the druggist's dilemma
Stage one (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine,
because he will consequently be put in prison. Stage two (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine, because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Stage three (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine, because his wife expects it. Stage four (law-and-order): Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the law prohibits stealing. Stage five (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine, because everyone has a right to live, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Stage six (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because that violates the golden rule of honesty and respect.
; It would be unethical for a person
to break into a long line at a theater, because if everyone did the same thing anarchy would result. Similarly, it would be immoral for a person to have a friend buy him or her a ticket under the agreement that he or she would reimburse the friend, but then fail to pay the friend back.