ppti.info Personal Growth Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition Pdf

MORAL ISSUES IN BUSINESS 12TH EDITION PDF

Thursday, August 22, 2019


Shaw And Vincent Barry Ebook Download, Free Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition. By William H Shaw And Vincent Barry Download Pdf, Free Pdf Moral. Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition By William H Shaw And Vincent Barry - [ PDF]. [EPUB] Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition By William H. siness,,,12th,,,edition,,,ppti.info Find,,Moral,Issues,in,Business ,13th,Edition,by,Sha w,et,al,at,over,30,bookstores.,Buy,,rent,or,sell.. This,,twelfth.


Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition Pdf

Author:PATTI MCCONN
Language:English, Spanish, Dutch
Country:Nauru
Genre:Children & Youth
Pages:646
Published (Last):09.06.2015
ISBN:433-1-67512-754-3
ePub File Size:23.35 MB
PDF File Size:19.80 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Downloads:25129
Uploaded by: ALEJANDRO

zo, 24 mrt GMT moral issues in business pdf - Ethics or moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and. Getting the books moral issues in business 12th edition by william h shaw and vincent barry H. Shaw, Vincent Barry Test Bank pdf docx epub after payment. Shaw And Vincent Barry Ebook Download, Free Moral Issues In Business 12th Edition. By William H Shaw And Vincent Barry Download Pdf.

Critics of egoism argue that a psychological egoism is implausible, b egoism is not really a moral principle, and c egoism ignores blatant wrongs. Utilitarianism, another consequentialist theory, maintains that the morally right action is the one that provides the greatest good for all those affected. In an organizational context, utilitarianism provides an objective way to resolve conflicts of self-interest and encourages a realistic and result-oriented approach to moral decision making.

But critics contend that a utilitarianism is not really workable, b some actions are wrong even if they produce good results, and c utilitarianism incorrectly overlooks considerations of justice and the distribution of happiness. Kant held that only when we act from good will moral reason does our action have moral worth. Good will is the only thing that is good in itself. For example, a person making a promise with no intention of keeping it cannot universalize the maxim governing his action, because if everyone followed this principle, promising would make no sense.

Kant believed that the categorical imperative is binding on all rational creatures, regardless of their specific goals or desires and regardless of the consequences. There are two alternative formulations of the categorical imperative. The first is that an act is right only if the actor would be willing to be so treated if the positions of the parties were reversed.

The second is that one must always act so as to treat other people as ends, never merely as a means to an end a way to accomplish our goals. Other nonconsequentialist theories stress other moral themes. Philosophers such as Ross argue, against both Kant and consequentialists, that we are under a variety of.

These are prima facie, meaning that any one of them may be outweighed in some circumstances by other, more important moral considerations.

Nonconsequentialists believe that a duty to assist others and to promote total happiness is only one of a number of duties incumbent on us. These rights can rest on special relationships and roles, or they can be general human rights.

Rights can be negative, protecting us from outside interference, or they can be positive, requiring others to provide us with certain benefits or opportunities.

Table of Contents

In an organizational context, nonconsequentialism in its non-Kantian forms stresses the plurality of moral considerations to be weighed. While emphasizing the importance of respecting moral rights, it acknowledges that morality has limits and that organizations have legitimate goals to pursue. Critics question whether a nonconsequentialist principles are adequately justified and whether b nonconsequentialism can satisfactorily handle conflicting rights and principles.

Rule utilitarianism is a hybrid theory. It maintains that the proper principles of right and wrong are those that would maximize happiness if society adopted them. Thus, the utilitarian standard does not apply directly to individual actions but rather to the adoption of the moral principles that guide individual action. Rule utilitarianism avoids many of the standard criticisms of act utilitarianism. Despite disagreements on controversial theoretical issues, people can make significant progress in resolving practical moral problems through open-minded and reflective discussion.

One useful approach is to identify the possibly conflicting obligations, ideals, and effects in a given situation and then to identify where the emphasis should lie among these different considerations. Teaching Suggestions Chapter 2 deals with several important normative theories of ethics that is, with several rival theories of right and wrong. Note that ethical relativism and the divine command theory, which were discussed in chapter 1, can also be seen as normative theories and thus contrasted with the theories of this chapter.

Students should be reminded that the main purpose of normative theories of ethics is that we apply them to our reasoning process. Students can be expected, encouraged, or required to apply these theories when they write essays and present arguments. Students can assess the comprehensiveness and accuracy of each moral theory and consider objections. This requires them to understand how to apply each moral theory to each. Each theory is intuitive insofar as we already know quite a bit about right and wrong and each theory should be consistent with the most uncontroversial moral beliefs we have.

For example, we all know that charity is generally good, stealing is generally wrong, and killing people is generally wrong. Each moral theory should be able to explain that these actions are good or wrong even though the explanations can differ.

Consequentialist theories, nonconsequentialist theories, and virtue ethics will all be briefly described below and applied to explain some of our considered moral beliefs.

Consequantialist theories: For the consequentialist, the key to determining whether an action or rule is ethically appropriate is a determination of the consequences of performing the action or following the rule. Once this is done, there are at least two different important issues that you can raise for the students to discuss: In considering the consequences, we are considering the effects that performing an action or following a rule can have. But the effects on whom or on what?

On humans On all sentient creatures? On ecosystems? What sorts of consequences should we be interested in?

For instance, John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham focused on pleasure and pain, which they equated with happiness and suffering. But is this what we want to focus on? If so, is there only one kind of pleasure? When discussing utilitarianism, bear in mind that the Shaw and Barry defer discussion of rule utilitarianism until later in the chapter and that they also discuss utilitarianism in chapter 3 in the context of justice and economic distribution.

How can a consequentialist theory apply to our considered moral beliefs? Consider Mill's act utilitarianism that states that all actions are right if they maximize happiness and wrong if they don't.

In that case: Charity isn't good when it fails to actually help anyone or if we have reason to expect that it won't. Sometimes the media can reveal corruption found in a charity and we have a good reason to give to the charities that we think will do the most good.

Stealing is not only likely to make people suffer emotionally when they find out someone stole from them, but stealing often takes away a person's ability to care for themselves. For example, if you take food away from someone, they might not be able to care for themselves as well. Nonetheless, stealing isn't necessarily wrong in every situation. Stealing from the wealthy might be necessary to live a decent life when we have no.

Consider Robin Hood who stole from the rich to give to the poor. Killing people can not only cause pain to the person that dies, but it can cause people grief. The loved ones of the person who dies are especially relevant. For example, it might be justified when defending a country in war time or when necessary to protect innocent people with law enforcement. Nonconsequentialist theories: Turning to nonconsequentialist theories, you will want to discuss Immanuel Kant, W.

Ross, and a rights-based ethical approach. In the case of Kant, you can focus on the notions of duty and intention, and how they figure into determinations of what is morally permissible. But is this what we want to focus on? If so, is there only one kind of pleasure? When discussing utilitarianism, bear in mind that the Shaw and Barry defer discussion of rule utilitarianism until later in the chapter and that they also discuss utilitarianism in chapter 3 in the context of justice and economic distribution.

How can a consequentialist theory apply to our considered moral beliefs? Consider Mill's act utilitarianism that states that all actions are right if they maximize happiness and wrong if they don't. In that case: a. Charity isn't good when it fails to actually help anyone or if we have reason to expect that it won't. Sometimes the media can reveal corruption found in a charity and we have a good reason to give to the charities that we think will do the most good.

Stealing is not only likely to make people suffer emotionally when they find out someone stole from them, but stealing often takes away a person's ability to care for themselves. For example, if you take food away from someone, they might not be able to care for themselves as well.

Nonetheless, stealing isn't necessarily wrong in every situation. Stealing from the wealthy might be necessary to live a decent life when we have no reasonable means of attaining money. Consider Robin Hood who stole from the rich to give to the poor.

Moral Issues in Business

Killing people can not only cause pain to the person that dies, but it can cause people grief. The loved ones of the person who dies are especially relevant. For example, it might be justified when defending a country in war time or when necessary to protect innocent people with law enforcement. Nonconsequentialist theories: Turning to nonconsequentialist theories, you will want to discuss Immanuel Kant, W. Ross, and a rights-based ethical approach. In the case of Kant, you can focus on the notions of duty and intention, and how they figure into determinations of what is morally permissible.

You can then move on to Ross and contrast Kant with Ross. Whereas for Kant duties can never conflict, for Ross they are prima facie and we often have to choose between them.

Here, you can ask how you are supposed to decide between competing, prima facie duties. Finally, you can discuss the notion of human rights. Many people talk about human rights e. How can a nonconsequantialist theory apply to our considered moral beliefs? Consider the first formulation of Kant's categorical imperative that states that we must act using principles that we can rationally will all people to obey. If they did, it would undermine the whole point of having property in the first place.

Assuming having property is rational, then stealing out of greed is not rational. Having property seems rational insofar as it helps us achieve our goals. We can have property out of self-respect to live our lives efficiently. We each have food, shelter, and clothing because it helps us care for ourselves, and caring for ourselves tends to be a lot more efficient than caring for others. If they did, it would become selfdefeating because almost everyone would kill out of anger at one point or another and no one would be left to do what's 'morally right.

Virtue ethics: Shaw and Barry don't discuss virtue ethics, such as Aristotle's ethical perspective.

Herculles Library | mail.deporteschiclana.es-Page:63

The focus of virtue ethics is what makes a good person rather than when an action is right or wrong, and some philosophers think it is important to discuss virtue ethics as an alternative to both consequetialism and nonconsequentialism.

It can be a good idea to at least briefly discuss virtue ethics with the students. Aristotle's virtue ethics is taught in many ethics classes in particular.

I will briefly discuss Aristotle's virtue ethics here. First, Aristotle argues that the main goal in life is to attain personal happiness flourishing. When someone seeks happiness, we don't want to say that such a goal is irrational.

We don't think we should only seek happiness if it helps us get rich or attain some other good. In fact, happiness might be something that can't be used to achieve anything greater than itself at all. Second, Aristotle argues that we have habits and skills that help us attain greater happiness or constitute the highest form of happiness by being attained.

In particular, these skills should emphasize what we are i. In particular, becoming the best kind of person will make us the happiest kind of person by developing distinctly human capacities: a our ability to reason well because we are rational animals and b our ability to cooperate and socialize with others because we are political animals. Being a political animal is why we have a natural tendency to care about people in general, and love family and friends in particular.

A general goal of being a political animal is to get along with people and help them. Third, Aristotle argues that virtues require us to avoid extremes by finding a golden mean. For example, courage requires us to be afraid when appropriate by avoiding cowardice being afraid when we shouldn't and foolhardiness not being afraid when we should be ; and temperance moderation in satisfying our desires requires us to avoid over-indulgence and under-indulgence.

Fourth, Aristotle doesn't think we can know how to be virtuous through theorizing alone. Instead, we need to refine our ability to be ethical thoughtlessly. This can require an ability to intuitively know what should be done without the need for argument and it requires a sensitivity to the situation, which can be incredibly complex. Aristotle would be skeptical of a the idea of using a decision-procedure to determine right and wrong, and b boiling right and wrong down to a set of rules.

This requires us to know how to actually behave ethically and be motivated to do what we believe is right. Aristotle's virtue ethics can apply to our considered moral beliefs in the following ways: a. We have to look out for our own needs and interests to be happy, but it's appropriate to share our wealth with others when we have more than we need because we are political animals and we care for others.

It is too judgmental. The type of moral equality espoused by John Rawls is: a. An auto designer chooses to devote his efforts to design an automobile that is the safest vehicle possible. He does so because he wishes to save lives and prevent disabling injuries.

He believes he and his employer have a duty to provide the public with the safest possible vehicle. The designer's approach to ethical decision-making is best characterized as: a. Social egalitarians believe: a. Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, said the capitalistic system was composed of six institutions, which include all but which of the following?

Test Bank Moral Issues in Business 12th Edition Shaw

Economic motivation. Free enterprise. Limited government. A factor demanding the ethical and social responsibility of business is: a. Analyze whether telling a lie is unethical in terms of each of the following ethical theories: a. The deontological approach. Intuitionism and the "Television Test. Ethical relativism. Immanuel Kant was a deontological theorist. Deontological theories in general hold that certain underlying principles are right or wrong irrespective of any pleasure or pain calculations.

Deontologists believe that actions cannot be measured simply by their results but must be judged by the means and motives as well.

To Kant, for an action to be a. It must not treat them as an expedient. Under his theory, it would be immoral to lie to a colleague if one could not support the right of all colleagues to lie to one another. Utilitarianism assesses good and evil in terms of the consequences of the action. Act utilitarianism assesses each separate act according to whether it maximizes pleasure over pain.

Under act utilitarianism, if telling a lie in a particular situation will produce more overall pleasure than pain, then it is ethical to lie. Rule utilitarianism holds that general rules must be established and followed even though in some instances, following rules b. Whether telling a lie in a given instance would produce greater pleasure than telling the truth is less important to the rule utilitarian than deciding if a general practice of lying would maximize society's pleasure.

If lying would maximize society's pleasure in general, then it is ethical, but if it would not maximize society's general pleasure, it is not. Intuitionism holds that a rational person possesses inherent powers to assess the correctness of actions. It is possible to refine one's sense of ethics by emulating the behavior of those individuals who always seem to know what the right choice is in any given situation and who always seem c.

The "Television Test" holds that a decision is appropriate if the person making it would be comfortable with the decision if it were broadcast on national television for all to witness.

Thus, a lie would be unethical if the public believed it to be unethical under the circumstances. Ethical relativism asserts that actions must be judged by what individuals feel is right or wrong for themselves. It holds that morality is relative. Ethical fundamentalism looks to a central authority or set of rules to guide its adherents in ethical decision-making.

The central authority may be the Bible, the Koran, or prophets or documents. Whether lying is unethical would depend upon the particular source of authority used. Whatever that e. Many ethical fundamentalists believe that lying is always unethical.

Others believe it is unethical in most, but not all, circumstances. Whatever rule the central authority states would be absolutely followed by an ethical fundamentalist.

Neal is the young, likable, optimistic, and generous son of a prominent public official. He has a master's degree in business and is the business partner of Ken and Bill in an oil drilling and exploration business.

Neal also serves as a director on the board of the Bonanza Savings and Loan Association. While serving on the Bonanza Board, Neal votes to approve major loans to Ken and Bill without disclosing to the other directors that he is a business partner of Ken and Bill. Federal banking officials seize Bonanza and liquidate its assets to pay creditors and depositors.

Because Bonanza is federally insured, tax money is also used to pay off depositors whose deposits are insured under federal programs. Bonanza shareholders lose their investment money. Was Neal's conduct as a director of Bonanza ethical?

Analyze his conduct in light of the following ethical theories: a. Milton Friedman's ideas on corporate governance. Deontological theories. Rule utilitarianism. Intuitionism holds that a rational person possesses inherent powers to assess the correctness of actions, and that an individual may refine and strengthen these powers by emulating the behavior of "good persons" who always seem to know the right choice in any given situation.

Although Neal is not a "bad" person, he should have sought the advice of more experienced directors and of those who over the years have established codes of conduct for corporate directors. The "Television Test" holds that a decision is appropriate if the person making it would be a. Neal's actions would likely fail this test. He should have disclosed his business ties with Bill and Ken to the other directors prior to the board's discussion of the loans and to his acts on behalf of his business partners.

After disclosing his business ties, Neal should then have refrained from voting on issues involving his business partners, especially when there was a chance he might personally benefit from any loans given to the two men. Milton Friedman argues that businesses are artificial entities established to permit people to engage in profit-making activities. The social obligation of a corporation is to make money for its shareholders. Under this analysis, Neal's obligation as a director is to make Bonanza as b.

Neal fails this test, because his actions were intended to make money for himself and his own business partners rather than for the Bonanza shareholders.

Deontological theories hold that actions cannot be measured simply by their results but must also be judged by their means and motives as well. This type of analysis would have to analyze the motives behind Neal's c. These motives are likely to involve some intent to benefit himself as well as his business partners more than they are to benefit the shareholders and depositors of Bonanza. This type of analysis should consider Neal's actions in terms of his duties to the shareholders and depositors of Bonanza as well as to the taxpayers of the nation and to his business partners.

Neal's actions would likely be unethical under this type of analysis. Utilitarianism assesses actions in terms of the consequences of those actions. Rule utilitarianism holds that general rules must be established and followed even though, in some instances, following the rules may d. It supports rules that on balance produce the greatest satisfaction.

That type of analysis makes Neal's actions unacceptable, because it caused more overall pain and was calculated to lessen rather than to increase society's wealth. It is difficult to judge Neal's actions using this system, because if a person's actions are always correct for that person, then his behavior is, by definition, moral and no one can e. Ethical relativism passes no judgment on what the person did other than to determine that the person truly believed the decision was right for him.

This type of analysis would make Neal's actions ethical if he thought they were right for him. Compare the social ethics theories of distributive justice, libertarianism, and social egalitarianism.

How are they alike?That which only apply in general and can be overridden by other considerations. It can be a good idea to at least briefly discuss virtue ethics with the students. The utilitarian theory that right and wrong are determined by the effects that our actions actually produce or what we should expect them to produce. Case 2. These are prima facie, meaning that any one of them may be outweighed in some circumstances by other, more important moral considerations.

The study of those policies and actions that constitute right and wrong, or good and bad, as they relate to human conduct within a business context. The argument regarding profitability is that, because corporations are artificial entities established for profit-making activities, their only social obligation should be to return as much money as possible to shareholders.

NATHANIEL from Alaska
Also read my other articles. I have a variety of hobbies, like world record breaking. I fancy reading comics shrilly .