Post-Midterm Content Flashcards
Relativism:
What is considered good or bad should be evaluated relative to the values and morality of the society in which they reside and to their personal background, not to some standard of behaviour.
There is no absolute right or wrong, but acts are said to be morally acceptable so long as they conform to society’s approved practices and beliefs.
What is considered morally right in one culture could be seen as wrong in another.
Morality (if it’s good or bad) depends on society’s approved practices and beliefs.
Consequentialism:
Acts are good if they have good/ fair consequences.
The morality of an action is determined by its results. If an action produced good consequences -> good, produces bad consequences -> bad.
Morality depends on the consequences.
Egoism:
The theory that acts are good if they benefit me.
Actions are considered morally right if they benefit the person.
Egoists believe that should act in ways that promote their own self-interests.
Morality is based on the benefits one gets from doing the action.
Utilitarianism:
Acts are good if they raise social welfare (outcome-based = consequentialism).
The best action is the one that gives the highest net positive effect on overall well-being.
Morality (if it’s good or bad) is determined by every’s overall happiness and wellbeing.
Golden rule:
“Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”
Treat others the way you would like to be treated.
About empathy and putting yourself in someone’s shoes.
Kant’s 1st Rule, the Categorical Imperative:
Act in a way that you believe could be a Universal law.
“Would it be okay if everyone did this?” -> No -> Don’t do it/ -> Yes -> Can do it.
Kant’s 2nd Rule, the Practical Imperative:
“Do not treat purely as a means (for oneself).”
Never use someone to get what you want without considering their own goals and humanity (feelings and needs).
Ethics of Care:
Ethics of care focuses on the importance of relationships and responsibilities. Actions should be guided by our duties for others, especially those who are dependent or vulnerable.
Emphasizes empathy, compassion, nurturing relationships > strict rules or principles.
Challenges with relativism:
- Cultures have different moral standards (what is considered wrong or right).
- Leads to conventionalism (what is right depends on what one’s what immediate environment dictates).
- Problems: Changes based on one’s environment.
- There are things that are considered universally wrong: genocide, torture, slavery.
Problems with Consequentialism:
- What is considered a “good” outcome varies between people (ex: material gains, success and achievements)
- Aims to maximize overall well-being, but how should the overall wellbeing be increased and be measured? (utilitarianism, egoism, or altruism?)
Ethical egoism:
It’s good for people to act on their self-interests.
It leads to better outcomes for everyone, resources are used more efficiently, people are motivated to achieve their best.
Smith: Collectively better off, trying to help others isn’t the best because we impose our own preferences over the others and charity is degrading.
Rand: Egoism recognizes the supreme value of each persons’ life and sacrificing one’s self for another, destroys one’s highest value.
Psychological egoism:
It claims that all human actions, even those that appear altruistic, are ultimately driven by self-benefit.
Self-interest is what motivates people.
Prisoner’s Dilemma and Egoism:
Egoism makes both parties worse off than cooperation.
Problems with utilitarianism:
- Justifies harming individuals for the greater good.
- Justifies torture for the greater good.
- Impartiality (treating everyone’s happiness equally) -> equal treatment of innocent, guilty, family and strangers.
- Justifies dishonest behaviours even if leads to the greater good (lying for the greater good).
- Monetizes everything, even someone’s life to quantify happiness (can diminish its worth).
Moral rules:
Not based on outcomes/ consequences but based on the idea that one should follow principles/ rules that one wants everyone to follow.
A moral rule should satisfy Universality and Reversibility.
The duty of all to be honest establishes a right for all to expect honest dealings.
Moral rules: Universality:
“I want everyone to follow that rule.”
Ensuring that a moral rule is one you want everyone to follow.
Moral rules: Reversibility:
“The rule should apply to me.”
Ensuring that the rule applies to you the same way it applies to others.
Limitations with the Golden Rule:
“Treat others how you would like to be treated.”
- Differences in preferences (how one wants to be treated).
- Does not provide guidance for actions that primarily affects oneself (realizing one’s talents).
- Lenient law enforcer (treating offenders with leniency because that’s how they’d like to be treated in the same situation).
Good for empathy and reciprocity though.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative:
A rule for making moral decisions. Tells you to act in an way that you would want everyone else to act (Universality) and that the actions respect others (others are valuable in their own right).
Determining if an action is morally right: Universalize & Respect.
- Think of an Action (I want to borrow money and not repay it) 2. Create A Rule for That Action (It’s okay to borrow money and not repay it). 3. Make it Universal 4. Respect Others.
Limitations with Kant’s Categorical Imperative:
- Strictly following the universalizable rules (even if it’d be better not to in a inquiring murder situation for example).
- One-size-fits-all rule can be difficult for complex human situations.
- If a rule leads to an unworkable society or contradiction then according to Kant it’s not a good rule, but there are differences in what one considers an unworkable society/ contradiction.
Rule utilitarianism:
Not to assess one act, but used to assess a rule. If the rule maximizes total utility if it is always followed, then it is a good rule.
Obey moral rules, which if universally followed would maximize social welfare.
Assess the morality of actions based on adherence to rule that, if followed by everyone, would maximize overall happiness (based on overall utility if applied universally).
Ex: More flexible as it considers the outcomes of following moral rules (if it maximizes social welfare). A rule against lying might generally lead to trust and better outcomes, but in the case of the “Inquiring Murderer,” lying might lead to a better outcome (saving a life).
Kant’s Imperative:
A principle says that we should never treat people as a means to an end, but respect their autonomy and inherent worth as individuals.
For others: Acknowledge their effort and humanity, allow individuals to make informed decisions about their participation.
Carol Gilligan/ Nel Noddings: Ethics of Care:
Principles that focuses on relationships (its importance) and care & responsibility (caring for others and being responsible for their well-being)
Moral actions depends on interpersonal relationships, care.
Act utilitarianism:
Take actions that add to the sum of human happiness.
Assess each individual action based on its specific consequences (greater happiness = do).
Milton Friedman & CSR/ Profit Maximization
- Manager’s responsibility as an employee and agent of the principle > social responsibilities.
- Pursuing social responsibilities instead of profit maximization is like “taxation without representation.”
- Pursuing profits leads to Pareto efficiency (Invisible hand).
Milton Friedman: Corporate activity that aims to help the community but reduces profits is:
- Undemocratic because not made under a democratic process (if shareholders agree in a vote -> it is democratic).
- Business person does not have the expertise to identify and fix social profits (actually there know more about the harm they are causing than outsiders).
- Ineffective -> manager might go elsewhere, or be fired for not profit maximizing (not if shareholders and consumers like their CSR goals).
He ignores:
- Market failure due to negative externalities.
Kenneth Arrow: Profit Maximization (problems with it)
Argues that profit maximization fails to yield efficient results due to:
- Negative externalities.
- Assymmetric (imperfect information): Firms knows more about their product/ processes/ workplace safety than others.
Potential Solutions to Market Failure:
- Regulations: Production standards, maximum emission levels, safety inspections, competition policy etc.
- Taxes (negative externalities) and subsidies (positive externalities): Tax pollution, subsidize abatement (reducing something).
- Legal responsibility: Damage suits or “torts”, legalistation for labout and consumer protection.
- Government produces public goods.
- Industry led solutions (guarantees, warrantees, and volunteer labelling -> to mitigate assymmetric information).
- CRS: Moral obligations to meet ethical codes (diminish negative externalities).
Corporate Social Responsibility:
A concept that captures
the responsibility of business to the environment, its
stakeholders and to the broader society (workers [safe working conditions], customers [safety regulations], neighbours).
Shared value:
Where firms have benefit to their (financial) bottom line from doing CSR initiatives. Some firms (e.g. those with consumer brands) find it easier to create shared value than others.
ESG investing:
Where investors invest in equities of firms that score highly on an ESG index. It is an important means of incentivising firms to engage in CSR.
Greenwashing:
Firms appear socially responsible but
without having much impact.
Triple Bottom Line:
Where firms expand their
objectives beyond just making money to include having a positive impact on the environment and the community (People/Planet/Profit).
Michael Porter’s 4 justifications for doing CSR:
- Moral obligation: Moral duty to do the right thing.
- Sustainability: Companies should operate in ways to
secure long-term economic performance by avoiding
detrimental short-term behaviour. Aligns with the Triple Bottom Line approach - Freedom to operate: Operating (ability to commercialize a product or process) without infringing on the rights of others.
Realistic and practical appraoch where companies look to satisfy stakeholders based on best pratice to ensure that everyone is well with the operations (more positive for everyone - avoid conflicts).
- Reputation: Improve image, strengthen brands and increase moral.
