Innocent or Guilty?

NAME

: NOORHAFIZAH MOHD ROSMADI

MATRIC NO.

: KLB1490007

COURSE

: ETHICS AND LEADERSHIP

COURSE CODE : KLB3173

LECTURER

: MR. NOR AZAMI ROSLI

a. What do you understand by moral obligations?

Moral obligation can be defined as an act of considerations of what is right and
what is wrong or do's and donts. These will prevent a person from doing something
wrong but if the individual is able to think clearly about the consequences or effects
that may be encountered. There are three sources of social obligation (Josephson,
2011).
The first sources is law. Good peoples have a moral as well as a legal obligation to
abide by laws. For example, the ethical duty to be honest is enforceable by laws
forbidding perjury, robbery, forgery, fraud, and defamation among others. If one
person failed to follow the law which mean that they unfollowing the moral
Obligation, they can be criminally prosecuted or sued. But, if they has a welldeveloped conscience, feelings of guilt and shame leading to remorse.
The second sources is agreement. Although an agreement does not reach the level
of an enforceable contract, there is a moral obligation to do the things that we have
agree to do, especially if others are counting on us to do so. These requiring us to
keep our promises. Failed to keep promises will drives to distrust.
The last sources is moral principle, which is a standard of conduct that exists
irrespective of laws or agreements. Moral principles can be mandated by religious
doctrine or derived through rational philosophical reasoning. In some cases, principles
such as justice and benevolence simply emerge as the result of an intuitive moral
sense.
Although the moral obligation can come from various sources, but basically they
requires all people to do things based on the high moral.
b. In this case, who are the various stakeholders to whom you have moral obligations?
The various stakeholders are first, of course is the organization where I have to
follow all the rules and the regulation that has been set. I should play my role without
doing any actions that violate the organization rules.
Second, is the employees that under my supervision. I need to make sure they do
their job properly and morality, I must treat them well. I cannot abuse the power that
has been given to capitalize my employee.
Finally, is to myself. I have to control my action. I have to keep myself honest,
trust and integrity. I have to able to think wisely so that I can make a decision that will
not harming anyone or parties.
c. Would your ethical obligations in this case be different if people were afraid to work
with Jones because he had AIDS? Why?

Ethics are a personal view of what is right, so it cannot be obliged, except by our
own principles. For me, it would not change my ethical obligation although the other
employees were afraid to work with Jones. In fact, I would accept him again to return
to work. Before that, I have to explain to my employees that Jones will not be a
danger to them if they were not having sex with him, sharing needles or syringes, and
so on. As long as they do not do these things with Jones, they will not be infected with
AIDS (AIDS.gov, 2015). So, I this case, I cannot be bias with Jones because he had
AIDS.
d. How would a Kantian decide on this case?
Kantian ethic believed that certain types of actions such as murder, theft, and lying
were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more
happiness than the alternative.
For Kantians, two questions that we must ask ourselves whenever we decide to act.
The first question is Can I rationally will that everyone act as I propose to act? If
NO, then we must not perform the action. The second question is Does my action
respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own
purposes? If NO, then we must not perform the action.
In this case, to answering the first question, I think, it is a yes if they think
rationally that at the first place, Jones are founded not guilty. Then, why they must
afraid of him? In addition, he has an excellent working performance. He is an asset
for the organization. So, why should he suffered the effect of something that he did
not do?
Second question, I think my action are respecting the goals of human being. I am
not being bias to Jones. Im trying to put myself on his shoe. He did not commit to
any crime. He is just a victim of circumstance. He didnt deserve to be treated badly.

e. Would you be ethical if you always do your duty as you describe by Kant? Why? /
Why not?
Absolutely yes because by practises, I will use to do ethical things and will feel
awkward if I want to do something which is wrong according to rules and regulation.
Our ethics and morals will be the walls that will avoid us to do wrong things.

f. Does it matter if you as a leader in the department, fired Jones not because it is the
right thing to do but because it will make you look good to your workers who refuse
to work with him? Why?
I am the worst leader if I do it to Jones. Yes, it is a matter to me. I stress again here,
I will not abuse Jones for the benefit of my own. It is against the ethics and moral. As
I stated above, I will use my influence to persuade those who insist to throwing out
Jones from the organization. They should receive him back because he is not a
criminal. In additional, he never do anything that give trouble to other employees,
instead, he helped them if they are in trouble.
g. In your opinion, can a moral system function without taking account of consequence?
No. everything that we do, we must think of the consequence of it. If not, we will
feel regret after doing such things. Thats why we has to have a strong values that will
drives our actions, behaviours, and so on.
REFERENCE
AIDS.gov. (31 December, 2015). How Do You Get HIV or AIDS? Retrieved from
Welcome to AIDS.gov: https://www.aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids101/how-you-get-hiv-aids/
Josephson, M. (14 February, 2011). 3 Sources of Moral Obligation. Retrieved from
Overview: Center for Business Ethics:
http://business.josephsoninstitute.org/blog/2011/02/14/3-sources-of-moralobligation/