Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT
Summary of the main points of the first two chapters in the book. The
remaining chapters are application of the concepts summarized as relating
to political forms of government and market systems. These further
chapters are less relevant to the DBA class that this summary was prepared
for.
preferred counted as
Chapter 1 – have worth, to other equal.
Ethics & such as values 5. Moral
Business “Honesty is including standards
good” and (especially are
Ethics is the “Injustice is ?) self- associated
principles of bad”. interest. with
conduct 4. Moral special
governing an Five standards emotions
individual or characteristi are based and a
a group. It is cs can help on special
the study of pin down the impartial vocabulary
morality. nature of considerat .
moral ions. –
Morality are standards.
the that is, a
point of Ethics is the
standards 1. Moral
view that discipline
that an standards that
individual or deal with does not
evaluate examines
group has matters one’s moral
about what is that we standards
according standards or
right and think can the moral
wrong, or seriously to whether
they standards of
good and injure or a society.
evil. seriously advance
the Ethics is
benefit
Moral interests the study of
human
norms can of a moral
beings.
usually be particular standards –
2. Moral
expressed as individual the process
standards
general rules or group, of examining
are not
or but one the moral
establishe
statements, that goes standards of
d or
such as beyond a person or
changed
“Always tell personal society to
by the
the truth”. interests determine
decisions
Moral to a whether
of
values can “universal these
particular
usually be ” standards
legislative
expressed as standpoint are
bodies.
statements in which reasonable
3. We feel
describing everyone’s or
that moral
objects or interests unreasonable
standards
features of are in order to
should be
objects that impartially apply them
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 2 of 31 0812/2001
Business Ethics, Anderson University DBA Fall 2001
2. Ins wh 1. Int ,
tru om erp an
me the ers d
nt chi on tru
an ld al st,
d car Co suc
Rel es. nc h
ati B. Conventio ord as
vit nal Stages anc fa
y Maintaini e mil
Ori ng the Ori y
ent expectatio ent an
ati ns of ati d
on one’s own on frie
– family, – nds
At peer Go .
thi group, or od
s nation is be
sta now seen ha
ge, as vio
rig valuable r at
ht in its own thi
act right, s
ion regardless ear
s of the ly
bec conseque co
om nces. nv
e ent
tho ion
se al
tha sta
t ge
can is
ser livi
ve ng
as to
ins the
tru exp
me ect
nts ati
for ons
sat of
isfy tho
ing se
the for
chi wh
ld’s om
ne on
eds e
of fee
the l
ne loy
eds alty
of ,
tho aff
se ect
for ion
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 6 of 31 0812/2001
Business Ethics, Anderson University DBA Fall 2001
2. La ion 1. So ns
w or cia an
an sur l d
d rou Co em
Or ndi ntr ph
de ng act asi
r soc Ori zes
Ori iety ent fair
ent . ati wa
ati C. Post on ys
on Conventio – of
– nal, At rea
Rig Autonomo thi chi
ht us, or s ng
an Principled firs co
d Stages t nse
wr At these pos ns
on stages, t- us
g the co by
at person no nv agr
thi longer ent ee
s simply ion me
mo accepts al nt,
re the values sta co
ma and norms ge ntr
tur of the the act
e groups to per ,
co which he son an
nv or she bec d
ent belongs. om du
ion Instead es e
al the aw pro
sta person are ces
ge now tries tha s.
no to see t
w situations pe
co from a opl
me point of e
to view that hol
be impartiall d a
det y takes var
er everyone’ iet
mi s interests y
ne into of
d account. co
by nfli
loy cti
alt ng
y per
to son
on al
e’s vie
ow ws
n an
lar d
ger opi
nat nio
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 7 of 31 0812/2001
Business Ethics, Anderson University DBA Fall 2001
consequence Jeremy
Chapter 2 – claims that s is Bentham
Ethical something is sometimes (1748-1832)
Principles in right to the referred to is generally
extent that it as a considered
Business
diminishes consequent the founder
Judgments social costs ialist of traditional
about and approach utilitarianism
justice are increases and . The
based on social sometimes as utilitarian
moral benefits. An a utilitarian principle
principles ethic of approach. holds that:
that identify care is an “An action is
fair ways of ethic that Utilitarianis right from an
distributing emphasizes m is a ethical point
benefits and caring for general term of view if and
burdens the concrete for any view only if the
among the well-being of that holds sum total of
members of a those near to that actions utilities
society. us. and policies produced by
Judgments Evaluations should be that act is
about of the moral evaluated on greater than
violations of character of the basis of the sum total
people’s persons or the benefits of utilities
rights are groups are and costs produced by
based on based on they will any other act
moral what is impose on the agent
principles called an society. Many could have
that indicate ethic of business performed in
the areas on virtue. analysts hold its place.”
which that the best
people’s 2.1 way to The
rights to Utilitarianis evaluate the utilitarian
freedom and m: Weighing ethical principle
well-being Social propriety of a assumes that
must be business we can
Costs and
respected. decision – or somehow
Benefits any other measure and
A utilitarian Selecting the decision – is add the
standard of course of by relying on quantities of
morality; a action that utilitarian benefits
moral would have cost/benefit produced by
principle, the most analysis. an action and
that is, that beneficial subtract
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 14 of 31 0812/2001
Business Ethics, Anderson University DBA Fall 2001
1. To 2. At over Part 1 of
th ta Principle B Principle B is
e ch should the called the
gr ed two of them difference
ea to ever come principle. It
te off into conflict, assumes that
st ic and within a productive
be es Principle B, society will
ne an Part 2 is incorporate
fit d supposed to inequalities,
of po take priority but it then
th sit over Part 1. asserts that
e io steps must
le ns Principle A is be taken to
as op called the improve the
t en principle of position of
ad to equal the most
va all liberty: each needy
nt un citizen’s members of
ag de liberties society,
ed r must be unless such
pe co protected improvement
rs nd from invasion s would so
on iti by others burden
s on and must be society that
s equal to they make
of those of everyone,
fai others. These including the
r basic needy, worse
eq liberties off than
ua include the before.
lit right to vote,
y freedom of Part 2 of
of speech and Principle B is
op conscience called the
po and other principle of
rt civil liberties, fair
un freedom to equality of
ity hold personal opportunity:
property, and everyone
freedom should be
Principle A is from given an
supposed to arbitrary equal
take priority arrest. opportunity
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 25 of 31 0812/2001
Business Ethics, Anderson University DBA Fall 2001
nevertheless business in
violate the the host
principles of country
utilitarianis without
m, rights, engaging in
justice or the
caring, or is practice? If
it not, then
condemnabl does the
e from the practice
perspective violate the
of moral principles of
character? If utilitarianis
so, and if m, rights,
the action or justice, and
policy is caring to a
legally degree
required to significant
do business enough to
in the host require
country, withdrawal
then is the from that
ethical country? Is
violation the practice
significant so
enough to pernicious
require from the
withdrawal perspective
from that of moral
country? character as
4. If the to require
corporate withdrawal
action or from the
policy country?
involves a
local
common
practice that
is morally
questionable
by home
country
standards
(such as
sexual
discriminati
on or
bribery of
government
personnel),
is it possible
to conduct
2001by Karl R. Knapp Page 31 of 31 0812/2001