Business 2400

Thanh Tony Dang

04/06/16        

Professor Wat

Discussion Questions

1. No, because according to Kant, if I were to justify my action to not present Leslie’s alternative, then that should be a universal law. That everyone should not present their partner’s idea if they are not present. So according to Kant, that is not ethical thing to do.
   
2. Yes, because you though that your idea was better than Leslie’s and believing that Leslie’s plan will cause harm towards the company means that your action caused a greater good for the greatest amount of people. So no putting the company at harm is a greater good than telling the company Leslie’s idea.
   
3. A. According to the utilitarianism, I am more ethically correct because if the company did follow Leslie’s propositions, they would’ve went bankrupt, it provided greater amount of good for the most amount of people, referring to the company.
   
   B. It would not make my decision more ethical, in fact it was just do the opposite. It created worse cause to the company than I expected so according to utilitarianism, I would not be ethically correct in this situation.
   
4. I believe the actual consequences because even though you believe you were ethically correct during the time of the decisions, ultimately to really justify your decision would be until the consequences of your action has played out. If killing Hitler at the time because the genocide, you would not know whether or not he was going to go forwards with his actions, if you killed him not knowing the consequences you would not be able to feel ethically correct about your actions.
   
5. A. No, because if I was in Leslie’s position I would want the meeting to be postponed. If I ethically choose to not postpone the meeting, that should be a universal law and when it does come time for Leslie to make the decision I would want her to postpone the meeting until I would be able to attend.
   B. According to utilitarianism, yes the decision to not postpone the meeting would be ethical because you feel that you ultimately can save the company from future disasters by not postponing the meeting and having Leslie be away.
   
6. It was ultimately change the ethics because by having myself not be able to work with Leslie creates a disadvantage for the company. That does not follow the philosophy of utilitarianism. That means that the greater amount of goods for greater amount of people does not apply since the company which is consider the great amount of people are now at a disadvantage.
   
7. A. Well according to Kant, whatever you do, you must believe it should be a universal law, like I stated earlier, I would not have Leslie do the same thing I’ve done to her by giving a biased presentation. I rather have the universal law that states that everyone should be given equal opportunity in the work environment.
   B. But according to utilitarianism, my behavior is absolutely ethical, by providing a bias presentation, that means my idea will be chosen which will provide the company with the greatest amount of good.
   
8. In this situation, I would postpone the meeting until Leslie is ready to present while following the Kant’s categorical imperative because I believe that everyone should be treated the way you would want to be treated at the end of the day. Especially in the work environment, I wouldn’t bash on another employee’s work ethics and expect them not to do the same towards me. Universal law, do what you want others to do towards yourself.