Basic Moral Concepts

Concept Definition Elaborations Examples Right An essential capacity of Framework to justify rights Key Rights in Business action that others are claims:  Privacy obliged to recognize and  Essential to autonomy  Free Speech respect  Vulnerable to a standard  Property threat  Free & Informed Consent  Feasible to recognize and  Freedom of Conscience respect Duty A principle that obliges Duty Levels: Categorical Imperative: Act only on that maxim that can be made into a us to recognize and  Not to deprive universal law respect the autonomy of  Prevent deprivation Formula of End: Treat others always as ends, never merely as means others (and ourselves)  Aid the deprived Moral Goods Teleologists: Types of Goods (Rawls) Types of Good (Utilitarianism) Goods trump rights in  Rights & Liberties  Intrinsic Goods: These goods are valuable and pursued in and of moral dilemmas  Opportunities & Powers themselves. Examples include happiness, friendship, pleasure, beauty,  Income and Wealth truth, justice. Deontologists:  Extrinsic Goods: These goods are valuable because they bring about Rights trump goods Principles of justice allow other, higher goods. Graduating is a means to obtaining a job. individuals to realize these  Preferences: Individual preference utilitarianism drops the notion of Virginia Held (among goods from any social position. intrinsic good and sees utility as creating conditions that allow for the others): Goods have (Rawls’s Veil of ignorance) maximum satisfaction of individual preferences. priority in some domains (economic) while rights have priority in other domains (politics)

Virtues Aristotle: “a state of Virtues are excellences of Key Virtues character concerned with character. Aristotle says that Cardinal Virtues: temperance, courage, wisdom, justice choice, lying in a mean, we find them by identifying the  Integrity i.e. the mean relative to mean between two extremes  Justice us, this being determined (=vices)  Responsibility by a rational principle,  In vices of excess, we have  Reasonableness and by that principle by too much of a good thing. which [a person] of Recklessness = too much  Honesty practical wisdom would courage.  Perseverance Concept Definition Elaborations Examples determine it.” (Ross’s  In vices of defect, we have  Moral courage translation in too little of a good thing. Nichomachean Ethics, Cowardice = too little (You may not be able to identify the vices of excess and defect for all these 1106b, 36) courage. virtues. Can we identify a vice of too much justice?) Responsibility Fingarette: response to Conditions for attributing an Responsibility as a Virtue: relevance action to an agent:  Diffuse blame avoidance strategies (More exactly, moral Identity/Causal (agent caused  Design responsibilities with overlapping domains responsiveness to moral action and agent’s identity  Extend the scope and depth of knowledge. relevance) persists over time)  Extend power and control Moral Sense (agent has general  Adopt a proactive problem solving/preventive approach moral capacities: cognitive and volitional) Corporate Responsibility Action is corporate if licensed by CID Structure Ownership (act stems from  carries out corporate goals (formal and informal) will of agent)  done in conformity with corporate decision procedures  Situation-specific  executes one’s role tasks knowledge  fits into organizational flow chart (decision/management structure)  Absence of compulsion Values  Values clue us into Values are embedded in our ADEM Statement of Values: things that are socio-technical systems: Justice/Fairness: Be impartial, objective, and refrain from discrimination or important to us as  Conflicts between moral preferential treatment in the administration of rules and policies and in its well as the ways in and non-moral values dealings with students, faculty, staff, and other stakeholders which they are  Conflicts between moral Responsibility: Recognize and fulfill its obligations to its constituents by important. and moral values caring for their essential interests, by honoring its commitments, and by  Goods are things or balancing and integrating conflicting interests. As responsible agents, the qualities of things faculty, employees, and students of the college of Business Administration important to human are committed to the pursuit of excellence, devotion to the community’s flourishing. welfare, and professionalism. Respect: Acknowledge the inherent dignity present in its diverse constituents by recognizing and respecting their fundamental rights. These include rights to property, privacy, free exchange of ideas, academic freedom, due process, and meaningful participation in decision making and policy formulation. Trust: Recognize that trust solidifies communities by creating an environment where each can expect ethically justifiable behavior from all others. While trust is tolerant of and even thrives in an environment of diversity, it also must operate within the parameters set by established Concept Definition Elaborations Examples personal and community standards. Integrity: Promote integrity as characterized by sincerity, honesty, authenticity, and the pursuit of excellence. Integrity shall permeate and color all its decisions, actions, and expressions. It is most clearly exhibited in intellectual and personal honesty in learning, teaching, mentoring, and research. Problem Analogy between design Four Stages: Problem classification: Solving and ethics problems: 1. Problem specification 1. Realizing or maintaining key values such as integrity, trust, respect, Framework 1. Construct a solution 2. Solution generation responsibility, and justice that integrates and 3. Solution testing 2. Conflict between two or more values (moral v. moral, moral v. non- realizes ethical 4. Solution implementation moral, non-moral v. non-moral) values 3. Identifying and eliminating (or minimizing) remote harms 2. Resolve conflicts between values (moral 4. Disagreement on the facts or concepts vs. moral or moral vs. non-moral) Different problem frames: 3. Test solution using 1. Technical ethics tests: reversibility, 2. Stakeholder harm/benefits, and 3. Social publicity 4. Management 4. Implement solution 5. Legal over resource, interest, 6. Financial and technical constraints Ethics Tests Tests that encapsulate Meta-tests: 1. Reversibility: Would this solution alternative be acceptable to those who ethical theory, separate 1. Convergence of ethics tests stand to be most affected by it? To answer this question, change places with good from bad solutions, is an indication of solution those who are targeted by the action and ask, from this new perspective, and rank good solutions strength whether the action is still acceptable? 2. Divergence of ethics tests is 2. Harm/Benefits: What are the harms your solution is likely to produce? an indication of solution What are its benefits? Does this solution produce the least harms and the weakness most benefits when compared to the available alternatives? 3. Publicity: Would you want to be publicly associated or identified with this action? In other words, assume that you will be judged as a person by others in terms of the moral values expressed in the action under consideration. Does this accord with how you would aspire to be judged?