Kantian Theory

Kantian Theory - Kantian Theory Freely motivated act for...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Kantian Theory Freely motivated act for the right reasons – inherently good. Intelligence/happiness to come to your decision is bad. Don’t do things just because you have inclination. Must be universally right. Creating maxims. Too rigid, not applicable in real life situations. What are the “right” reasons. 2 nd principle – rude to paying someone to fill your gas. To determine what duty is/universal rules are. Everyone is rational and free. Hitler used people as means to an end. Employers are similar. Assume similar conditions for everyone. (same for homeless person and CEO) Utilitarianism Form of consequentialism . Consequences of human actions is how you decide how you act. Way you achieve desired results. Desired result then make actions. Right and wrong is based on the outcome. Right action max overall good in community and minimum bad. The action that you choose should result in the greatest balance of good//happiness considering all other alternatives. Purpose of moral action: achieve greatest happiness for greatest number. Maximum of 2 variables impossible. Disagreement over definition of good. Some utilitarian believe it includes intangibles, intelligence, friendship etc. Evaluate an individual action based on group effect. 1) how it’s applied: race religion irrelevant (everyone’s background is irrelevant) counts for 1util 2) future generations should be considered – long term. Pollution example. Utilitarian creating lots of pollution in the LR. Drinking a lot in SR/LR consequences. 3) Defense: One pleasure stronger than another. One’s pain may outweigh everyone else’s happiness. They do not appeal to majority happiness. ?Utilitarianism Valuing knowledge/physical pleasure – how to quantify these things. Rule utilitarianism – slavery etc is bad in the LR. Most people enjoy the conseuqentialist view – and is better applied than the Kantian theory. Too vague to be a theory of ethics. E.g. Cheaper supplies to increase profit margin from more sales. Kantian theory would disagree with this and util’ would agree. Different to cultural relativism.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Philosophy 394 -- Business Ethics Winter 2008 Professor John Laing Final Exam Essay Questions 1. Describe Milton Friedman’s view of the purpose, role and responsibilities of the corporation. Contrast Friedman’s view with Richard Freeman’s “stakeholder theory.” Whose view do you believe is stronger, on balance, and why? Friedman’s View - Friedman said the responsibilities of the corporation and corporate executive were “to conduct the business in accordance with their (business owners), which generally will be to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in custom. (pg. 34) - Role of corporation diff than individual - By spending some of the corporation’s money, and therefore stockholders money on “social” purposes, the executive in effect becomes a civil servant or public employee. - Stockholder’s trying to get corporation to do “social” things are imposing taxes
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/19/2012 for the course BIP 300 taught by Professor Liang during the Spring '08 term at Northwestern.

Page1 / 11

Kantian Theory - Kantian Theory Freely motivated act for...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online