ETHICAL REASONINGETHICAL REASONING

What is it?Isn’t it just different for everyone?

Let’s Define It!

Ethics: Derived from the Greek word, Ethos.

Ethos: means “character” or “custom”

Thus, ethics comes from a concern with essential qualities and behavior.

Ethical reasoning is a way to determine what kinds of behavior help or harm beings.

Group Work: 3 Minutes

Can you say that some things are just right or wrong or does it always depend on cultural norms? Why or why

not? Examples?

THEORY 1:THEORY 1:ETHICAL RELATIVISMETHICAL RELATIVISM

ETHICAL RELATISM | SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY | http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/ethicalrelativism.html

ETHICAL RELATIVISM

MORALITY IS RELATIVE TO THE NORMS OF ONE’S OWN CULTURE.

WHETHER AN ACTION IS RIGHT OR WRONG DEPENDS ON THE MORAL NORMS OF THE

SOCIETY IN WHICH IT IS PRACTICED

ETHICAL RELATISM | SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY | http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/ethicalrelativism.html

ETHICAL RELATIVISM (cont.)

The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another.

For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards -- standards that can be

universally applied to all peoples at all times.

The only moral standards against which a society's practices can be judged are its own.

ETHICAL RELATIVISM (cont.)

THERE ARE MANY PRACTICES THAT ARE CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE IS SOME SOCIETIES

BUT CONDEMNED IN OTHERS

GROUP WORK: 3 MINUTESWHAT ARE 5 PRACTICES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE IN

SOME SOCIETIES BUT CONDEMNED IN OTHERS?

THE LIST GOES ON & ON & ONTHE LIST GOES ON & ON & ON

ETHICAL RELATIVISM (cont.)

GENOCIDE – POLYGAMAY – SLAVERY – RACISM – SEXISM – TORTURE – FEMALE

GENITAL MUTILATION – CIRCUMCISION – WOMEN WEARING A VEIL – PREMARITAL

SEX - BIRTH CONTROL – SEX EDUCATION –EATING MEAT – KILLING

ANIMALS – DOGS AS PETS

Most ethicists reject the theory of ethical relativism—the notion that there are no

universal moral standards.

WHY?

IN SUM: Societies may differ in their application of fundamental moral principles but agree on the principles.

#1 REASON WHY ETHICITS REJECT ETHICAL RELATIVISM

Some claim that while the moral practices of societies may differ, the fundamental moral principles underlying

these practices do not.

EXAMPLE In some societies, killing one's parents after they reach a certain age is common practice,

stemming from the belief that people are better off in the afterlife if they entered it while still physically

active and vigorous. While such a practice would be condemned in our society, we would agree with these

societies on the underlying moral principle -- the duty to care for parents.

BUT: Simply because some practices are relative does not mean that all practices are relative. Aren’t there some issues

that are simply right or wrong?!?

#2 REASON ETHICISTS REJECT CULTURAL RELATIVISM:

It is argued that some moral beliefs are culturally relative whereas

others are not. Certain practices, such as customs regarding dress and decency,

may depend on local custom whereas other practices, such as slavery, torture,

or political repression, may be governed by universal moral standards and

judged wrong despite the many other differences that exist among cultures.

BUT WAIT: This view promotes social conformity and leaves no room for moral reform or improvement in society.

#3 REASON WHY ETHICISTS REJECT RELATIVISM

If the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on a society's norms, then it follows that one must

obey the norms of one's society and to diverge from those norms is to act immorally.

This means that if I am a member of a society that believes that racist or sexist practices are morally permissible, then

I must accept those practices as morally right.

Much of the previous information comes from this excellent website:

ETHICAL RELATISM. SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY.

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/ethicalrelativism.html

.

MORAL ABSOLUTISMMORAL ABSOLUTISM

The belief or theory that there are absolute standards against which moral

questions can be judged—suggeststhat morals are not determined by societal or

situational influences. According to moral absolutism, morals are inherent in the laws

of the universe, the nature of humanity, or some other fundamental source.

Why is ethical reasoning important?

Please note, there is some exaggerated information in this scenario.

Question 1: If you knew a woman who was pregnant, who had eight children already, three

who were deaf, two who were blind, one mentally retarded, and she had syphilis, would you recommend that she have an abortion?

Remember your honest answer and go to question 2.

Which candidate is your choice? Which candidate is your choice? Remember your answer. Shhhh.Remember your answer. Shhhh.

Question 2: It is time to elect the world leader, and yours is the deciding vote. Here are the facts about the three leading candidates:

Candidate A: He associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologers. He's had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks up to ten Martinis a day.

Candidate B: He was ejected from office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a large amounts of whisky every evening.

Candidate C: He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and hasn't had any extra-marital affairs.

Please note, there is some exaggerated information in this scenario.

Candidate A is Franklin D Roosevelt, Candidate B is Winston Churchill,

Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.

And by the way--the answer to the abortion question... If you said yes, you just killed Beethoven.

We all tend to make ethical judgments based on conditioned and subjective views of what is right and proper.

And we all tend to make snap decisions in assessing whether something is right or wrong, before seeking the full story. Sometimes a choice seems obvious, but maybe it’s not.

Ethical reasoning is important to use in thinking, research and writing so that we don’t make snap decisions.

The Tylenol CaseThe Tylenol Case

Consider This…

On September 30, 1982, three people in the Chicago area died from cyanide

introduced into Extra-Strength Tylenol capsules. The link between the deaths and the tainted capsules

was made with remarkable speed, and authorities notified Johnson and Johnson.

As the number of deaths grew—the final total was seven—the firm faced a crisis and, indeed, potential

disaster. Tylenol, a leading pain-reliever, was Johnson and Johnson's single largest brand, accounting for

almost 18 percent of the corporation's income.

EXECUTIVES FOR TYLENOL EXECUTIVES FOR TYLENOL NEEDED TO RESPOND QUICKLYNEEDED TO RESPOND QUICKLY

But the executives did not know the answers to these three pertinent questions:

1.Had the cyanide been put in the Tylenol capsules during the manufacturing process or later?

2.Were the deaths that had already been reported just the first of a very large number?

3.Would the deaths be limited to the Chicago area?

The United States Food and Drug Administration had issued a warning not to take

Tylenol, but the government had not ordered the

company to take any specific action. Perhaps the deaths would be local, and there

would not be more than seven. Perhaps the authorities would not demand a

recall. Perhaps a temporary cessation of sales until

the source of the contamination was determined could prevent more harm to the public.

Against all these unknowns, the Against all these unknowns, the Johnson and Johnson executives had Johnson and Johnson executives had

to weigh five certainties:to weigh five certainties:

1. A recall would involve a loss of up to $100 million.

2. The loss was not covered by insurance.

3. News of a recall could so damage the product that Tylenol might never be able to regain public confidence and its 37 percent of market share.

4. The news and loss would surely result in a dramatic drop in the company's stock which would hurt many thousands of stock holders.

5. The competition in their product market was fierce; competitors would try to make Tylenol's loss their gain.

The facts you now have are the The facts you now have are the only facts they had…only facts they had…

1. What should the Johnson & Johnson do? What is the ethically right choice?

2. What did Johnson & Johnson actually do?

Consider ALL factors.

What did Johnson & Johnson Do?What did Johnson & Johnson Do?Unwilling to expose consumers to further risk—and

making a decision that puts them in the Ethics Hall of Fame—Johnson and Johnson ordered a recall of all Tylenol bottles. In the long run, public welfare and the company's reputation were protected by ethical decision making. “Tylenol: The Name You Trust”

The Tylenol case obviously presents a major example of ethical reasoning in the business world. But ethical issues, large and small, present themselves every day. Business leaders and professionals in all fields need methods for dealing with them and arriving at reasonable decisions.