Crash and the philosophical theories Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Crash and the philosophical theories - Essay Example Kant also makes several arguments about lying, whether it is morally acceptable to lie. He argues that lying at all times and in all possible circumstances is always morally wrong. He says that all human beings have what is referred to as an intrinsic worth called human dignity. Human beings are rational being who are capable of making their own decisions and guarding their own conduct by the use of reason. They have a rational power that enables them to be ethical in their deeds and actions. They are therefore set to make the right choice in every circumstance that presents itself before them that is in need of a decision or a choice. The fact that they are moral beings gives them the aspect of morality enabling them to make the right choice. It is for this reason that Kant argues that lying is morally wrong because it introduces corruption into the most important quality of a human being; that is the ability to make a free will. When one tells a lie, the lie contradicts the part of this person that gives him moral worth. This is what it does to the person lying. To the people who are being lied to, the lie robs them of the freedom to make a rational choice. It is for this reason that Kant argues that lying is morally wrong because it introduces corruption into the most important quality of a human being; that is the ability to make a free will. When one tells a lie, the lie contradicts the part of this person that gives him moral worth. This is what it does to the person lying. To the people who are being lied to, the lie robs them of the freedom to make a rational choice. When people make a decision because of a lie, a decision they would not have taken if they were told the truth, then the lie interferes with their human dignity and autonomy. Kant in his belief that in our endeavor to value other rational being as ends and not merely as means to an end, we are obliged in all circumstances never to damage, interfere with or to misuse in any way the ability o f a human being to make a free will decision. John Stuart Mill, a philosopher, makes several arguments concerning utilitarianism, he corrects the misconceptions that have been said concerning this subject. One of the arguments that mill disagrees with states that life has no higher end than pleasure. He says that this is a doctrine worth of only the swine. He argues that action must not be evaluated by how much pleasure we derived from it to know how much happiness can be derived from it. His argument is that a higher pleasure must be taken to be in kind, that is what brings much happiness and not how much pleasure that can be derived from it. This is to say that an action might derive much pleasure but it is not in kind and therefore it must not be used as a measure of happiness. The only action that should bring happiness is that which is done in kind and not that which brings much pleasure. Raping someone might bring much pleasure but in the measure of things that bring happiness , not raping someone might bring much happiness with less pleasure, which is a kind action. The other objection by Mill concerning the principle of utility is that it is not easy for people always to act from the inducement to promote the interests of the public. According to Mill, our actions should not always be motivated by a sense of duty but we must be motivated by ethics. Almost all our actions are always done from other motives and are always considered right if they conform to the rule of duty. Mill says that when we want to do the right thing we should never be motivated by the concern of happiness. Many of the actions we do intend the good of ourselves and not the good of the world. Yet the good that is

Toyotas Social Initiatives Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Toyotas Social Initiatives - Case Study Example This essay declares that one of the most important questions that the rise of the modern business corporation has triggered in the minds of men is the following: â€Å"What is the purpose of a business?† Like the human beings that founded, managed, and grew them, corporations have searched for answers to this basic question on the assumption that doing so would give meaning to their existence, their behavior, and the countless short- and long-term business decisions made each day. This paper stresses that the search for an answer is not easy. Why and how does a business begin? Usually, some brave soul discovers a need in society that can be met, a product or a service that can be sold either because no one else is selling it or because s/he thinks it can be improved, made more convenient, or sold at a cheaper price. In the process, the person who discovers this unmet need and can supply it to people who are willing to pay the right price becomes rich. The business grows, expands, competes, and then goes public by listing in the stock market†¦and then what? This is where having a business purpose comes in handy, because making money is the easy part (although most start-up businesses fail, not only in America but in any other part of the world). These successful businesses go beyond finding ways to be profitable and try to discover how to spend those profits. the company’s business goals can be profitable if properly managed.... The business grows, expands, competes, and then goes public by listing in the stock marketand then what This is where having a business purpose comes in handy, because making money is the easy part (although most start-up businesses fail, not only in America but in any other part of the world). These successful businesses go beyond finding ways to be profitable and try to discover how to spend those profits. At first, companies were happy to share those profits with their managers, employees, and shareholders, but over the years, everyone realized that there were limits to the amount of money one could spend. In their search for a purpose, they came up with several answers. Adam Smith, in his Wealth of Nations, Book III entitled "Of the Natural Progress of Opulence" (Bartleby 2001) entreated private businesses to go beyond profits and create surpluses for export because this would lead to progressive wealth resulting in the improvement of the standard of living and the cultivation of society, a sort of heaven on earth where everyone would be happy. Drucker (1955) argued that the creation of value is the purpose of the organization, and that the purpose of business is to create and keep a customer. Friedman (1962) also emphasized that the social responsibility of business is to increase profits and maximize shareholder return without breaking the law, and that it is not the purpose of business to take care of society. Two prominent thinkers disagreed. Freeman (1984), the pioneer of stakeholder theory, defined (p. 48) stakeholders as "groups and individuals who can affect the organisation" and that "managerial behaviour must respond to those groups and individuals." Freeman argued that a business must go