Ethics Notes PDF

.General Notes Week 1 Ethics → study of morality (what is right/wrong) → boils down to our value system. Business ethics → how ppl doing business shld behave. Moral reasoning → reasoning process used to judge whether one is in line with moral standards or not (aka whether ure moral or not) Moral...

.General Notes Week 1 Ethics → study of morality (what is right/wrong) → boils down to our value system. Business ethics → how ppl doing business shld behave. Moral reasoning → reasoning process used to judge whether one is in line with moral standards or not (aka whether ure moral or not) Moral Reasoning should be Logical - easy to unds Evidence provided must be ARC- Accurate, Relevant, Complete Consistent with each other’s standards & beliefs Morality has 2 types : - Consequentialist → Morality is in the consequence of ur action. (if consequence to action is good = u did the right thing) - Categorical → Morality is in duties and rights, dc abt consequence. (the act alone is wrong alr) Types of moral reasoning : Consequentialism (Utilitarianism) - The right thing to do = max utility (happiness and pleasure) - To calculate utility for policy making, use CBA (cost benefit analysis) Exception: - Philip Morris smoking case → shows govt earn eco value by letting smokers die early → shows moral implications of valuing life by monetary terms. Kant Ethics Week 2 3 Levels of discussion Micro – Personal ○ Within / with other businesses ○ Rights, Expectations, Obligations ○ Virtues, Character traits ○ Dealing w Dilemmas Mid – Govt ○ Activities, Policies, Governance structures of Orgs ○ Biz, Advocacy groups, pro assoc, industry assoc, regulatory agency ○ Standards to hold accountable to ○ Rights, Obligations, Responsibilities, Permissions Macro – International ○ Market structures & Rules within own & intl economy ○ Who has authority to regulate ○ Who gives legitimacy ○ How to design & enforce regulations Relationship btw law & ethics: 2 schools of thought (a) Law shld govern both private life & businesses (b) Law shld only govern private life, NOT businesses. - Business ethics are good to have but not necessary - Law is the minimal level that shld be maintained in society Recognising Ethical Situations 1. Involve serious harm to 1 or more people? 2. Harm focused on victims / will focus on victims? 3. Harm likely to occur / has occurred? 4. Victims close/accessible to us? 5. Will harm happen soon / already occurred? 6. Harm violates moral standards we/most ppl accept? Context of Ethical Theories Divine Command Theory ○ Based on religion Enlightenment Period - educated elite believed more in knowledge/themselves over a higher being/ God ○ Social Contract Theory – Thomas Hobbes Morality = set of rules agreed & defined by co-inhabitants ○ Utilitarianism – Jeremy Bentham / John Stuart Mill Pleasure & Happiness Our basic duty is to add happiness ○ Kant Ethics Humans are free, rational agents who should be given appropriate respect Utilitarianism Act Utilitarianism; Jeremy Benthem - pleasure > pain One ACTS on achieving pleasure at all costs. Pleasure depends on duration + intensity. Maximise Utility, Cost Benefit Analysis ○ Utility = Pleasure > Pain; Happiness > Suffering Individualistic Disregards Human Rights Immediate Challenges – standardisation & uniformity impossible Can you put a value on life? ○ Ford Pinto Rights of individual & minority Ambiguity to interpret everything as dollars & cents Different values to pains, deprivations & frustrations (Edward Thorndike, 1937) Rule Utilitarianism; John Stuart Mill Goes through thorough decision-making process, considering various rules likely leading to greatest good for greatest number (greatest happiness principle) To do this: 1. Moral actor must be disinterested & benevolent spectator (think selflessly, act on behalf of others) 2. Must distinguish between Higher & Lower pleasures - High pleasure = mental pleasure, low pleasure = physical pleasure a. Humans > Animals b. Some humans prioritised (Long term benefit) Challenges to utilitarianism 1. Happiness difficult to quantify, thus difficult to make distinctions ○ Love & Friendship unquantifiable 2. May not lead to justice (fairness in distribution) ○ Utilitarianism may allow death of innocent parties for utility sake (coz overall happiness is most impt). This foregoes the innocent parties’ rights. Kant Ethics – Kant’s Categorical Imperatives Deontology – Duty Ethics Study of Duty & Morality of human actions Categorical Imperatives (moral laws u must follow cos it is ur duty to do so. Regardless of ur desires. Its binding on all of us.) 1. Principle of Universality a. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you b. Consistent across society c. “If you can do, everyone also can do” i. No exceptions 2. Humanity Principle a. Do not treat humans as mere means, but as an end. (they are not a resource for u to use and dump to get a objective) → Kant believes that humans are free rational agents who shld be given appropriate respect RULE UTILITARIANISM VS KANTIAN ETHICS RULE UTILITARIANISM KANTIAN ETHICS Happiness as end goal Morality is sufficient in itself. (doing what is right is enough, its the end goal) The greatest good for greatest numbers Happiness is not important, you are duty bound to do what is moral/right. Happiness > Pain for society We are duty-bound to do what is right. Morality In Nature – Personality Traits – Personal Characteristics Personality Combination of traits – Classifies indiv behaviour Pattern of behaviours displayed consistently over time Personality Profiles Identifies strong & weak traits of an individual Personality MIGHT influence ethical behaviour High honest-humility associated with ○ Avoid manipulation for personal gain, follow rules, less interested in material wealth & high/special social status More Kantian Categorical Imperatives? Low honest humility associated with  ○ Materialism, Unethical practices, Selfishness ○ Narcissism, Anti-social behaviour, Lacking remorse ○ More likely to carry out amoral/utilitarian works? Maximum benefits? Kohlberg’s 3 levels, 6 stages Level 1 - Pre- conventional Stage 1 : get punished = wrong act. avoid punishment = good act. Stage 2 : morally right action = based on self-interest. Level 2 - Conventional Stage 3 : good = what others see/validate as good. Stage 4 : good = obey laws Level 3 : Post-conventional Stage 4 : good = based on human well-being (whats good for majority) Stage 5 : good = good = deep personal values/ principles Week 3 Fairness / Justice approach to Ethics Fairness: Ethical actions should treat all human beings equally. If not, then fairly, based on some standard that is defensible/ there must be justification provided Why people in power/authority don’t make the ‘right’ decisions? Ignorance (feign ignorance) Limited alternatives considered ○ Choose not to find alternatives and conveniently rest on given bad alternatives Satisficing – satisfy min criteria Lack courage  Peer pressure Moral Disengagement → convincing urself that ethical standards dont apply to u within a particular situation/context (Albert Bandura) 1. Moral Justification - justify inhumane behaviour with a moral purpose of doing it i. Torture for National Security → good moral purpose so itsok! (false) 2. Displacement of Responsibility a. Use leading authority to explain immoral behaviour 3. Diffusion of Responsibility a. Bystander effect 4. Euphemistic Labelling a. Use socially acceptable words to disguise actual action 5. Advantageous Comparison a. Comparing unethical action against worse ones 6. Disregard / Distort Harm a. Belittle the bad action / outright denying harm done 7. Dehumanizing the VIctim a. Demonizing enemy. (eg Jews arent humans so they can be tortured.) Definitions of Justice (1) Visible injustice is good; Invisible justice is bad – Plato Ring of Gyges. People are inherently unjust and selfish. Justice is a consequential good People act justly only for fear of punishment from injustice; Visible injustice that leads to punishment is good - deters other crimes, leading to order (2) Better to suffer wrong than to do wrong – Plato Doing wrong bad for soul. Better to suffer punishment from doing bad than do bad and get away with it. Punishment cleanses the soul of its badness. (3) Better to be strong and do wrong, than to be weak and suffer wrong – Callicles Stronger have natural right to rule over the weak and inferior Might is Right. The winner takes all, what matters is who is still standing at the end of the day. Athenians: Strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must ○ Weak gain by submission to Strong ○ Strong gain by not using excessive resources to take the weak ○ Athens fulfill their happiness and interests Theories of Justice - how is justice achieved/ how does it look like? A just society = everyone fulfills roles so society runs smoothly. Justice = Equality – everyone gets same amount and types of things Needs-based Justice – everyone has diff needs so we shld get things differently Merit-based Justice – items are distributed unevenly, but according to merit (1) Aristotle Conception of Justice Justice is a virtue. To be Just = Lawful & Fair ○ Should lead to the betterment of others ○ Just / Unjust actions are voluntary acts. ○ Principles of Administering Rules Justice requires rules to be administered fairly Rules clearly stated & made known Consistently & impartially enforced Excuse individuals who act in ignorance, duress or against free will Distributive Justice - items shld be distributed according to what ppl need/contribute/ fair allocation. ○ Who decides who get what on what basis ○ Not arbitrary characteristics ○ Should be treated the same unless there is a need to be treated differently, that benefits everyone Rectification / Compensatory / Corrective Justice ○ Compensation for victims who had wrong done to them Retributive Justice ○ Punishment to restore moral equilibrium (2) John Rawl’s concept of Justice as Fairness = a society of free citizens holding equal basic rights & cooperate within a egalitarian (equality among all) economic system First Principle of Equal Liberties ○ All same equal claim to fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties Second Principle ○ Social & Economic inequalities are to satisfy Fair Equality of Opportunity Jobs are formally opened and assigned in meritocratic ways Everyone gets a fair chance of obtaining social positions/jobs Difference Principle Social and economic inequalities work towards the advantage of the poorest (they end up still better off than w/o these) Which scenario gives best case to least-advantaged? (3) Robert Nozick Entitlement Theory (opp of John Rawl) → Believes that people shld be free to pursue own interest with minimal govt intervention. People are to pursue self-interest as long as these hold true: Principle of Just Original Acquisition ○ If u obtain ur wealth through legal means, no obligation to help poor Principle of Just Transfer ○ If you acquire assets through legal means, no obligation to help poor Principle of Rectification ○ Fraud/ force on one’s assets should be rectified appropriately (4) Adam Smith Ethical Egoism → if you act on self-interest = u did the right action.  - Pursue self-interest, and it will lead to overall benefits for society. Everyone is more well-off. “We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love” Everything is done for the benefit of the self, and in such a way, benefitting the whole economy. ○ “If everybody is self-secure, everybody is secure” Week 4 Whistleblowing Releasing evidence by member / former member of org of illegal / immoral / unethical conduct in organisation that violates public interest (Boatright, 2014) Can only be done by a current or former member Must be information. Must have evidence of significant misconduct. Types 1. Govt 2. Internal a. Within internal structure 3. External a. Social media / cancel culture Justifying Whistleblowing Truth & Transparency is impt, so its justified BUT, is your obligation of loyalty to ur organisation or public? ○ Obligation to prevent serious harm ○ Obligation of loyalty to organisation Utilitarianism – every member of org affected if org is taken down Revelation of wrong violate org rights to privacy? Loyal Agent argument → views employee as the AGENT of the employer → you are empowered to act on behalf ur company → obligated to protect ur company. Whistileblow = violates org code of conduct Disloyal Agent argument (traitor) If Hired person turning against org / client / backs out of their agreement → views as a traitor, disloyal. Arguments to protect the traitor : 1. Law of Agency does NOT impose absolute obligation to do everyth boss wants them to do. - Comply only to reasonable demands. (but its a grey area!) 2. Agents obligations are confined to needs of the relationship ONLY.  - employees are hired for a specific purpose/job. They only need to do that. Nothing more. Western vs Confucius (Chinese) philosophy West → Believe in reciprocity & Rational Loyalty. - Assume that employee and employer are EQUAL. - They have mutual obligations - Expected to follow formal whistleblowing policies (they encourage it!) Confucius ○ Employee show “filial love” without expecting reciprocity from employer EVLN Model → Ways one can respond to job dissatisfaction / unfavourable work situations. Exit, Voice, Loyalty, Neglect Whistleblowing Protection Should not Open to abuse; ○ Revenge purposes ○ Cover up incompetence/mistakes Adds another layer of regulation to traditional right of employers to conduct their business. ○ Whistleblowing encourages ethical egoism ○ Classical CSR argument → business shld focus on core business, economic activity rather than social issues. Should Utilitarian argument ○ Raising potential harm benefits everyone if it is changed Right to free speech – Theory of Rights (Kant) + Justice (Rawls’ first principle of equal liberties) Components of a whistleblowing policy 1. Effectively communicated statement of responsibility a. What channels, what circumstances 2. Clearly defined procedure for reporting 3. Well-trained personnel to receive and investigate the reports 4. Commitment to take appropriate action a. Reports will not be ignored or misused 5. Guarantee against retaliation Power & Politics Power Potential to possess authority and influence over others Ability to mobilize resources, energy, and information on behalf of a preferred goal or strategy (Tushman, 1977) Assumption ○ Orgs composed of individuals & coalitions that compete over resources, energy, information and influence 5 Bases (sources) of Power (French & Raven) 1. Legitimate – Compliance 2. Coercive – Resistance 3. Referent – Commitment 4. Expert – Commitment 5. Reward – Compliance  6. (informational) Forms of Power (Toffler) 1. Violence – Basic form a. “Might is Right” – Callicles (Btr strong & do wrong than weak & suffer wrong) b. Inflexible, almost always produce resistance c. Suggests pre-emptive / defensive action 2. Wealth – Medium quality a. Promise of wealth/ Threat of losing wealth is powerful motivator (Ethics of Money) b. Money → Stored time / action in exchange for work c. Offering product/service highly valued i. Ability to take on last-minute urgent assignments leading to wealth 3. Knowledge – Highest quality power a. Most democratic b. Don’t require strength / money c. Fewest power resources used to achieve goal d. Used to make other party like your agenda e. Manipulation f. Punish, reward, persuade, transform minds g. Force multiplier h. Violence & Wealth finite, Knowledge is expandable & infinite – Highly appropriate for orgs Using Power for Good Checks & Balances Share power Give Organizational Politics → Informal, unofficial, sometimes behind the scenes efforts to sell ideas, influence org, increase power or achieve other targeted objectives (Brandon, T., & Seldman, M., 2004) OR - Influence tactics to improve personal / org interests Using Power Immorally In org Backstab, dishonesty, bullying, untrue rumours Using Power Morally In org Co-operation, networking, alliance building, mentorship Good Politics Social Astuteness ○ Constructively read other ppl, self-awareness to understand how ppl see you Interpersonal Influence Networking ability Apparent Sincerity ○ Sincerity in the eye of the beholder Ethical Criteria for Political Decisions Act Utilitarianism - one ACTS to achieve pleasure at all costs (jeremy bentham) My pleasure > his pain Rule Utilitarianism (John Mill) Thorough decision making process, greatest happiness for greatest number ○ No other options (incl my resignation) other than firing that guy? Should we violate the rights & justice of others because we have the power to do so? → No. Theory of Rights (Kant)→ all humans have rights that shld be respected in all decisions 1. Right of free consent a. Treated the way they consented to be treated 2. Right to privacy a. Do what they want in privacy, don’t need public to know 3. Right to freedom of conscience a. Refrain from doing anyth that violates their moral / religious norms 4. Right of free speech a. Can critique ethics/legality of others as long as dont violate others rights 5. Right to due process a. Fair & impartial hearing when rights violated Decision making should be guided by : Theory of Justice – Aristotle (Virtue, distributive, compensatory, rectification) Rawls (first principle of equal liberties, social and wealth inequality are to satisfy fair opp to all + difference principle) 1. Distributive Rules a. Fair allocation of org resources (rewards/salaries etc) 2. Principles of Administering Rules - Rules should be fair & uniform rules for all. Consistently enforced. 3. Compensation Norms a. Compensation for harm done to victims at work Amoral Political Power No concern about whether behaviour/action is morally right or wrong. Apathetic Ammoral → dont do anyth to avoid what is morally wrong, tho dont intend to do it Immoral → intentionally violate moral standards/ do what is morally wrong. Niccolo Machiavelli Better to be feared than to be loved. Morals not impt, survival is. Believes that out of evil can come good/ happiness - defined by Act Utilitaranism Amoral explanations can justify seemingly immoral actions ○ Visible injustice is good – Callicles CSR Context: Humans left unchecked tend towards greed & lack of responsibility towards others Economic Responsibility ○ Obligation to seek out supplies of raw materials ○ Discover new resources ○ Improve current technology Legal Responsibility ○ Manage assets of corporation in interests of shareholders ○ Legally responsible to customers, suppliers & regulatory authorities Milton Friedman → dont engage in CSR unless benefit shareholders Advantages of CSR Balance corporate power & rights w responsibility (Accountability) Encourages responsible self-regulation (less govt oversight) Long term profits for businesses Biz value & reputation improved w trust & confidence Directly addresses & manages externalities caused by business Disadvantages of CSR Lowers economic efficiency & short term profits Cost of CSR born by stakeholders & customers Business work business, lack expertise in social issues Individuals & govt low incentive to be involved in biz’s CSR ○ Moral Hazard Risk born by firms, benefit on Society & Govt Classical View of CSR Economic behaviour separate and distinct from from other types of behaviour Primary criteria for business performance : economic efficiency + growth in production of goods and services ○ Businesses for profit ○ Firms engage purely in economic activities, judged solely in economic terms FOR Classical View Moral Minimum is achieved ○ Firms already playing by rules + carrying out their business in honesty + good faith Power & Responsibility ○ Immense power of firm will dictate what is the “right & true” CSR to do, belittling others forms of CSR → not good for society, imbalance of social services Helping Govt ○ Economic well-being left to firms to take care ○ Social well-being govt & NGOs to take care ○ This split allows firms to help govt by tackling the economy problem, govt just focus on social issues. Justice Applied: John Rawl’s Second Principle; Difference Principle → Social + eco inequality ok as long as they work towards advantage of poorest Robert Nozick’s Entitlement Theory - ppl shld be free to pursue own interest w/o govt intervention. Smith’s Ethical Egoism → fulfilling business self-interest (profit maximization for businesses) will benefit everyone in society + invisible hand will resolve issues eventually Businesses (Milton Friedman) ○ Prioritise spending money on employees & firm ○ Lowering prices for preventing inflation NOT in the interest of maximizing profits ○ May have to hire less qualified people due to social agenda, against efficiency goals & targets AGAINST Classical View Moral Minimum ○ In good faith not enough to prevent ‘social injury’ ○ Active self-regulation (CSR) needed ○ Ethics of money → money minded people lead to unethical behaviour Power & Responsibility ○ Powerful firms need to be restrained via CSR (balances corporate power and rights with RESPONSIBILITIES) ○ Lord John Dalberg-Acton “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” Helping Govt ○ Social problems too big for govt, firms need to play a part especially if  Need is urgent Firm is closely related to need Firm can respond effectively Need unattended unless firm acts Kantian Duty Ethics Applied - all humans have moral obligations and duty to others to care ○ Govt dont have all the resources to manage negative externalities of ALL business dealings (Fair trade etc). Firms better position to deal with their own negative externalities. Businesses ○ They are already involved with activities outside their business scope → they lobby the govt daily on rules & standards → no excuse to not be concerned about CSR ○ Principle of Administering Rules (Justice by Rawl & Aristotle)→ rules should be fair & uniform for all, not adapted according to firms favour Taxation Argument ○ Money that cld be spent on employees & firm is used for CSR, but ultimately benefits everyone positively. (eg prevents enviro pollution etc) Business approach to CSR Market for Virtue → CSR is profitable for corporations! ○ Market rewards responsible behaviour & punishes lapses (failure to fulfill certain responsibilities) in corporation → IO sustainability (consulting firm) & Babson college study found that socially responsible firms had gains like increased sales, “reputation dividend”, higher productivity etc. Justice Applied (Aristotle) → Distributive justice - resources distributed fairly according to need (eg lower prices) → Compensatory justice - compensation given to victims who had harm done to them (eg compensation for oil spills/ child labour) → Retributive Justice - punish wrongdoing; moral equilibrium (eg ppl dont support ur business cos ure unethical) Rule Utilitarianism → Greatest Happiness Principle Deontological approach (its ur duty to be moral and follow rules) Competitive Advantage (Michael Porter) ○ Makes firm stand out, offer new value proposition  ○ CSR is a source of opportunity, innovation & competitive advantage Business Focus - no business can solve all social issues. → CSR efforts must intersect with business dealings & operations Focus on : Value Chain Social Impact - Areas largely affected by company activities eg c02 emissions) Social Dimensions of competitive context - Focus on dealing with external factors that affect underlying drivers of competitiveness in places where company operates (eg Rio Tinto mines in africa cos labor is cheap. Africa has AIDS epidemic so work on this issue so that ur labor pool wont be affected n shrink, and so ur cost of labor can remain low) Global Standards on CSR ○ UN Global Compact  ○ ISO 26000 Creating a Corporate Social Agenda ○ Responsive CSR Mitigating harm → React to negative externalities ○ Strategic CSR Adding social dimension to firm’s USP Week 7 Marketing & Advertising → Ethical Egoism Ethical Framework Angle - Fairness (Justice), Freedom, Well-being 1962 President John F kennedy → came up with consumer rights. - Right to be protected from harmful products - Right to have adequate info abt product they are buying - Right to be given choices - Right to have a voice in making major marketing decisions (1) Fairness (Justice) Result of successful marketing = Market Transaction ○ Seller & Buyer exchange something of value Fair Exchange = Both act freely & has adequate information ○ Fraud → exchange with coercion/manipulation Fairness should apply to search costs also → search cost for buyer > seller - Seller shld release info till the extent that it won’t cause harm / substantial financial loss to buyer Problems w Fairness Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) - Buyer has responsibility to judge quality of goods themselves + claims seller makes. Caveat Venditor (Seller Beware) - SELLER has responsibility to reveal quality of their product. So they can protect themselves against unethical buyers filing false claims Responsibility divided, but seller usually held responsible ○ Search cost for seller often lower (2) Freedom (Range of options should be given to consumers) Absence of force (no duress), voluntary decision making ○ Kantian Theory of Rights (right to free consent) Privacy of personal data ○ Kantian Theory of rights (right to privacy) ○ Rawls First Principle; Equal Liberties (3) Well-being → Due care theory (Consumers have the right to safe products) Due Care Theory: → Manufacturers are obliged to take all reasonable precautions to ensure selling a defect-free & safe product ○ Aristotle – Rectification / Compensatory / Corrective Justice - compensation shld be given to victims for wrong done to them ○ Does NOT include consumer misuse Issue with Due Care Theory: → focuses on the CONDUCT of manufacturers rather than condition of the product. ○ Difficult to establish what is due care. Hard to measure. ○ Justice Learned Hand (US judge) proposed : → If burden of taking precautionary measures < prob. of harm x severity of harm = negligent. Failed due care. But need evidence in lawsuit. (hard to provide also) Manufacturers can be protected against claims of failed due care by : Contributory Negligence → Consumer contribute to own injury Assumption of Risk → Consumer is proven to have known the risk involved b4 actually buying/using the product Ethical issues with the 4Ps Product 1. Life Cycle responsibility ○ Manufacturers are responsible for the whole life of the product (creation to disposal) 2. Product Development ○ Economic responsibility to discover new resources + improve current tech– Classical CSR Seller might withhold new improvements to “milk the cash cow” and retain high margins with old tech (which works against classical CSR / eco responsibility of business) Act Utilitarianism 3. Product Safety ○ Some countries have lesser regulations → Satisfice? ○ Utilitarian Cost-Benefit Analysis → less safe = cheaper manufacturing process = affordability & benefits developing countries? Ford Pinto Price Ethical Egoism → Market self-regulates through invisible hand UNLESS ○ Monopoly / Oligopoly (Cartel) Bad for utilitarian consumer – Greatest Happiness Principle, Rule Utilitarianism Callicles Strong do what they can weak suffer what they must (might is right) Nozick Entitlement Theory → ppl shld be free to pursue self-interest with minimal govt intervention, as long as pursue them within free market framework Fixing prices makes it unnecessarily expensive for consumers Limited supplies Pricing Tactics by online vendors 1. Drip Pricing a. Add on, hidden costs 2. Pre-Ticked Boxes 3. Strikethrough Pricing a. Fake discounts 4. Pressure selling techniques a. Create false sense of urgency b. “Fire Sale” / “Last Day of sale” Place Targeted Marketing ○ Provide essential service for the vulnerable, but make use of their lack of spatial mobility to rack up prices (can’t go other stores to compare price) ○ Convenient places to “trick” buyers to purchase Kant Humanity Principle - shld not treat people as meere means Promotion → alot of pressure placed on employers to generate sales. Must meet KPI. 4 types of people vulnerable to “promotion scams” Physical vulnerabilities/injuries (ailments) Cognitive (immature, senile) Motivational ○ Targeting those who have a serious illness / in grief Undertaker touts at the mortuary Social (low income, less empowered; foriegn domestic workers) Advertising → Ethical View Advertising = mass communication of info abt the product ure selling Utilitarian (what does the utilitarian think?) Facilitates market exchange, efficiency and overall happiness – GHP Kantian (what does the Kantian think?) Advertising is potentially immoral & harmful Invasive, manipulates mind & influences behaviour (to get what they don’t need) ○ Violates Kant Humanity Principle - dont treat humans as mere means ○ Violates justice (Aristotle Virtue Theory) - justice is a virtue and shld lead to betterness of others. Shld be voluntary act. Framing In Advertising (1) Attribute Framing Highlighting specific attributes ○ 75% Lean > 25% Fat (2) Goal Framing Emphasis on negative outcome for not participating (FOMO) (3) Risky Choice - present 2 choice options One option sure gain or loss, another risky alternative with numeric probability People are Risk-averse with sure gains and risk-seeking for losses - If given sure gain, will take the sure gain over a risk. If given potential loss, will take risk to avoid loss. Sex in Advertising (Sex Sells) Consider it through 2 lenses: Teleology - the effects & consequences of this on individuals Sex advertising involves - Sexually conditioning arousal to a product - Additional eroticism to products with existing sexual connotations → which then incites favourable response to an advertisement ** Unintended consequences : - This promotes sexual preoccupation, dissatisfaction, porn YET, not limited sexually related ads (eg abt birth control/condoms) led to AIDS & unwanted pregnancies Deontology - considers whether this act is inherently right/wrong. - Are such appeals morally appropriate? - Are sexual appeals used with good intentions, OR exploitative and degrading simply to appeal to consumer’s base instincts so that they will buy “unneeded” products? Can lead to preoccupation with materialism & induce them to buy “uneeded” products **Unintended consequences: - Foster atmosphere of disrespect, objectification of women - Create idealized images of how women shld look and act Week 8 Technology Technoethics (the study of ethics on tech)) is interdisciplinary (relates to more than 1 branch of knowledge), cutting across various segments of society (affects diff sectors of society) Computer ethics – AI, Robotics Cyberethics – Cyber identity theft, Phishing Bioethics – Gene therapy, GMO food, cloning Military Technoethics – Unmanned machines, strategic missiles Precautionary Principle (for decision making) Taking actions now to reduce the likelihood of unwanted consequences (look before leaping) Potential harm is known, but the particular cause-effect relationship cannot be scientifically established. ○ Justified where activity or substance poses plausible threat of harm, yet there is insufficient scientific evidence / lack of agreement to nature or scale of likely adverse effects Arguments against Precautionary Principle Vague – Scientific Uncertainty ○ Hard to define what is harm Stifles Innovation ○ Excessive regulations Incoherent in guiding policy ○ WiFi bad for health, but 5G is worse so should develop WiFi instead. In the end still bad for health? May create adverse effects ○ New technologies may have greater benefits though there is a smaller risk of catastrophic outcomes Nuclear power vs Coal Misuse of Internet Technology Privacy Limits power from others over us (#CancelCulture) Respect Individuals ○ Rights Theory (Kant); right to privacy ○ Humans are free rational agents who should be appropiataed respect. Entitled certain rights that should be respected in all circumstances. Maintain social boundaries ○ Judged on who we are today, not our past / things we do in private Right to free thought and speech ○ Reserve comments in public due to social norms Kant Theory of Rights Rawls First Principle of Equal Liberties Prevent misuses ○ Cyber theft, fraud, hacking PDPA Address concerns and to maintain individuals’ trust in organisations that manage data Doxing & Anonymity Judgements on social media is easy & premature Subject to error and misinformation Consequences can be disproportionate and life-long Bioethics & Technology Issues Definition of “good” and “bad” genes ○ What traits are normal / disability / disorder High cost → available for wealthy only? ○ Rawls Second Principle of Equal Opportunity Widespread use of gene therapy make people less accepting of different people? Ethical to boost human traits like Height, IQ, Athletic ablity? → Capt America? Positives of Genetic Engineering Pharmeceutical Development (improve drugs) Agriculture Human Organ Transplants Treat illnesses in foetuses → Cure diseases born from certain genes Negatives of Genetic Engineering Playing God? “Nature’s balance” ○ Artificially extending life may cause more problems Unsure of future genetic defects Limits genetic diversity End of Life, Prolonging Life Autonomous Decision Making Respect wishes of patient and their right to autonomosly voice their end of life treatment choices. But this right to autonomy has limitations: Age (minors / elderly) Physical ability SES Personality Mental / Psychological impairment Advance Directives - instructional or proxy Instructional : enables competent individuals to design and document their healthcare choices in advance in case of future disability of terminal illness Proxy : allows competent individuals to specify their wishes to their providers/families in case of future disability in carrying out their end of life decision. Physician’s Role & Responsibilities to resolve the issue Provide detailed info on benefits, limitations, drawbacks of treatment - Has responsibility to explain information and provide facts so that patient fully understands the situation about withholding medical treatment that is futile even if patient wants to continue Deontological theory → work to gain greatest good for patient, act for patients’ benefit Patient : has a duty to take an autonomous decision to undergo, or forego futile treatment for greatest good of society by saving cost and emotional stress. Has a duty to preserve patient life but NOT unnecessary use of resources which inflicts more harm than good to patient by continuing medically futile treatments. Rationing of Care & Futile Treatment → technological advancements revolve around prolonging life rather than allowing natural dying process Ethical value of patients autonomy must be weighed against 1. Expensive treatment for futile cases 2. Option for Comfort Care → ease natural dying process Costs for End-of-Life Care Increasing. Should target lengthening life & increasing quality of life Accessibility to quality care at affordable cost is important Ethical Theories for End-of-Life Care (1) Virtue Theory (Aristotle) - Justice is a virtue, should lead to the betterment of others → physicians should work for the greatest good for the patient by family and by physician RATHER THAN ethical egosim (self-interest of doctor is save life but sometimes better to let patients go) (2) Consider Theory of Rights (Kant) - Consider patients perspective, preferences and rights (right to free consent) Artificial Intelligence Who do you save? Depends on culture ○ Ethical Implications? Technological Unemployment Luddite Fallacy? In Frey & Osborne’s study, 47% of American jobs, 54% of EU, 77% in China and 69% in India were at risk of being obsolete Dealing with Tech Unemployment Public projects Welfare handouts (GST Voucher?) Universal basic income Expanding ownership of innovation assets ○ 3D printing machines Upskilling & Training How should one react to technoethics? Expose oneself to multiple and competing sources of information Ask many questions Avoid making a quick decision on an issue Have a basic position with room to adapt in the future Week 10 Discrimination → the unfair treatment of people & groupds based on chracteristics like race, gender, age or sexual orientation. - Recognise a distinction; differentiate - Make an Unjust / prejudicial distinction in treatment of different categories of people  ○ Often from fear & misunderstanding When you experience unfair or negative workplace decisions as a result of your age, gender, race, religion, language, marital status and family responsibility or disability Reasons for Discrimination 1. Cultural Stereotypes from historical precendence 2. Work-Related Reasons a. Prior ±ve experience 3. Religious affiliations (can affect hiring/work decisions) 4. Tendency to take shortcuts (discrimination speeds up decision making) 5. Fear (of consequences if they dont discriminate also) Bias - A Tendency, inclination OR prejudice toward/against someone/smth. - Can be seen as a mental shortcut. - Based on steorotypes Effects of Discrimination Higher stress levels on average Higher stress just being a member / associated to group that is being discriminated (though you are not directly) Anticipation of discrimination creates its own chronic stress Guiding Principles against Discrimination Kantian Theory of Rights, Rawls First Principle of Equal Liberties ○ Rights to life, liberty, pursue happiness (USA) Discrimination = distinguishment not on merit but bias ○ goes against Rawls Second Principle on Equal Opportunities Discrimination may lead to harmful & -ve consequences ○ Not good for the utilitarian (Rule Utilitarianism) → Greatest Happiness for greatest number. May lead to unserserved social class. Job Discrimination → unfair workplace decisions due to age, gender, race, religion, marital status, family responsibility, disability, language. Types 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Race 4. Disability 5. Sexual Orientation 6. Lifestyle a. Smoker, Drinker 7. Language Examples of biases in Job Discrimination 1. Law of small numbers a. Draw conclusions from small sample size 2. Contrast effect / error  a. Candidate valuation impacted by prev candidates who were good/bad due to prior benchmark 3. Similar-to-me effect a. People tend to like others who have same interests/attitudes 4. Halo/Horn effect a. Judge someone/smth to be wholly good based on 1 good trait (tom is kind hence he must also be capable, hardworking, intelligent) b. Judge someone/smth to be wholly bad based on 1 bad trait 5. Confirmation Bias - Tendency to search/look for info that alr supports what u believe while ignoring contrasting evidence Is there a morally relevant reason for discrimination? Job Discrimination Applied Steer away from explicit discrimination Focus on qualities required for the job Week 12 Ethics of Crisis Management → to protect an organisation and its stakeholders from threats and/or reduce the impact of the threats 3 types of Crises 1. Crises of the physical world – Natural disasters, failure of technology (nuclear) 2. Crises of the human climate – Terrorism, politics, civil war 3. Crises of management failure – mismanagement, skewed values, deception 5 stage model (Ian Mitroff) 1. Signal Detection a. Early warning systems 2. Probing & Prevention a. Investigation, actively reducing risk 3. Damage Containment 4. Recovery 5. Learning INITIAL OBLIGATIONS (1) Ethical Principle of Responsibility and Accountability Moral obligations and duties to others (Kantian Duty Ethics – Deontology) Moral Responsibility (Aristotle) – Virtue Ethics?? ○ Ability to reason, awareness of action & consequences, willingness to act free from external compulsion Accountability - readiness to justify your actions (2) Ethical Principle of Humanistic Care Humanity Principle The ethics of humanistic care concerns the duty of all humans to others, specifically requiring a supportive response to individuals in suffering and in need. ○ First priority → Protecting stakeholders from harm NOT organisation reputation ○ Ethical Duty to avoid harmful actions ○ Support those harmed by crises Crisis Communication 3 stages, Before, During, Post Pre-Crisis 1. Monitor crisis risk 2. Decisions to manage potential crises 3. Train people involved in crisis management process Crisis (during) 1. Collect & process information for decision making 2. Create & disseminate crisis messages Post-Crisis 1. Assess crisis management effort 2. Provide follow-up Crisis Communication Objectives 1. Accurate, Timely information to all targeted internal + external audience 2. Demonstrate concern for safety of lives 3. Safeguard org facilities and assets 4. Maintain +ve image of org as good corporate / community citizen AFTER INITIAL RESPONSE SCCT – Situational Crisis Communication Theory Attribution of responsibility in crisis Assess situation by Can Org be viewed as victim of event? Does event occur due to unintentional / uncontrollable factors? Is event preventable? If accident / natural disaster etc Low crisis responsibility If preventable, esp due to human incompetence / failure Strong crisis responsibility Consider Utilitarianism – Loss of profits in crises Power of firm Justice – Corrective Justice & Retributive Justice (Rawls) Avoid being viewed having Classical view of CSR – Business as profits. MUST acknowledge harm. ○ Good response better for long-term profits anyway Ethics of Money → anyth ppl are willing to use to represents systematically the values of other things with the purpose of exchanging goods & services Universal Principles of Money (1) Universal Convertability Money as medium of exchange can convert everything into anything (2) Universal Trust Any two strangers can cooperate on any project in any place Most universal & efficient system of mutual trust Money Theories Morality arises out from social relationships ○ (1) Money mutes social relationships Money focused tend to see themselves as self sufficient (2) Issues are thought in a business frame ○ Look out for self-interests than considering impact of decision on others  (3) Power – Medium Quality Power (Toffler) Down Side of Money (1) Social Effects - makes one less social Less helpful Less likely to ask for assistance Donated less to charity More social distance when meeting someone new Work alone > work together (2) Acting Unethically (make you unethical) More likely to act unethically to enrich oneself Lied more often for profit – Liars game, Squid game etc Paying for Service vs Paying for Public Good? Money & Ethics Money can buy anything, so can! ○ Act Utilitarianism - as long as act leads to max pleasure, it is ok! Even if it affects others negatively. ○ Smith Ethical Egoism - right action = pursuit of self-interest. Cos that brings overall benefit to everyone/society. ○ Nozick’s Entitlement Theory Freedom to pursue own interest with minimal govt intervention? ○ Callicles - might is right. better to be strong and do wrong than to be weak and suffer wrong Money should not be used to buy anything ○ Rule Utilitarianism - any action must be for the greatest good for greatest number Kant Principle of Universality (do unto others as u wld do unto you) Violates Rawls First Principle of Equal Liberties (all have same equal claim to fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties) ○ Rawls Second Principle of Fair equality of opportunity ○ Kant Humanity Principle Dont treat people as mere means ○ Aristotle Retributive Justice Plato better to suffer wrong than to do wrong – purged sickness from soul Not every issue should be measured by a cost-benefit analysis