Ethics Notes PDF

Week 1 1. What is ethics? 2. Is ethics relevant to our life and are there any challenges that you could find? If so, is there any way to handle the challenges? 3. Do you agree with Peter Singer? How does globalisation intersect with the realms of ethics? Readings Gary Chan 3 di...

Week 1 1. What is ethics? 2. Is ethics relevant to our life and are there any challenges that you could find? If so, is there any way to handle the challenges? 3. Do you agree with Peter Singer? How does globalisation intersect with the realms of ethics? Readings Gary Chan 3 different levels of examining ethics - Descriptive: describes the ethical norms of a given society/community - Do not make value judgements on what ought to be the ethical norms of the community - Akin to scientific inquiry - Normative: what ought to be the appropriate ethical conduct in a given situation - You cannot derive a normative statement solely from a factual one → you need to rely on another normative statement as a premise otherwise the moral argument is not valid - E.g. you ought to do X because you promised to do so → invalid moral argument UNLESS you imply in such a statement the premise that: we ought to carry out our promises - Also examine soundness: this is dependant on the factual accuracy of the statements Normative approach (for moral arguments): - P 1: X promised to purchase machines from Y (factual) - P 2: We ought to keep our promises (normative) - C: X ought to purchase machines from Y (normative) Check (1) Soundness (2) Whether premise is true: so for factual statements, are they correct/ for normative statements, are they valid (are there alternative propositions?) - Meta Consistency in ethics - Ethical reasoning requires that we act consistently in similar circumstances - Presupposes that ethical principles are sufficiently general in scope to apply to human conduct in a consistent manner - Consistency is connected to the criterion of impartiality (decision-makers treat affected persons in an equal and fair manner) Rationality and emotions in ethical decision-making - The fact that parties implicitly accept the importance of reasons and reasoning does not mean that they believe reasons alone would  necessarily be determinative of the outcome (emotions play a part) - Emotivism (moral judgements are based on emotions alone) - Under emotivism, a particular action cannot be shown to be objectively right/wrong - Decisions reached may be inconsistent, arbitrary and subjective - Moral imagination: uses both rational and emotional faculties to make ethical decisions - The moral actor takes into account both rational and emotional perspectives - They appreciate the situational context and are aware of potential biases - Intrinsic morality: sympathy, sense of fairness, self-control, sense of duty Kohlberg’s 6 stages of human development in moral reasoning - Preconventional stages - Stage 1: Punishment and obedience orientation - right and wrong is determined by what authority figures deem punishable → individuals focus on avoiding negative consequences vs understanding the inherent morality of actions - Stage 2: Instrument and relative orientation - View moral actions as a means to satisfy their own needs and those they have relationships with → moral reciprocity is self-interested - Conventional stages - Stage 3: Interpersonal Concordance Orientation - Moral actions are based on expectations of peers/family/etc - Stage 4: Law and Order Orientation - Moral actions are based on adherence to societal/national norms - Post-conventional stages - Stage 5: Social contract orientation - Individuals reach consensus through agreements and fair procedures although they may have conflicting personal views - Stage 6: Universal ethical principles orientation - Where individuals believe in consistency, comprehensiveness and universality in the chosen moral principles Ethics and law - Both law and ethics are norms but they are distinct - To distinguish law and ethics - Positivists jurisprudence: treats law as a set of norms created and maintained pursuant to some legal authority within a legal system - Hart: primary and secondary rules, rules of recognition need to be accepted from an internal POV - Natural law: contend that there are higher standards/criteria which must be fulfilled before a norm may be regarded as  law - Finnis: natural law is a set of principles based on practical reasonableness in the ordering of human life and community - Human Beings possess intrinsic values that govern their reasoning and behaviour → Rules of right/wrong are inherent in people and not created by society/court/a judge - Positivists treat legal norm binding insofar as it is created in a manner regarded as authoritative within a particular legal system VS natural law jurists who rely on certain ethical standards Differentiating legal and ethical norms - Authority and process of law vs ethical norms - Legal norms are created by the relevant authorities via the accepted processes - But there is no generally accepted process by which ethical norms are created, maintained or modified - Scope of application: Legal norms tend to emphasises their territorial scope or jurisdiction vs ethical norms which do not have specific territorial boundaries - Sanctions: legal sanctions are specific and formal vs sanctions for a breach of ethical norms which is more informal (e.g. social disapproval) Ethics in business professions 3 levels in which business ethics issues operate in the real world 1. Individual level: relates to the decision making of an individual 2. Organisational level: impinges on the culture of business organisation and professional entities (especially in partnerships and corporations) → culture refers to the shared practices/policies/values of the organisation - Qn: can the corporation be morally responsible for the acts of the directors, officers and employees? - Moral responsibility of a corporation depends on the acts of individuals who are involved in the corporate activities, their extent of knowledge and voluntariness/liberty of their actions + could they have reasonably prevented the adverse consequences of the acts? - Doctrine of double effect: an action is justifiable if: - The nature of the act itself is good/ at least morally neutral - The good effects are generated from the action not from the bad effects - The agent intends the good effect and not the bad - The good effect outweighs the bad effect sufficiently such that causing the bad effect is justified 3. Systemic level: deals with the morality of capitalism and the marketplace Regulations of business ethics - Rules  - Economic instruments - Guidelines/Codes of conduct/soft law - Ethics and moral standards Adam Smith - Under a competitive market’s conditions self-interest alone will lead to ethically appropriate ends - This is because: sympathy, humanity, generosity and benevolence are the most fundamental of all human motivations Similarly: Milton Friedman - The only social responsibility of businesses is to use its resource and engage in activities designed to increase its profits - Caveat: you must stay within the rules of the game → engage in open and free competition without deception or fraud - Criticism: - Businesses have to be seen as a part of society so acceptable standards of business behaviour are drawn from society rather than having opposing standards within business and society - The pursuit of self-interest has been over-emphasised at the expense of other factors Peter Singer Ethics and globalisation - People in different regions no longer live separate lives such that they can think that they owe no obligations (beyond non-interference) to those in other states - E.g greenhouse gas emissions/migration/… - Where more and more issues demand global solutions, the extent any state can independently determine the future diminishes → need to strengthen institutions for global decision making → world community should have its own directly elected legislature - BUT: need to consider how to prevent such global bodies from becoming either dangerous tyrannies or self-aggrandizing bureaucracies Week 2 Gibson Act vs Rule utilitarianism Utilitarianism - Act utilitarians ask what individual act will maximise happiness - VS Rule utilitarian who generate rules from the greatest happiness principle → so they look beyond the immediate and bring in other consideration - Both look at the Consequence - Difference is that act utilitarians look at the immediate circumstance while rule utilitarians look at the broader contexts which may alter the balance Bentham’s definition of utilitarianism - Maximising happiness, minimising pain - What is happiness? Defined by 7 factors - Duration - Certainty - Intensity - Propinquity: How immediate/available an experience will be - Fecundity: If pleasure will lead to further pleasure - Purity - Extent - 2 important notions - We have to integrate considerations about the wider community’s welfare into any decision - No one has the privileged ability to tell others what is best for them - Should not be mistaken for sesuality/hedonism: this would excessively narrow the definition of what is pleasure and focuses solely on individual vs collective good Mill’s definition of utilitarianism - Similarities with Bentham: - Consequentialist - Avoid pain and creating pleasure - Applies to everyone affected by the action so we need to consider our own actions as a disinterested and benevolent spectator → act as a neutral 3P with no stake in the outcome - Differences VS Bentham: - Pleasures are qualitatively different VS Bentham who believes that the greatest happiness = greatest quantity - Utilitarian assessments should not reflect our own preferences but should be a result of education and experience → seems to suggest some kind of objective standard - We should be more aware and engaged with the world even if it means we are less content → knowledge of happiness depends on discerning experiences from one another - This implies that in assessing our moral options, we should rely on elders and connoisseurs How does MIll deal with individual rights? - Justice, when regarded collectively with other moral requirements, stand higher in the scale of social utility and is therefore of paramount obligation compared to others - Mill is a rule utilitarian - He aggregates happiness → individual preferences may be overridden Contemporary utilitarianism: Challenges to Bentham and Mill Moore - Argues that - Happiness is not the single ultimate good - Utilitarians have confused the mental states of happiness with the means used to attain it → our own happiness is a means to another ultimate end (which may not necessarily be happiness) - Mill and Bentham have mistakenly said that there was a single quality that captures the concept of good → the ultimate good is an intrinsic property - Moore is open to the charge of social construction → societies have different views on the good - He also asserts without further justification that 2 prime qualities are - Personal affection; and - Appreciation of beauty Simon - Challenges the notion of needing to maximise because we might have limited knowledge, time and resources to make decision - Theory is based on bounded rationality: the best available outcome is better than the best possible one → “satisficing” Preference utilitarianism - Tries to circumvent the above 2 criticisms - A moral endeavour is to fulfil as many preferences as possible - Is an antirealist position: what is good depends on the interests of people involved - Objection: what if some people have odd or negative preferences? Charitable ways of defining preference utilitarianism would say that only genuine preferences should be considered - Preference utilitarianism would depend on people having a solid sense of their preference and priorities Addressing concerns with preference utilitarianism - Singer - Preferences is not a return to egoism but we still have the 2 preconditions of utilitarianism: impartiality + sympathy with others - Claims: if we can benefit others with little costs to ourselves, that is what we should do - Moral consideration used to only belong to a select few (namely landowners, men) but is now being expanded → each have different preferences → how do we balance the interests of all?  Another thing is that preferences are not fixed - This means that we have to be careful and precise in articulating our preferences Challenges to utilitarianism 1. Problems with the calculation a. How do we balance the difference concerns in the calculations? b. Calculus looks at total quantity and not distribution c. Hurting minorities d. Does not address the issue of individual merit or responsibility i. concerns may not derail the utilitarian project but instead create more sophisticated methods of quantifying human utility ii. There has to be a point where we have done enough as morally required → if utilitarianism is maximising happiness for the maximum no. then we will never stop working to help others, to the extent our own welfare has been diminished e. Mill: i. Rule utilitarianism ii. For utilitarianism to work, the individual must see the paramount tenet to not hurt another → otherwise, happiness will not be maximised (regardless of any immediate benefits) 2. Autonomy a. Challenges the 2 main roots: Sympathy and impartiality b. Utilitarian may feel it appropriate to intervene in our own personal projects if it seems to detract from the overall welfare of society 3. Impartiality a. We treat ourselves/those we love as equal to strangers in the calculus → might be too demanding b. The idea of improving welfare might hurt the indiv’s right to choose his or her own priorities 4. Agency a. Reluctance to be an agent of harm even though there may be a net benefit to society 5. Probabilities a. Many factors play into decision making; We always have to make decisions under uncertainties b. The way issues are presented plays into our moral intuitions c. The way outcomes are framed can also impact decision making Sandel Fundamental tenets: Libertarianism - Everyone has a fundamental right to liberty - provided that we respect others right to do the same - Reason for objections on tax - High tax rates reduce incentive to work/invest  - Taxing the rich to help the poor violates a fundamental right How libertarians envision governments - No paternalism: such laws violate the right of the individual to decide what risks to assume - No moral legislation: Oppose the promotion of notions of virtue by the majority - No redistribution of income or wealth: Redistributive taxes are a form of coercion and even theft Free market philosophy - Nozick - Only state regulation allowed is: enforcement of contracts, protecting people against force, theft and fraud - Distributive justice does not depend on income equality etc, only - Justice in initial holdings - Justice in transfer - If both requirements are met, then you are entitled to what you have and the state cannot take it away without your consent - 2 problems with the usual theories of distributive justice - Intervention in the free market repeated and continuously, such that people’s choices are undone - Violates an individual’s personal rights - Crux of libertarianism: self-ownership → I own myself and my own labour (and hence the fruits of my labour) Objections to the libertarian logic 1. Taxation is not as bad as forced labour: because if you still have choice when you are taxed i.e. the choice to work less and get taxed less a. But libertarians counter that the state should not be forcing you to make such a choice 2. Poor need money more: a. does not change the fact that it is still stealing 3. The individual’s success is not owed only to him a. But the other people contributing to the success have already been paid market value for their work 4. Taxation is with consent as a citizen of democracy a. If it is just by democracy then what about individual rights? 5. The successful individual is just lucky to have a certain talent a. This objection questions whether one’s talent is really theirs → but if one cannot take the benefits from exercising their talents, then he does not really own them and hence he does not own himself → libertarians value self-ownership Week 3 Sandel - Kant’s perspective Kant - Rejects utilitarianism - Just because something is pleasurable for many people does not make it right - Bentham is wrong to say that pain and pleasure are our “sovereign masters” - Advocates for freedom - Morality should not be based on empirical considerations like interests, wants, desires and preferences —> these are variable and cannot serve as the basis for universal moral principles - The supreme principle of morality should be based on pure practical reason (rationality) - Human beings are autonomous, capable of acting and choosing freely - To act freely, is to act autonomously —> to act autonomously, is to according to a law i give myself (VS heteronomy: act according to determinations given outside of me or doing something for the sake of something else) - To act freely is not to choose the best means to a given end but to choose and end itself, for its own sake - To determine what is moral - Look at the motive —> is the action done for the sake of the moral law? Only the motive of duty confers moral worth - Reason has to determine my will: follow the categorical imperative which is unconditional (vs hypothetical imperative) - Categorical imperative - Formula of the universal law: Act only on the maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law - Criticisms of this: Can be consequentialist at times which is against what Kant is saying (i.e. if everyone do ___, then some bad thing will happen) - But this test is a way of checking whether the action I undertake outs my interests ahead of everyone else’s - Formula of humanity as an end: Humanity has an absolute value as an end in itself: so you must act in a way that treats yourself/any other person never as a means, but always as an end Sandel - 2 ideas Aristotle - Justice is teleological: defining rights requires us to figure out the telos (purpose/end/essential nature of the social practice in question)  - Theory of causation: everything in nature works towards a telos (purpose/end) - Justice is honorific: you need to argue what virtues should be honoured and rewarded Justice means giving people what they deserve —> people who are equal should have assigned to them equal things - Equal in what respect? Justice discriminates according to merit and according to relevant excellence —> because those people can best realise the purpose of the good - So to determine the just distribution of a good, you need to inquire into the telos (or purpose) of the good being distributed - Moral desert: condition of deserving something good or bad Opinion on politics: Is about learning how to live a good life - Any polis must devote itself to the end of encouraging goodness - Reason people such as Lincoln should hold the highest political offices is not just because they will enact wise policies but also because the political community exists to honour and reward civil virtue - Why does he think this way? because only by living in a polis and participating in politics do we fully realise our nature as human beings How to become virtuous? - you have to practise —> emphasis is on habit - being steeped in virtuous behaviour helps us acquire the disposition to act virtuously - but habit is not enough, what if you meet a situation you have never encountered before? moral virtue requires judgement, or practical wisdom - Practical wisdom: the ability to make informed and rational decisions and to weigh between what is good and bad for man Aristotle’s eleven virtues: courage, temperance, liberality, magnificence, magnanimity, proper ambition, truthfulness, wittiness, friendliness, modesty, righteous indignation Doctrine of the mean: a virtue lies between 2 vices Criticisms of virtue ethics - Tends to be vague and does not tell us what to do - Practical wisdom is vague and subjective - Defining the purpose of something is also a subjective exercise Confucian Key principles ethics - The dao: the way humans ought to live - The junzi: ethical exemplar with the virtues to follow the dao  - The ren: complete or comprehensive moral excellence → wisdom and courage - The shu: emphasises reciprocity and treating others as one would like to be treated → moral principles of empathy and compassion - The li: refers to the concept of proper behaviour, rituals and etiquette to uphold moral order Purpose: learning in order to attain the utmost of one’s principles Poise: the superior man in his thought does not go out of his place Self-sufficiency: what the superior man seeks, is in himself; what the ordinary man seeks, is in others Earnestness; the superior man in everything puts forth his utmost endeavours Thoroughness; the superior man bends his attention to what is radical → all practical courses naturally grow up Nussbaum Beginnings: Philosophers in the 1950s/60s were more interested in 2 - Rawls meaningful type of inquiries - Empirical investigations into matters of fact - Conceptual discussions of the meanings and uses of terms - His ideas tend to build on Kantian liberalism and show the defects of utilitarianism Starting point: each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override - Focus on the idea of procedural justice → attempts to design a procedure that embodies the moral ideal of justice Original position: people of roughly equal ability to decide to agree on the principles of social cooperation without knowing how anybody is placed in society → model of purity of heart: has 2 parts: 1. People in this system are described as rational, self-interested individuals who aim to do well for themselves as they can, are roughly equal in capacity, and have needs that can be met more effectively by cooperation than by noncooperation 2. Veil of ignorance: parties do not know where they will be placed in the resulting society - Crux: where social justice is in question, real people should always try to choose w/o being biased in the direction of their own special interests - Impartiality is better understood in this manner Difference principle: Parties prefer - A strong priority for basic liberties - Distribution of basic goods that would tolerate inequalities only when those inequalities raise the level of the least well off - Criticisms  - Cannot take from people what they earn by their talents BUT people do not really own what society requires to support the needs of others - Tolerating inequality subverts the aims of justice - Focused too much on income and wealth as indexes of who is well off in society → the difference principle only measures the least well off in society with regard to income and wealth alone; - What about self-respect/discrimination (i.e. lesbians/gays) - He is fixed in certain conservative views: i.e. denying girls equal opportunity by teaching them the unequal worth of females/ treats the american style nuclear family as a quasi-natural unit… - Rawls recognises that modern societies all have differences about the basic matters of value and the ultimate meaning of life - - So the political principles of a liberal society must be acceptable to citizens who hold a wide range of different positions Rawls and religion - Because we respect the differences in society → we accept a wide range of opinions on metaphysical matters - Political actors should not directly contradict the views of religions (even if it posits inequalities) - I.e. sex discrimination; you should just say all people are equal as citizens but not go so far as to say that men and women are equal by nature Rawls and transnational matters - Does not provide anything on the global economy and multinational agreements such that they erode the state’s role - Does not also comment on whether rich nations owe anything to poorer nations in like matters of global environment etc Rawls and the need for care in society? - He sets himself in a social contract type of situation BUT - While he acknowledges the inequality in providing for care does not assume that it is a primary good Hinton Why Rawl’s idea of the original position is significant The 1. Offers a fresh way of thinking about problems of justification and original objectivity in political philosophy position 2. Raises interesting philosophical questions 3. Gained traction Justice as fairness; a form of contractualism that is kantian - Rawls TOJ is meant to explain why we are justified in thinking that justice is so basic by uncovering the foundations of that belief - He wants to find a moral justification of the institutions that comprise a constitutional democracy Basic question: what conditions must a democratic society satisfy in order to count as perfectly just  - Rawls original position assumes that all our beliefs form a systemic whole which would be fully governed by rational standards Basic principles of justice that those in the original position will choose: - Equal basic liberty principle: each person has equal right to basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for others - Second principle - (a) fair equality of opportunity principle - (b) difference principle Crux of original position argument - Appeals to the maximum rule: where you should choose the alternative whose worst outcome is better for you than the worst outcome of any other alternative - VS the average utility principle where goods are distributed to max the average utility of members in society - Places importance of publicity in choosing a conception of justice - Conception of justice should be stable and this is achieved when the society’s members develop a desire to act in accordance to its principles - 2 further features - Self-respect - Each person’s advantage is taken into account as part of a cooperative scheme of mutual benefit Week 4 Eugene Tan - CSR Businesses tend to treat CSR as a way to contribute to making profits - Create shareholder value: investors invest in companies that act according to CSR - Increase revenue base: goodwill with suppliers…motivated employees - Branding - Operations efficiency - Better access to capital - Lower business risk But this approach is very utilitarian - Suggests that companies will not do CSR if it is not profitable Governments treat CSR as a quasi-regulatory tool to achieve public policy and governance objectives like sustainable environment/poverty reduction Asian business and economies need to widen the conception of CSR on: - Global corporate social responsibility: where companies need to be responsible for their actions beyond their boundaries (i.e. including supply chains) - CSR has to address issues arising from doing business like labour rights, corruption, sustainability… Hartman Corporate culture - Shared pattern of beliefs, expectations that guides the decision making of those within an organisation - Hofstede’s 6 dimensions of culture - Power distance index - Individualism vs collectivism - Uncertainty avoidance index - Long term orientation vs short term orientation - Masculinity vs femininity - Indulgent vs restraint - But critics say that his culture divisions are generalisations - Culture can be seen through - Tempo of work - The organisation’s approach to humour - Methods of problem solving - Competitive environment - Incentives - Hierarchical structure - Individual autonomy - Why is culture important? - It shapes habits and our decision making processes - It needs to have ethical ground Compliance vs value based cultures - Compliance based: Adherence to the rules is the primary  responsibility of ethics - Value based: reinforces values not rules; if there are codes of conducts, it usually is based on a statement of values - Value based cultures recognise that where rules do not apply, the firm relies on personal integrity of the workforce in decision making Ethical leadership - Leaders in a corporation have the responsibility to steward the cultivation of values/habits/.. for ethical decision making → this is because stakeholders in an organisation are guided by the tone at the top - Leaders are responsible for being a role model through setting a good example - They do this by - Personal behaviour - Proper allocation of corporate resources to support and promote ethical behaviour - What makes an effective, ethical leader? - Has both elements of utilitarianism and universalism - Utilitarianism: businesses still need profits to sustain adequate working conditions; utilitarianism will consider this - Universalism: ensures that workers are not mistreated to reach a certain end How to build a value-based culture? 1. Firm must determine its mission so the decision makers have a direction a. Mission should be inspiring b. It is an articulation of fundamental principles at the heart of the organisation → Universalist perspective: no decisions should ever breach the underlying mission 2. There must be an articulation of a clear vision regarding the firm’s direction a. Helps stakeholders to understand exactly what an organisation stands for 3. Identify clear steps on how this cultural shift will occur 4. Organisation should have a belief that the culture is possible and achievable Integration of ethical culture - Should not be too incentive based or this might send the message that acting unethically is ok, you just won’t get a bonus for it - Acting according to company values is arguably a basic expectation and should not be rewarded beyond basic compensation - BUT counterargument that incentives is not to reward expected behaviour but to acknowledge actions that go beyond job expectations Whistle blowing  - Exposes and ends unethical activities but is also seen as disloyal - Has negative connotations so some firms have changed the term to “speaking out” → the individual is a reporter instead of a whistleblower - Reporting to external vs internal stakeholders - External carries risk so there is a preference for internal reports first → only if internal mechanisms are effective (i.e. to the firm’s ethics ombudsman) Class slides Friedman vs Stakeholder capitalism Friedman believes that the only social responsibility of businesses is to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase profits as long as there is no deception or fraud - Criticism: Sees businesses as part of society and not apart so the acceptable standards of business behaviour is drawn from society Stakeholder capitalism: - Purpose of a company is to engage all its stakeholders in shared and sustained value creation - A company is more than an economic unit generating wealth - A company is multinational so corporate global citizenship requires companies to improve the state of the world Operation of business ethics - Individual level - Organisational level - Systemic level Week 5 Hartman - 2 perspectives on ethics in workplace relationships Ethics in the 1. Utilitarian: where employers create a culture where employees employment are treated well as a means to produce greater workplace context harmony and productivity 2. Kant: where employees are treated well out of a sense of duties/rights, regardless of utilitarian or self-interested consequences in productivity Parameters of employment relationship - issues Right of due process: Right to be protected against arbitrary use of authority - Employer’s have power over their employees - employees may lose their jobs and livelihood - Basic fairness requires that this power is used justly and this is through due processes in exercising the power - Fairness in areas of promotions, salary and benefits Downsizing - how to be ethical - Decision should be made by a representative group so all stakeholder interests can be considered and we can earn the trust of those who will be impacted - Notice? - Uncertainty and rumours in the workplace upon notice of layoffs - Letting a worker stay for a period of time after notifying them of being let go off may not be the best decision either because it seems like you are getting the most work out of the before their departure - Should identify stakeholders and catalogue the impact of each option on each stakeholder group - Critical for firms to lessen the impact of downsizing as much as possible - Rawls’ theory of distributive justice: Under the veil of ignorance, you don't know how you might end up so you can make the fairest decision Health and safety - Basic principle: workers should be protected from sickness, disease and injury arising out of employment - Healthy and safety are valuable - as a means for attaining other ends and they also have intrinsic value (valuable as ends in themselves) - A workplace is safe if the risks are acceptable - Probability of harm in the work activity is equal or less than the probability of harm in some other common activity - Usually workplaces hire safety experts to determine risk → Objections to this: - Paternalistic - Assumes health and safety as mere preferences that can be traded off against competing values - Assumes equivalency between workplace risks and  other types of risk → daily risks may not be uncontrollable but work risks can be controlled - Disregards the utilitarian concern for the consequences of an unsafe working environment on the social fabric - What if we leave health and safety standards to the market? - Employees can bargain for the risk they undertake against the wages they are to be paid → objections - Labour markets are not perfectly competitive and free → employees do not have the kind of free choices need to optimise satisfaction in the free market theory - Employees rarely possess complete information efficient market require → they are not in a position to freely bargain because they do not know the full risks - Rana plaza case study - Global brands and shoppers were all complicit participants - What is the role of the state, companies, and buyers? - Accord on fire and building safety was signed by compliance was a mere charade Class slides What are ethical issues? - Situations that occur as a result of some moral conflict/uneasiness VS ethical dilemma - Situations where an agent stands under 2 moral requirements, none of which overrides the other Ethical issues in employment - Unethical leadership - Discrimination - Sexual harassment - Improper use of company time and resources - Unsafe working conditions - Exploitations Issues - Downsizing - Fair wages - Health and safety - Child labour - Work that is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous to children - Interferes with their schooling - Whether work can be child labour depends on the child’s age, type and hours of work performed and the conditions under which it was performed Who is responsible? From an international government perspective → Global governance gap thesis - MNCs are active in developing countries but when human rights/labour violations occur, what is their responsibility? - International obligations apply to states to ensure that businesses in their jurisdiction comply with international standards. → but there is no direct legal obligation on MNCs → lack of enforcement of law Week 6 Advertisement - Conception of advertising Chan 1. Form of mass communication 2. Involves information regarding a commercial product 3. Element of choice that the communication brings to the consumers Advertising is ethical when - It is about providing information to willing consumers → facilitates transactions in the marketplace of interest to both consumer and seller - Kant: contributes to consumer’s autonomy - Utilitarianism: makes the market more efficient Ethical issues - How ads affect consumer behaviour and the impact of constant exposure to advertisements - Clients or media that have not been adequately researched Deceptive advertising - Advertisements that do not tell the truth - “Truth” only makes sense in the context of propositions - facts or assertions - If an advertisement make a false claim, it undermines the voluntary character of market transactions and interferes with consumers ability to make rational choices - Deception also covers half truths - Difficulty is that advertisements tend to mix facts, metaphors, exclamatory or interjectory language → perception that is neither real nor unreal - To circumvent this: use the concept of a reasonable man - Levitt’s case for deceptive advertising - Advertisement’s purpose is to influence the audience by creating illusions that promise more than pure functionality → it is like art or poetry - Ads also at least promise functionality so even if some of the claims are false, at least something is true… Irrational persuasion - Persuasion is not manipulation and is permissible - But advertisement critics claim that they irrationally persuade people, denying them their autonomy because - Ads play on human desires for security, acceptance etc to influence consumer choices - Ads invoke powerful visual images rather than written word to bypass rational thought process - Intrudes into everyday life in massive proportions - Morality - Kant: autonomy is fundamental - Utilitarian: the outcome of irrational persuasion may not  be the greatest good for the greatest number - Virtue ethics: Would a virtuous person persuade people to do things that harm them? Or buy things that they do not need? Subliminal advertising, product placement and advertorials - Problematic because it makes people buy product the do not need or desire + act contrary to the consensual nature of transactions - Defenders claim - Ads have no subliminal powers → people are taken in because they want to be taken in - Humans have the capacity to reason → challenges the idea of coercion - Certain products may create adverse impacts on 3Ps → generates externalities even if the contracting parties benefit from the exchange (i.e. tobacco/alcohol) - Advertisers may also disguise the ad as an opinion/editorial comment → conflates the objective of providing information and persuasion Stereotypes and prejudice in advertisements - Are advertisers responsible for stereotypes/prejudice portrayed in ads? - If such stereotypes do exist, then it is already present in the society → unfair to say that the ads create the stereotype - The advertisements convey a message to the correct target audience using the stereotype/prejudice - Danger is that the advertisements continue to strengthen and perpetuate in the minds of the audience the existing negative stereotypes/prejudice Building brand loyalty and culture - The main objective of ads - Brand grows → becomes increasingly indistinct form the culture or lifestyle promoted by advertisers - Helps to differentiate products that are functionally and objectively familiar - Building a brand is not morally objectionable - Except when the product is harmful and brand loyalty reinforces the negative effects - Branding may also create certain promises and engender the expectations by consumers Advertising codes and voluntary compliance - ICC code: based on a voluntary model - Many codes in other countries adopt it with or without modifications Marketing - Like advertising, raises concerns central to autonomy and fairness - Is moral because of the consensual nature  - But fairness of transaction is impacted by availability of appropriate information without which meaningful choice cannot be exercised - Require of information has 2 common maxims - Buyer beware: buyers have the responsibility to judge the quality of goods where seller makes no specific representation - Seller beware: seller has to fully reveal the quality of goods sold - Interaction of ethical principles in marketing - Effects and value of marketing on consumers - Looking at how the marketing practices add value for the marketers themselves Ethical issues in marketing - Product - Manufactures should prevent or minimise harms arising from the product throughout its entire lifecycle - Are sellers morally obliged to market only products with newer tech (assuming that it is more profitable to sell products with old tech than to push newer product sales) - Product safety → especially across different regions - Labelling and dating products; what information should labels contain - Pricing - Creation of monopolies to undermine the free market - Predatory pricing by undercutting competitors - Discount gimmick - Price gouging: Taking advantage of natural disasters and charging exorbitant amounts for basic necessities - Promotion - Time intensive and intrusive direct marketing - Place - Targeted marketing → marketing to specific segments of the market based on a common characteristic shared by the relevant market segment - Marketing to vulnerable consumer populations Online advertisements and consumer privacy - What are the responsibilities of internet service providers who source and track information if the process is fully automated? - Security breaches is a challenged for the protection of privacy rights Consumer protection legislation (non-voluntary compared to codes) - Consumer protection acts Ethical marketing - Marketing strategies that - are geared towards achieving certain social or public interest or benefit - Encourage the purchase of fair trade products  - Cause related marketing - Drawback is that consumers may not be aware of the specific cause they are contributing to and may not be connected in a personal way to the people they supposedly benefit - What is ethical advertising? - Truth fairness and equity in messaging and consumer experience - Honest, accurate and strives for human dignity - Considers the advertising environment that are chosen for placement and examines potential for data bias in analytics Class slides Why do we need advertising? - Effectively distribute and consume goods and services Criticisms - Destroys choice/autonomy - Manipulate actual interests and needs - materialism/consumerism - Utilitarianism vs kant Week 7 Brison - What is hate speech? Hate - Speech that vilifies, harasses, intimidates or incites hatred towards speech an individual or group (on the basis of certain characteristics) - While it is accepted to be harmful, the question is whether it is harmful to the extent that it should be legally restricted Arguments for and against restricting hate speech For Restrictions are necessary to prevent serious harms and to promote equality - Prejudice against minority groups - Maintaining certain status hierarchies - Legitimization of violence - Norm and role compliance: a feeling that you are expected to hate on another group as a member of one group → in-group cohesion Against more likely to achieve such goals through other means - State should compensate victims of hate speech/provide victims with a means of speaking back instead Restricting hate speech might open the door to unacceptable restrictions on speech → Slippery slope argument: - Implicitly acknowledges that the current case is not itself problematic - Presupposes that the case at hand can be described in some way that distinguishes it from the feared future case - Assumes language to be imprecise so the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable speech will keep shifting → reducible to an argument from distrust of government Tolerate speech functions as a safety valve rather than letting people bottle up and let it erupt in more harmful behaviour - BUT expressions of hate speech not necessarily dissipate the racist attitudes expressed by the speaker Defence of free speech - Mill: Restrictions hamper the search for truth BUT this would suppose that everyone is a rational truth seeker - Vulnerable minority members will also be targeted by hate speech Democracy - CItizens in a democracy need access to information to make well informed political decisions - BUT: power is distributed unequally in a democracy with many citizens having no access to press - Assumes that it is fairer to let the market regulate speech  Free speech is constitutive of a broader intrinsically valuable right - Dworkins: Free speech is a universal human right and central to democracy - Marketplace of ideas: free speech contributes to the search for truth Class talk Should free speech be restricted? - Balanced approach → can subscribe to Mill’s harm principle → the question is what does harm mean? - Even if the harm is not immediate, there might be other long term effects Hate speech and social media - Amplification and reach of hate speech - Longevity - Anonymity - Deindividuation because you are in an echo chamber - Inadequate content moderation Solutions - Non legal - Community standards and content moderation - Counter speech…but is this really a valid option - Awareness and literacy programmes - Legal - Criminal or private legal actions against offenders and also the platforms