Ethical standards in business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Ethical standards in business - Essay Example 1987). Thus any virtuous manager aught to be particularly conscious about the validity and credibility of one's ethical affiliations and must ensure that the organization being managed and run by him/her abides by the time tested and authentic standards of integrity and propriety. It often gets difficult for the managers operating in the contemporary organizations to accurately identify the ethical standards, considering the deluge of ethical philosophies circulating in the academic and intellectual spheres. In the given context, it will be highly relevant to consider the opinions pertaining to ethics furnished by various schools of philosophy, which will go a long way in understanding the dilemma faced by the conscientious managers pertaining to the identification of appropriate ethical standards in a given situation. As per the theory of ethical relativism, there exist no universal norms pertaining to what is right or wrong (Ethical Relativism 2008). This gives every individual a free hand in deciding what is right or wrong as per one's discretion and understanding. ... As per the theory of ethical relativism, there exist no universal norms pertaining to what is right or wrong (Ethical Relativism 2008). This gives every individual a free hand in deciding what is right or wrong as per one's discretion and understanding. Ethical relativism holds that the meaning of 'right' and 'wrong' mostly depends on a society's dominant moral perceptions and thus the ethical standards can never be universal and may vary from place to place and from time to time. The confusion pertaining to ethics and in particular the business ethics gets further aggravated when one takes into consideration the consequentialist theories that tend to identify if an action is ethical or unethical on the basis of its final consequences. Utilitarianism is one such consequentialist theory that holds that any action is to be labelled as being truly ethical only if it succeeds in doing the "greatest good to the greatest number of people" (Ethics Matters 2006). As per this theory, an action aught to be considered to be ethical if the net happiness produced by it exceeds the unhappiness associated with it. Thus if any organization decides to build a dam to assuage the water shortages being faced by a state, utilitarianism will consider it to be ethical, even if it involves uprooting and displacing some historical monument situated in the vicinity of such a project. In contrast, the nonconsequentialist theories of ethics like Kantianism and the social contract theory totally negate the individual or group preferences in the overall process of judging the credibility of ethical or unethical actions and give predominance to the fundamental rules and principles cherished by the

Textual Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 2

Textual Analysis - Essay Example For him, group absolution means the dominance of the group influence over individual will. Grossman effectively convinces the audience through pathos and logos that people can kill another person because of their group bonds that dissolve their accountability and promote their anonymity, although he commits the fallacies of false analogy, biased sample, and confusing cause and effect, when he fails to expand his sampling and to identify other probable motivations and conditions for killing. Grossman effectively convinces the audience through pathos that it takes emotional bonding to do something as hard as killing another human being, as well as being killed. He uses different emotional examples to support his claim. For instance, he mentions Dinter who explains that the â€Å"integration of the individual in the group† can be so deep that when the group is destroyed or defeated, individuals either fall to depression or commit suicide (Grossman 149-150). This example is emotio nally charged because it describes how people give up their lives when their groups falter. Furthermore, Grossman highlights the emotional connections involved in group bonding that can overpass the will of survival. He cites the account of a veteran U.S. Marines Corp. Gwynne Dyer, who underlines the role of â€Å"peer pressure† in combat, while Ardant du Picq calls it â€Å"mutual surveillance† (Grossman 150). He mentions these people who believe that groups form emotional connections, which make them extremely aware of and sensitive to one another’s opinions and actions. In addition, Grossman uses examples of emotional value to stress the association between emotional group bonds and individual action. He narrates the action of Audie Murphy as a form of gallantry: â€Å"[Murphy] won the Medal of Honor by single-handedly taking on a German infantry company† (Grossman 155). The word â€Å"single-handedly† suggests that, for Grossman, what Murphy di d is not stupid, but rather admirable. Grossman extends this admiration by quoting something deeply emotional from Murphy, who said that he attacked the Germans against all odds because â€Å"they were killing [his] friends† (Grossman 155). Murphy is illustrated as a selfless, devoted comrade, an emotional tactic that depicts how emotions surpass rationality in the context of heroic acts. Grossman, hence, clearly articulates through the testimonies of others that killing is a group business with strong emotional attachment, and not a product of individual will alone. While using pathos, Grossman also employs logos to explain how the group shapes individual combat behavior. He uses analogy to describe the parallelism between animal and human group behavior. He narrates the result of the 1972 research of Kruck, who learned that some animals slaughter prey that are more than necessary for their consumption because of group behavior (Grossman 151). Grossman believes that the same analogy applies to people in groups, where they think and act like a herd, instead of as separate individuals. He adds the explanation of Shalit, which he believes is important to corroborate his analogy. Shalit believes that â€Å"senseless violence in the animal world† is similar to â€Å"violence in the human domain,† and in both cases, groups are the ones who conduct violent acts, not individuals (Grossman 151). Senseless violence cannot be performed by one individual in normal cases, but groups can