3 Moral Dillema - ethics PDF

Preview

Summary

ethics...

Description

Whatar edi l emmas ?

After a thorough discussion on the difference between moral from a nonmoral experience, we now proceed to the concrete example of a moral experience; a dilemma Sowhati saMor al Di l emma? Adi l emmai sasi t uat i onwher eaper s oni sf or cedt o c hoosebet weent woormor econfli ct i ngopt i ons ,nei t herof whi chi saccept abl e. Theper sonhasc hoi cest omak et hatwi l l al lhav er esul t s s hedoesnotwant .Forex ampl e,at ownmay orf acesa di l emmaabouthowt opr ot ectandpr eser v eavi r gi nf or es t andatt hesamet i meal l owmi ner sandl ogger sf or economi cdev el opmenti nt het own.I tmustbenot ed, howev er ,t hati faper s oni si nadi fficul tsi t uat i onbuti snot f or cedt ochoosebet weent woormor eopt i ons ,t hent hat per soni snoti nadi l emma. Whendi l emmasi nv ol v ehumanact i onswhi c hhav emor al i mpl i cat i ons ,t heyar ecal l edet hi calormor aldi l emmas . Mor aldi l emmas ,t her ef or e,ar esi t uat i onswher eper sons , whoar ecal l ed“ mor alagent s ”i net hi cs ,ar ef or cedt o c hoosebet weent woormor econfli ct i ngopt i ons ,nei t herof

whi chr esol v est hes i t uat i oni namor al l yaccept abl e manner . Consi dert hef ol l owi ngex ampl e:Li nds ayi sadeepl y r el i gi ousper son;hence,sheconsi der ski l l i nghumans abs ol ut el ywr ong.Unf or t unat el y ,i ti sf oundoutt hatLi nds ay i shavi nganect opi cpr egnanc y.Asi swel lknown,an ect opi cpr egnancyi sat ypeofpr egnanc yt hatoccur s out s i det heut er us ,mos tcommonl yi nt hef al l opi ant ubes. I not herwor ds ,i nect opi cpr egnanc y ,t hef et usdoesnot dev el opi nt heut er us .Now,i ft hi shappens,t he dev el opmentoft hef et uswi l ldefini t el yendangert he mot her .Thus ,i fLi nds aycont i nueswi t hherpr egnancy , t hent her ei sabi gpossi bi l i t yt hatshewi l l di e. Ac cor di ngt oexper t s ,t hebes twayt os av eLi ndsay’ sl i f ei s t oabor tt hef et us ,whi c hnecess ar i l yi mpl i eski l l i ngt he f et us .I fwedonotabor tt hef et us ,t henLi ndsay ,aswel las t hef et us ,wi l ldi e. I nt heabov eex ampl eofamor aldi l emma,Li ndsayi sf aced wi t ht woconfli ct i ngopt i ons ,namel y ,ei t hersher esor t st o abor t i on,whi chwi l lsav eherl i f ebutatt hesamet i me j eopar di z eshermor ali nt egr i t yordoesnotr esor tt o abor t i onbutendanger sherl i f easwel last hef et us . I ndeed,Li ndsayi sf acedwi t hahugemor aldi l emma. Ac cor di ngt oKar enAl l en,t her ear et hr eecondi t i onst hat mus tbepr es entf orsi t uat i onst obeconsi der edmor al di l emmas .

Fi r s t ,t heper s onort heagentofamor alact i oni sobl i ged t omak eadec i si onaboutwhi chcour s eofact i oni sbes t . Her e,t hemor alagentmustchoos et hebes topt i onandact accor di ngl y .I nt hecaseoft heex ampl eofabov e,Li ndsay mayoptt oabor tt hef et usast hebes tcour s eofact i on. Second,t her emus tbedi ffer entcour sesofact i ont o c hoosef r om.Hence,asal r eadypoi nt edoutabov e,t her e mus tbet woormor econfl i ct i ngopt i onst ochoosef r om f or mor aldi l emmast ooccur . Andt hi r d,nomat t erwhatcour seofact i oni st ak en,s ome mor alpr i nci pl esar eal way scompr omi s ed.Thi smeans t hat ,accor di ngt oAl l en,t her ei snoper f ectsol ut i ont ot he pr obl em.Andf ort hi sr eas on,accor di ngt oBenj i emen Labas t i n,i nmor aldi l emmas ,t hemor alagent“ seemsf at ed t ocommi tsomet hi ngwr ongwhi chi mpl i est hatshei s boundt omor al l yf ai lbecausei nonewayoranot hershe wi l lf ai lt odosomet hi ngwhi chsheoughtt odo.I not her wor ds ,bychoosi ngoneoft hepos si bl emor al r equi r ement s ,t heper sonal sof ai l sonot her s . ” TypesofMor al Di l emmas

Ty pesofMor al Di l emmas 1)Epi s t emi candOnt ol ogi calDi l emmas : Epi s t emi cmor al di l emmasi nv ol v esi t uat i ons wher ei nt woormor emor al r equi r ement s c onfl i ctwi t heachot herandt hatt hemor al

agenthar dl yk nowswhi c hoft heconfli c t i ng mor al r equi r ement st ak espr ecedenceov er t heot her .I not herwor ds ,t hemoral agent here does not know which option is morally right or wrong. moder n

days amar i t an Ont ol ogi cal mor aldi l emmas ,ont heot her hand,i nv ol v es i t uat i onswher ei nt woor mor emor al r equi r ement sconfl i ctwi t heach ot her ,y etnei t heroft hesec onfl i ct i ngmor al r equi r ement sov er r i deseac hot her .Thi si s nott os ayt hatt hemor alagentdoesnot k nowwhi c hmor alr equi r ementi ss t r onger

t hant heot her .Thepoi nti st hatneither of the moral requirements is stronger than the other;henc e,t he mor al agentc anhar dl yc hoos ebet weent he c onfl i ct i ngmor al r equi r ement s . 2)Sel f-I mpos edandWor l d-I mpos ed Di l emmas : As el f i mpos edmor al di l emmai scaus edby t hemor al agent ’ swr ongdoi ngs .For ex ampl e,apol i t i cal candi dat e' spr omi se dur i ngel ect i on: Dut er t e' s

pr omi se

AWor l di mpos edmor aldi l emma,ont he ot herhand,meanst hatcer t ai nev ent si nt he wor l dpl ac et heagenti nas i t uat i onofmor al c onfl i ct .Forex ampl e,t heWW I IHol ocaus t . hol ocaus t

pi c t ur e 3)Obl i gat i onandPr ohi bi t i ondi l emmas : Obl i gat i ondi l emmasar es i t uat i onsi nwhi ch mor et hanonef eas i bl eact i oni sobl i gat or y . Pr ohi bi t i ondi l emmasi nv ol v ecas esi nwhi ch al l f eas i bl eac t i onsar ef or bi dden. 4)Si ngl eAgentandMul t i per s on Di l emmas :

I ns i ngl eagentdi l emma,t heagent“ ought , al l t hi ngsconsi der ed,t odoA,ought ,al l t hi ngsc ons i der ed,t odoB,ands hecannot dobot hAandB” .I not herwor ds ,t hemor al agenti sc ompel l edt oactont woormor e equal l yt hes amemor al opt i onsbuts he c annotc hoosebot h.Forex ampl e,t he pr i s onerdi l emmai nt hemovi e,Dar kKni ght .

I nmul t i per sondi l emma,ont heot herhand, “ …t hes i t uat i oni ssuc ht hatoneagent ,P1, oughtt odoA.Asecondagent ,P2,oughtt o doB,andt hougheac hagentc andowhat heoughtt odo,i ti snotposs i bl ebot hf orP1 t odoAandP2t odoB. ”Accor di ngt o Benj i emenLabas t i n,“ t hemul t i per s ondoes noti nas muc hasagent sX,YandZmay pos s i bl yhav ec hosenconfl i ct i ngmor al

c hoi ces–t hati s ,per s onXc hoosesA i ns t eadofBandCandper s onYchoos esB i ns t eadofAandC,s oonands of or t h.The mul t i per s ondi l emmaocc ur si ns i t uat i ons t hati nv ol v es ev er alper s onsl i k eaf ami l y ,an or gani z at i on,oracommuni t ywhoi s ex pec t edt ocomeupwi t hc ons ens ual dec i s i ononamor al i ss ueathand.The mul t i per s ondi l emmar equi r esmor et han c hoos i ngwhati sr i ght ,i tal s oent ai l st hat t heper s onsi nv ol v edr eac hedagener al c ons ens us .I nsuchamanner ,t hemor al obl i gat i ont odowhati sr i ghtbecomesmor e c ompl i cat ed.Ont heonehand,t hei nt egr i t y oft hedeci s i onoughtt obedef endedon mor al gr ounds .Ont heot herhand,t he dec i s i onmus tal sopr ev entt heor gani z at i on f r om br eaki ngapar t ” . e Readt hewhol edoc umenther e-Whatar Mor alDi l emmas ?

Anex ampl eofasi ngl eagentormul t i per s ondi l emmai sf r om t hemov i e,Dar k Kni ght : Lev el sofMor al Di l emma

THREE LEVELS OF MORAL DILEMMAS: 1. ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICAL OR MORAL DILEMMA Asdi scus sed byLamber t o et .al ( 2013) ,an or gani z at i onal et hi cal di l emma r ef er s t o a s i t uat i ont hatcausesanor gani z at i ont or espond negat i v el yorpos i t i v el yt oan et hi cali ssuet hat affect ss t aff,shar ehol der s ,andsoc i et y ,aswel l ascor por at e et hi csand cust omer s.I ti ncl udes al s ot he l eader s'et hi calact i ons i n pr es er vi ng fi nanci alr epor t i ngi nt egr i t y . Bas ed on t he ar t i cl e of Mi c hi gan St at e Uni v er s i t y onl i ne. com ( 2020) and Smal l Bus i nessChr on. com ( 2019) ,t her ear ec ommon et hi cal i ss ues i n t he or gani z at i on suc h as unet hi call eader shi p/ bad l eader shi p behav i or . Al eader of t he or gani zat i on must act wi t h candor ,beanex ampl et ohi ssubor di nat es ,wi t h upr i ght mor al He orshedoesn’ t engage i n abus e of l eader s hi p aut hor i t y , accept i ng i nappr opr i at e gi f t s and ot herr el at ed unet hi cal l eader s hi p.Thef ol l owi ngar eex ampl es :

o

o

o

o

o

Toxi cwor kpl acecul t ur e.Al eaderoft heor gani zat i on mus tf oc usont hedev el opmentofwor kcul t ur e.Hemak es s ur et hathi ss ubor di nat eshav ewor k l i f ebal ance, mot i v at edandhappywor ki ngi nt heor gani zat i on,I fnot t hent heper f or manceandpr oduct i vi t yoft heempl oy ees wi l lbe Di scr i mi nat i onandhar ass ment /Per i lofempl oy ee f av or i t i sm.Al eadermustt r eatf ai r l yhi sorhersubor di nat es andav oi danyf or m ofdi scr i mi nat i onand Unr eal i st i candconfli ct i nggoal s .Al eadermusthav e r eal i st i candv er ycl eargoal ssot hathi sorher s ubor di nat esunder s t andwhatt heor gani zat i oni sgoi ng t hr ough,hence,t heycanwor kt oget hert hor oughl yunt i l t heyr eacht hegoal soft he Useoft heor gani z at i on’ st echnol ogy ,s oci almedi a us e,t echnol ogy ,andpr i v acyconcer ns .I ti set hi calt hatt he t echnol ogyoft heor gani z at i onmustonl yusef ort he or gani z at i on’ st r ansact i onsSoci al medi ausewhi l ei nt he officemustbeav oi dedasmuchasposs i bl es ot hat i mpor t antdeal i ngswi t ht hecl i ent smus tbe Bus i nesst r av el .Ther ear et i mest hatal eaderandan empl oy eear ei noffici albusi nessandi ndoi ngt hat ,t hey hav eperdi em ev er ymeal andmus tuset hef undoft he or gani z at i onappr opr i at el y . 2. INDIVIDUAL MORAL DILEMMA Asment i onedbySmi t h( 2018) ,i ndi vi dual et hi calormor aldi l emmaper t ai nst oasi t uat i on wher ei ndi vi dual sconf r ontwi t hanumberof

f act or ssuchaspeerpr ess ur e,per s onalfinanci al pos i t i on,aneconomi candsoc i alst at uswhi c h mayi nfluenceal li ndi vi dualet hi cals t andar ds . Soc i al i z at i oni spar tofev er yi ndi vi dual ' sl i f e. I ti sj ustaquer yast owhet herani ndi vi dual r emai nsawar eofdoi ngwhati sgoodandwhati s r i ght .Ther ear et i mest hatduet opeerpr essur e, ani ndi v i dualengagesi nacer t ai nsc enar i oi n whi chmaychanget hei rbehavi orandat t i t ude. Fori nst ance,bef or et haty oungpeopl e,Ai sa r esponsi bl eandobedi entc hi l dt ohi spar ent s . Whenhemety oungpeopl eBandy oung peopl eC,y oungpeopl eAt r emendous l y t r ansf or m asahumanbei ng,hi sc har act er s hi f t edt oani r r es pons i bl e,har dheaded,anda t r oubl emak er .Ther easoni st hathi sf r i end y oungpeopl eBandy oungpeopl eCt aughthi m t ot ak ei l l egaldr ugs .Ot her s ,howev er ,ar e affect edbyt hefinanci alst andi ngposi t i on,t he s oci alandeconomi cs t at usofot her st hatev en hei snotcapabl e,f or ci nghi m orhert hatheor s hei satt hesamel ev elast hem,por t r ay st hat heorshebel ongst ot hegr oup,andcal l edt obe associ alcl i mber s .Ahumanbei ngshoul dbear i nmi ndt hatl i v i ngi nt hi swor l di snoteas y .He mus tbest r ongenought ost andst i l l i ndependent l yandnotbei nfluencedby undesi r abl epr es sur es .I ti sal r i ghtt oenj oyl i f eas l ongasaper s onknowshi sboundar i esand

l i mi t at i onsandot her swi l lnotbeaffect edby whatheorshedoesspec i fical l yt heunwant ed act s.Humanbei ngsmus tnotbeconf us ednor ambi guousandputhi ms el forher s el fi na di l emmawher ehedoesn' tknowwhatt odoand dec i det owhati sgoodandwhati sr i ght . 3. STRUCTURAL MORAL DILEMMA Thes t r uct ur almor aldi l emmai st hatsel ect i ng apr opers ys t em ofr esponsi bi l i t i esand r el at i onshi ps ,whi chi sacont i nui nguni v er sal c hal l enge Ther ear efiv econcept si nt hes t r uct ur almor al di l emmat oconsi dernamel y : 

Di ffer ent i at i onv s .I nt egr at i on Theconfli ctbet weent hedi st r i but i on of j obs and t he or gani zat i on of numer ous act i vi t i esgener at esac l assi cdi l emma.The mor ecompl i cat edat as kst r uct ur e,t hemor e di fficul ti ti st os ust ai n a cent er ed,t i ght l y coupl ed or gani z at i on. When compl ex i t y gr ows , t he company needs mor e compl i cat ed and expensi v e management t echni ques . Laws , r egul at i ons , and di r ect i v es need t o be bal anced by l at er al appr oac hes .



Gapv sOv er l ap

Whent hemai nt ask sar enotexpl i ci t l ydefi ned,t hecr i t i cal j obwi l lsl i pt hr oughgaps .I nas i mi l armanner ,f unct i ons andact i vi t i escanov er l ap,causi ngconfli ct ,was t i ngt i me, anduni nt endeddupl i cat i onofr esponsi bi l i t i es . 



o

LackofCl ar i t yvs .LackofCr eat i vi t y When empl oy ees ar e notc l earabout whatt hey ar e expect ed t o do,t hey of t en adapt t hei rt as ks t o per sonal i nt er est s i ns t eadofs y st emwi degoal st hatof t enl ead t opr obl ems .Yetwhenpeopl e' sdut i esar e ov er defined, t hey compl y wi t h t hei r pos i t i onsandpr ocedur esi nabur eauc r at i c manner . They spec i fical l y f ol l ow j ob r equi r ement sast ohow mucht heser v i ceor pr oductf ai l s . Ex ces si v eAut onomyvs .Ex cessi v eI nt er dependence When i ndi vi dual s or gr oups ar et oo i ndependent ,t heyar e al way si sol at ed.On t he ot her hand, i f t he uni t s and r esponsi bi l i t i es ar et oo c l osel y connect ed, peopl e ar e abs ent mi nded f r om wor k and wast et i meorex cess i v ecoor di nat i on. Bas ed on t he di scus si on abov e, t o av oi d s t r uct ur al mor al di l emmat henf ol l owi ngchar act er i st i csmust bemai nt ai ned: Mus thav ewel l di st r i but edj obsandt hel aws ,pol i ci es , r ul es ,andr egul at i onsmustbebal ancedt hr oughl at er al

o

o

o

Mus thav eani mpl i c i t l ydefi nedj obdescr i pt i on,r ol es , anddut i est oev adef r om gapsandov er l aps . Mus thav eac l ear c utexpect at i onoft het asksi na wi der angeofgoal s Mus thav eawel l bal ancedi nt er dependenceand coor di nat i on. Deal i ngwi t hMor alDi l emma

PLEASEWATCHI NTENSEL YONTHE VI DEO BELOW andcont empl at eons t eps i ndeal i ngwi t hmor al di l emmaanddec i s i on maki ng.Theonegi vi nghermagi s t er i al l ec t ur ei sas eni orphi l osophypr of es s orDr . heAt eneoDe Ant onet t ePal maAngel esoft Mani l aUni v er si t y ....