Question 5

Discuss the basic tenets of moral philosophy that should be applied in business
organizations. Answer with respect to the philosophies that you learn. 

Most practitioners, including accountants and lawyers, are involved in business

practice. They are also bound by professional societies ' codes of conduct. Several companies
have already developed and adopted comprehensive codes of conduct through ethics
departments. The ethics of business can therefore be understood as an analysis of ethical
practices, that is, an examination of the nature, creation, management and effectiveness of
code of conduct aimed at directing the activities of people engaged in commercial activities.
This entry does not take this type of business ethics into account. Alternatively, business
ethics is treated as a scholarly subject [ CITATION Mor16 \l 1033 ]. Moral philosophy is the
research, in accordance with professors of philosophy Brooke Noel Moore and Kenneth
Bruder, of moral judgments or the importance put on decisions on what is right or wrong,
good or bad or reasonable and unjust. It is not easy, in particular, in the global marketplace
where concepts of right and wrong mean different things for different cultures to apply moral
theory to business ethics[ CITATION Jar \l 1033 ].
Every information structure has its own values. These are the principles which form
the way we act. Normative Ethics, part of moral philosophy, which includes concepts or
guidelines for deciding whether our acts are right or incorrect. It is how the ideas of
"practice" turn our actions in different ways in Moral Philosophy. Such principles of conduct
set various moral criteria for different moral philosophies with their individual and social
justifications. One is, at least indirectly, in choosing, judging and speaking morally. The
primary purpose of any ethical philosophy is, therefore, to direct or settle on different acts,
such as moral, non-and extraterritorial acts, with a view to the individual and social
perspectives. An individual is involved in society in various capacities, i.e. as a mother, a
daughter, a friend, a resident, a philanthropist, etc. How should he determine, then, morally
whether his acts are right or in specific respects? Normative ethics include concerns about the
right and wrong people, and about the standards for identifying them. Specifically, regulatory
theories aim to decide the right use, interest, good, duty, responsibility, good, fraudulent,
permissive and forbidden terms of action or prescriptive conditions[CITATION Sin15 \l 1033 ].
Ethical theories are broadly classified into Teleological Theories, Deontological
Theories, Justice Theories, and Virtue Theories. From various angles, all these philosophical
philosophies have set forth their moral values. Let us find these ideas separately from each
other with their respective action concepts. Teleological Theories: This theory provides a
correct course of action or principles which increase pleasure over pain as much as any
alternative universe. teleological theories: This implies that an action is moral if it has more
beneficial than adverse consequences. According to teleological theories, therefore, the
nonmoral meaning that is generated is the fundamental or ultimate criterion or norm of that
moral right or wrong or obligatory. The final appeal must be to the proportion of good
produced or to the comparative balance of good with evil produced, either directly or
indirectly. An action, so it is, is right and only if it or its prevailing theory will achieve a great
balance between good and evil. If you don't, an event is incorrect[ CITATION Sin15 \l 1033 ].
 The first moral philosophy, teleological theories are based on the individual's thought,
enjoyment, satisfaction and good. The individual's reflective preferences are therefore the
purpose of the actions. The teleologists rely on the effort of the individual agent to distinguish
between the real thing and what is obvious good and to harmonize conflicting desires,
subsuming under a systematic conception of good. This confirms teleologically the effects of
practice. There the correctness and error of an action is based on the goodness and evil of its
effects. The theory of teleology must first of all be assumed to have positive as well as bad
consequences. If the positive outcomes are greater than the bad consequences, the action is
moral right[ CITATION Phi \l 1033 ]. Teleological theories are divided into three separately
explained heads:
Ethical Egoism: Epicurus, Hobbes and Nietzsche are the believers of this theory. This
idea holds that an individual must always do so to oblige his own interests-if and only when
he inspires a better balance of good than evil for an individual is an act or belief of an action.
In other words, if the consequences are more favourable than undesirable, an act is morally
right. The nature of the satisfaction and the pain it causes for an individual may be compared
to the importance of an action.
Ethical Altruism: Behaviour is morally appropriate When everyone expects the person
to have better outcomes than others. Ethical altruism encourages an individual to abandon
personal projects and devote themselves to the other's cause, in order to be viewed as the
most compassionate path.
Ethical Utilitarianism: This utilitarianism is fundamentally the uppermost overall
ethical for which an act or theory of action is acceptable, if and only if it permits a good
balance over evil at least as high. A behaviour in this principle is moral when the outcome is
more favourable than unfavourable. This theory is an experience or a meaning created by an
action, which implies that one's intention to carry out an action must take all its expected
consequences into account. And the morality of an act holds the balance between good and
bad. The essence of the action itself cannot place a cap on individuals. This theory can be
explained further into two categories as follows:
Act-utilitarianism: The act of the person is morally right if and only when it produces
at least as much joy as any other act that the person may take place[ CITATION WIL18 \l 1033 ].
Rule-utilitarianism: Behaviour is correct because it is in line with a law leading up to
the greater good, or "the rightness or wrongness of a given action depends upon its
correctness[ CITATION WIL18 \l 1033 ].
What makes both categories differ from one another is the consistency of a rule is
calculated in favour of law utilitarian by the number of products it generates when followed.
Act utilitarian, by comparison, consider an act alone in terms of its ramifications. Also, act
utilitarianism believes that action is morally correct in achieving the greater good for the most
people, while ruling utilitarianism believes that the moral correctness of action depends on
the accuracy of the rules which enable it to achieve the greatest good. Actual utilitarianism is
the idea that a law should be violated if it gives more benefit[ CITATION WIL18 \l 1033 ].
Second moral philosophy is the Deontology theory. The scholars claim that action or
theory of action can be ethically right or necessary, even though it does not offer for self-
society and the world the best possible balance between good and evil. These theories seek to
describe the fairness and wrongness of an action with a predetermined standard of conduct.
They are aimed at defining universal values or rules of morality independent of the good and
subject to the application of moral law. The basic concept of morality, like the ten
commandments of the Bible, provides us with the intrinsic right or wrongness of our acts
regardless of their consequences. Deontological theories again believe in moral obligation,
obligation, equity, impartiality and justice on the basis of perspective. Such moral duties and
responsibilities are self-evident and thus do not need to be explained by inherent principles.
The logical faculty of the mind defines the validity and error of an event in these theories.
Within Holmes (1973), solid and weak hypotheses are distinguished. According to him the
rightness of an action can be valued without depending on goodness of moral rightness.
Deontologists therefore rely upon the actions of the community of men, by essential concepts
pursued by an internal faculty of the mind, to harmonize and judge contradictory statements.
Let us explain these contrasting hypotheses as follows separately[ CITATION Sch \l 1033 ].
Divine Command Theory: This theory consecrates the accuracy and error of an action
that is based on the will of God. The advocates of this point of view assert that correctness or
wrongdoing requires God's order or prohibition. In other words, if and only if it is ordered or
prohibited by God, Almighty, an action is right or wrong.
Kant's categorical imperative: the categorical imperative of Kant stresses the role of
reason in moral life, arguing that morality is modelled in the practical way. This dictates that
any move is right and wrong. In any logical mind, Kant defines' consciousness' as an
infallible moral faculty. It is the practical explanation why Kant again maintains that it is the
practical justification for the moral agent to determine the fairness and wrongness of an
action to increase. He states, "A wrong conscience is a chimera," but it is obvious that the
categorical imperative serves as the moral principle. An absolute principle works like an
implicit order, it is incomprehensible[ CITATION Sch \l 1033 ].
Another theory that falls under this is the Rights theory. The theory is based on
positions of justice and rights which regard moral leadership as implying fairness and respect
for individual rights In business ethics the theory of rights lies in the notion that every person
has a right to life and therefore needs to be treated with the highest degree of respect and
dignity. Ciulla (2004), assumes the moral decision would require careful application of moral
values and not the possibility of the outcomes because people could hardly anticipate their
consequences. Morality plays an important role in life, and life should practice their ethical
actions individually in order to achieve their goals without hurting others (Shoemaker, 1999).
The philosophy of rights notes that no other human being should be mistreated by any person
or business purposes.
This stance is focused on ethische best practices where workers should be shielded
from any physical, emotional or psychological damage arising from their job in the sense of
an ethical right approach. Organization and their leadership will also follow the requisite
values of corporate ethics that take human rights into account in their core business
foundations philosophy. In terms of freedoms, privileges, obligations, powers and immunities
given to persons are the four main freedoms [ CITATION Arn10 \l 1033 ] . Privileges involve the
sovereignty and democracy of people to take action against them. Claims provide the right to
be protected from damage or paternality by individuals. For example, an employee should be
free of bullying or corporal punishment. Rights powers are "the right to alter the normative
circumstance of one person"[ CITATION Arn10 \l 1033 ] within the asset of rules.
The third moral philosophy is the Justice theory. The theory is one of the corporate
ethics theories that are critical of the exploitation and oppression of people in companies in
particular. Through leadership and corporate practices, fairness as an ethical approach is
where individuals seek fair treatment through society regardless of ethnicity, ethnic heritage,
educational standing or even social class. They also denounce acts of hurt, favoritism,
discrimination, racism, and unequal pay among employees, which are known as fairness and
ethical business practices. The concepts of the ethical justice approach have developed in
business organizations, and they suggest that individuals, including staff, will obtain fair
treatment if not partly unregulated in a way which seems essential to the current situation
[ CITATION Arn10 \l 1033 ]. This ethical system of organization, in which the basic principles
are Social justice and equal rights, may be justice in the form of distributive justice,
compensatory justice or even compensatory justice. Distributive justice requires fair
distribution between the group or organizational leaders concerned of rewards and burdens.
Last moral philosophy is the Virtue Ethics. Aristotle was the key motivational source
of modern virtue ethics from the 4th century B.C.. In his Nicomachean ethics he insisted that
virtue consists of virtuous or excelling activities for a human being's best life, because it
could be known that there is no meaning in life but the practice of virtue, he could be one of
most revolutionary virtue ethics. This is also the idea that stoics support. The Kantians are
more committed to service. The utilitarian people emphasize the biggest amount of people's
happiness. But the Virtue Ethicists mention the conduct that results from charity's devotion to
its own charisma. But Mcdowell understands virtue as a responsiveness to a obligation
imposed upon one another on the basis of the most essential characteristics of circumstances
in which one is considered to be able to justify behaviour, i.e., the practice of virtue itself is a
crucial component for human beings of good lives[CITATION Lot \l 1033 ].
Virtutis believe that the main objective of any person is ethics in certain tasks or
activities related to the cultivation of virtue or excellence. The Greek "ideal man" is rational
and the theological strength comprising faith, hope, love, reveals Christian ideal of man is
characterized by classical virtues comprised of courage, temperance, judgment and wisdom.
Theoreticians of morality insist that it should be practiced instead of the results of practice.
Theory of virtue calls people for recognition or remorse in behaviour. Lobbying or guilty are
instruments that allow individuals to take responsibility. In view of the consequences of their
actions, the people should control their behaviour. .Praise and blame are tools which make
people more careful in regulating their acts in accordance with their duty, in other words,
their sense of obligation in the future[CITATION Lot \l 1033 ].
The principal muddle of virtuoso thinkers is showing a virtuous life that helps to
engage in happiness and to accomplish what is called the principal goal of any practice. That
Jacob should be put to death and that Socrates and Jesus will die while the wicked prosper.''
The world is pure, according to eudaemonists. Socratic's words "No wrong, either in life or
after death, could happen to a good person." In Jesus words`` But he who endures to the end
will be saved. 'According to Franklin virtues are means to an end[CITATION Lot \l 1033 ].
As for business, although it is not understood and misunderstood by researchers and
its connection with business practice is decided according to its complexities, it is of
considerable value. Digital conduct ethics in organizations believe that people are sincere and
just in their deeds, not based on false motives but on moral acts [ CITATION Gar03 \l 1033 ].
Any human behaviour is less moral and immoral in bad intentions.
Management teams should be moral to avoid interfering with the true sense of the
ethical leadership with their actions and regulations they create. Aristotle once believed that a
human being's primary role as a decent being is thinking and moral thought certainly needs a
pure and sound mind (Fist, 2019).
 To conclude, all four theories of business ethics are important to understanding the
notion of ethical action which in the modern business world continues to generate varying
controversies. Ethical leadership requires unsatisfactory, equal treatment and moral
leadership. But the philosophical rationale that culminated in the development of care theory
is important to remember, most possibly above all the other theories of business ethics.
Many philosophies such as moral law, justice, and rights find their basis in the laws or
legislation, with a few exceptions the principle of morality that tends to be less qualified in
corporate practices. As the philosophy of caring suggests, ethics requires a love for others and
moralism is self-driven, making philosophy more realistic both for the situation of the
Massey Company and its businesses and other firms.
Similar academic literature given by such philosopher may be used to provide
guidance in business ethics practice. However, no one should stand alone in a discipline. It is
because the philosophy offered by one school of thought is not enough or adequate to solve a
multiplicity of moral problems that arise in real life. Most organizations already use
interdisciplinary approaches to produce better results in dealing with ethical problems.
The belief that most business ethicists and political philosophers are in varying
degrees not happy with the way the standard models frame, integrate, and explain regulatory
problems at micro, middle, and macro levels. But there are few comprehensive "progressive"
options at this stage in discipline growth.
To date, a great deal of business ethics theorizing has been developed into one degree
(e.g. micro virtue ethics, intermediate-level stakeholder theories or corporate social
responsibility theories in macro level), concentrating on relatively limited issues. Decades of
studies on the topics of business ethics demonstrate that business ethics have made
considerable strides on a wide variety of issues over the past three decades. Nevertheless, the
discipline itself also lacks a generally accepted systematic theory that fulfils the four
conditions for a thorough, cross-disciplinary approach to economic ethics and adverse
markets.
References
Arnold, D., Audi, R., & Zwolinski, M. (2010). Recent work in ethical theory and its
implications for business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 559-581.
Cuilla, J. (2004). Ethics and leadership effectiveness. The nature of leadership, 302-328.
Fist, I. (2019, February 6). Business Ethics: Utilitarianism, Rights, Justice, Caring, and
Virtue theories. Retrieved from IvyPanda: https://ivypanda.com/essays/business-
ethics-utilitarianism-rights-justice-caring-and-virtue-theories/#ivy-csf-section
Foot, P. (n.d.). Theories of Ethics. In P. Foot, Ch I (p. 9). Oxford University Press.
Gardiner, P. (2003). A virtue ethics approach to moral dilemmas in medicine. Journal of
Medical Ethics, 297-302.
Kenton, W. (2018). Utilitarianism Defined. Retrieved from investopedia:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/utilitarianism.asp
Lewis, J. (n.d.). How to Apply Moral Philosophy to Business Ethics. Retrieved from Chron:
https://smallbusiness.chron.com/apply-moral-philosophy-business-ethics-33340.html
Moriarty, J. (2016). Business Ethics. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-business/
Pradhan, S., & Singh, B. (2015). Principles of Actions in Moral Philosophy. Journal Of
Humanities And Social Science, 30-33.
Scheffler, S. (n.d.). Consequentalism and its Critics. In S. Scheffler, Ch Vii (p. 142). Oxford
University Press.
Shoemaker, D. (1999). Utilitarianism and personal identity. Journal of Value Inquiry, 183-
199.
Slote, Michael, & Roger, C. (n.d.). Virtue Ethics. In M. C. Slote, Ch VI (p. 121). Oxford
University Press.