Moral Reasoning Moral reasoning itself has two essential

Moral Reasoning • Moral reasoning itself has two essential components: – An understanding of what reasonable moral standards require. – Evidence or information concerning whether a particular policy, person, institution, or behavior has the features of these moral standards.

Moral reasoning • Refers to the reasoning process by which human behaviors, institutions, or policies are judged to be in accordance with or in violation of moral standards. Moral reasoning always involves two essential components:

Moral reasoning • An understanding of what reasonable moral standards require, prohibit, value, or condemn. • Evidence or information that shows that a particular person, policy, institution, or behavior has the kinds of features that these moral standards require, prohibit, value, or condemn.

Moral reasoning • To evaluate the adequacy of moral reasoning, ethicists employ three main criteria: – Moral reasoning must be logical. – Factual evidence must be accurate, relevant, and complete. – Moral standards must be consistent.

This consistency requirement can be phrased as follows: • If I judge that a certain person is morally justified (or unjustified) in doing A in circumstance C, then I must accept that it is morally justified (or unjustified) for any other person: – To perform any act relevantly similar to A. – In any circumstances relevantly similar to C.

Arguments For and Against Business Ethics • Some people object to the entire notion that ethical standards should be brought into business organizations. • They make three general objections. – First, they argue that the pursuit of profit in perfectly competitive free markets will, by itself, ensure that the members of a society are served in the most socially beneficial ways.

Arguments For and Against Business Ethics – Second, they claim that employees, as "loyal agents, " are obligated to serve their employers singlemindedly, in whatever ways will advance the employer's self-interest. • Agents should obey “Law of Agency”.

– Third, they say that obeying the law is sufficient for businesses and that business ethics is, essentially, nothing more than obeying the law. However, the law and morality do not always coincide (again, slavery and Nazi Germany are relevant examples).

Arguments For the Ethics • One argument points out that since ethics should govern all human activity, there is no reason to exempt business activity from ethical scrutiny. • Another more developed argument points out that no activity, business included, could be carried out in an ethical vacuum.

• One interesting argument actually claims that ethical considerations are consistent with business activities such as the pursuit of profit. Indeed, the argument claims that ethical companies are more profitable than other companies

• Perhaps the most fascinating argument for bringing ethics into business is the prisoner's dilemma. A prisoners dilemma is a situation in which two parties are each faced with a choice between two options: Either cooperate with the other party or do not cooperate.

• If both parties cooperate, they will both gain some benefit. If both choose not to cooperate, neither gets the benefit. • If one cooperates while the other chooses not to cooperate, the one who cooperates suffers a loss while the one who chooses not to cooperate gains a benefit. Though it may seem a bit stilted, closer examination will reveal that we all face such dilemmas in our everyday lives.