Philosophy essay
1) What is the “Do No Harm” principle and how is it used in determining Safety versus Acceptable Risk? What is the difference between Corporate Liability and Strict Liability? What are the ways in which the “Do No Harm” principle can be used in the ethical amelioration of pollution?
The “Do No Harm” principle serves as a guide for many business ethical decisions as it is one of the key principles of business ethics. The “Do No Harm” principle ensures ethical professionalism in business environment. It has been found that this principle lies in the basis of biomedical science as it was developed from Hippocrates’ ethical approach: “First, do not harm”. The “Do No Harm” principle is often interpreted as the non-maleficence principle, accord to which people should never do harm to others. Human morality is based on this principle. Today many corporations place emphasis on the role of the “Do No Harm” principle in everyday business practices, providing employees with ethical obligation to never do harm to others (e.g. the general public, business partners and staff members). The “Do No Harm” principle can be applied to business relationships, interpersonal relationships, as well as to finding the proper solutions to various environmental challenges and health-related issues (e.g. transmission of the HIV virus). In fact, this principle is often used to determine Safety versus Acceptable Risk. The “Do No Harm” principle requires improving working conditions in order to prevent employees from any hazards that can cause serious damage to human health. Safety risk stands for various kinds of risks associated with health-related hazards. Acceptable risk can be defined as the risk that can be taken as it is, and the level of this type of risk should be lowered to the acceptable level. De George argues that “some jobs are inherently dangerous, and with these, the general rules of determining acceptable risk come into play” (280). The “Do No Harm” principle is used to identify both safety risks and acceptable risks as it is focused on safety protection and reduction in the amount of risk. Generally speaking, the “Do No Harm” principle requires the use of the proper skills, abilities and knowledge to guarantee safety in the workplace and the general environment. Employees should be aware of a wide range of risks they encounter in the working setting or in the environment.
There are certain differences between Corporate Liability and Strict Liability. Corporate Liability and Strict Liability require the application of the proper ethical and moral principles to control the appropriateness of the actions of individuals. De George believes that “liability for actions means that one can rightly be made to pay for the adverse effects of one’s actions”(104). Corporate Liability stands for the type of liability, which can be identified at the corporate level. Corporate Liability involves the obligation of employees to prevent corporate malfeasance. Besides, Corporate Liability refers to a wide range of liability risks, which should be taken into consideration by shareholders to provide effective control over the actions of individuals. However, Strict Liability is based on more strict types of obligations, including the individuals’ responsibility for some harmful action regardless of their fault. Richard De George gives a clear definition o the term “strict liability”: “the doctrine of strict liability does not assess blame, and is different from finding a company negligent, or culpable of not taking sufficient care in producing its products, or of failing to correct defects it knows about” (278). Strict Liability places emphasis on the significance of regulation of the individuals’ actions, without imposing blame for these harmful actions.
There are certain ways in which the “Do No Harm” principle can be used in the ethical amelioration of pollution. As the “Do No Harm” is considered to be the moral principle, it can be applied to ethical amelioration of pollution. De George argues that this principle stands for the “general obligation binding on individuals and corporations alike”(193). It is possible to prevent pollution by means of the proper strategies based on the “Do No Harm” principle. In fact, environmental problems are caused by a wide range of factors, including technological problems and ethical concerns. Corporations are focused on the use of the appropriate resources to support the ethical amelioration of pollution through the reduction of various negative effects on the environment and the general public. The “Do No Harm” principle deals with a wide range of environmental concerns, including serious challenges with hazardous wastes, water pollution, air pollution, increased sound levels, and some problems with wildlife and habitat preservation. The “Do No Harm” principle highlights the necessity to use effective technologies aimed at promoting ethical amelioration of pollution.
2) Please explain the different kinds of whistle blowing. Provide at least one argument for why whistle blowing is morally permissible, and not morally permissible. Please explain under what circumstances is whistle blowing is not only morally permissible, but also, morally required.
The different kinds of whistle blowing can be explained by the theory of whistle blowing developed by Richard De George. It has been found that various circumstances affect the appropriateness of whistle blowing. In other words, whistle blowing depends on the situation. Whistle blowing is based on employees’ responsibilities to prevent harmful behaviors, actions or policies that violate laws. Actually, Richard De George’s theory of whistle blowing helps to better understand the appropriateness of whistle blowing and its effects on the whistle blower and the company. Richard De George argues that there are three kinds of whistleblowing morally prohibited whistle blowing, morally permitted whistle blowing and morally required whistle blowing. In fact, whistle blowing stands for the employee’s obligation or duty to respond to harmful actions, preventing the company from doing harm to the general public. According to De George, three kinds of whistle blowing have obvious differences that are connected with the level of the employee’s morale and the circumstances. Whistle blowing is morally permitted provided an employee is willing to reveal harmful actions caused by the company to the general public. These harmful actions can be defined as illegal actions if the established laws are violated. In most cases, whistle blowing is focused not only on morale, but also on human duty to prevent harm. According to De George, there several conditions, highlighting the appropriateness of morally permissible whistle blowing practices:
- if harmful action toward others is caused by the company’s products, policies or decisions, affecting the general public;
- if an employee has reported his/her concerns concerning harmful actions to his/her supervisor(s);
- if a whistle blower is “getting no satisfaction from their immediate supervisors” (300).
Actually, whistle blowing can be viewed as morally permissible if the company’s actions, decisions, products or services do serious harm to the general public. A whistle blower’s decision is based on moral obligation to blow the whistle and to stop harmful actions. The act of whistle blowing in this case is justifiable because an employee who blows a whistle is not supported by his/her supervisors. This fact means that the internal processes in the company are confidential and illegal. Thus, a whistle blower makes a decision to prevent corruption in the company. Indisputably, in this case, the whistle blower’s actions may destroy the company’s image on the competitive market through adverse publicity.
Whistle blowing is not morally permissible if a whistle blower does not want to damage the company’s reputation and the company’s harm is not serious.
Whistle blowing is not only morally permissible, but also, morally required if a whistle blower has found some interesting facts, documentation or evidence that will help to convince the public of the negative effects of the company’s policies, products or actions. According to De George, “even with some documentation and evidence, a potential whistle blower may not be taken seriously, or may not be able to get the media or government agency to take any action” (311). This fact means is if a whistle blower has got some important confidential information, it can be used to prevent harm. As a matter of fact, two conditions should be added to defined morally permissible whistle blowing: “the employee must have good reasons to believe that by going public the necessary changes will be brought about”(De George 311).
Thus, De George provide strong arguments that help to identify the appropriateness of whistle blowing and find difference between three kinds of whistle blowing. The key principles of business ethics should be applied to the assessment of the act of whistle blowing.
3) How can one argue that there is a right to employment (in answering this question you must explain how one may have a) a right to work, b) a right to life, and c) a right to respect -not necessarily in that order)? How can one argue for a right to a just wage?
One can argue that there is a right to employment that can be regarded as a fundamental human right. The right to employment is not only one of the fundamental human rights, mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but it is also a basic social right. All citizens who have a desire to work should be given the right to employment. Governments are responsible for providing the right to employment to all citizens of the country. The opportunities to be employed should be equal. In addition, the right to employment is closely connected with other important human rights mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including a right to work, a right to life, and a right to respect. These human rights are interrelated as these rights are regarded as the fundamental human rights. It is known that employment is one of the major requirements of the U.S. legislation. This fact means that all citizens should be employed. This requirement refers not only to the United States, but also to other countries. It is very important to mention that employment and labor legislation provides a set of comprehensive laws, rules and regulations that refer to various employment-related issues, e.g. hiring, selection and firing procedures, payments, benefits, etc. Generally speaking, employment is part of social and economic growth of the nation, as it deals with various problems caused by poverty. According to De George, “the right to work is equivalent to the right to employment for those able, willing and desiring to work and unable to engage in productive work if not employed” (425).
The right to employment and the right to work have very much in common. The right to work guarantees economic stability of the nation. Governments are interested in providing the proper opportunities for individuals who are employed, including training, coaching, mentoring, as well as safety working conditions. The right to work guarantees massive opportunities to support families. Besides, the right to work is linked to other human rights, including the right to life and the right to respect. The right to life is given to any individual because it is the most fundamental and universal human right, which should be protected by law. Legislation guarantees adequate working conditions, which do not pose threats to human life. Although employment may cause various threats to human life, legislation provides specific employment laws to guarantee safety environment. In addition, individuals have the right to respect, which is linked to the right to employment. Employees require respect for their work. The right to respect is a human right because it is focused on promoting employment opportunities.
Furthermore, one can argue for a right to a just wage, which is also linked to the right of employment. The right to a just wage is also closely connected the right to work because an individual receives a just wage for the work he/she has done well. A just wage stands for the wage that allows providing support to one’s family. In general, the justice of a wage should be taken into consideration by employers. The inequality in wages contributes to the growth of discrimination. Governments are responsible for promotion of a just wage. The right to a just wage is crucial to business development as it provides motivation and promotes job satisfaction.
Do you like this essay?
Our writers can write a paper like this for you!
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...