What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of ethical egoism as an ethical philosophy for business managers? (Based on Business Ethics text Chapter 4; tied to course competencies 3 and 4) Ethical egoism is a normative ethical theory that assumes that people have a choice; that is, one is not always psychologically bound to act in one’s self- interest (Civic & Magmata, 2013, p. 47). The idea behind ethical egoism is that the right and moral thing to do is look out for your own self-interest. It does not describe how people behave, rather, it describes how people “ought” to behave (Gang).
While this might offer the egoist short-term satisfaction, it could make his/her life worse in the long run because if everyone acted only in their own self-interests, then a society might develop in which people lived under constant threat Of attack (Gang). However, according to our textbook, an ethical egoist is not always egoistic or a selfish person. A person can act consistently with ethical egoism by treating people well, helping others, respecting their rights, and evidencing concern for their welfare in order to remote his or her own self-interest in the long run (Civic & Magmata, 201 3, p. 3). An example our textbook uses to show an advantage of ethical egoism is that improvements in working conditions for employees or contributions to the community can very well earn the ethical egoists approval. Since it can improve performance by decreasing turnover, improving productivity, and enhance reputation of the firm. Business managers can use such egoistic practices to improve productivity, as it is often argued that business managers ought to act egoistically in order to promote general interest in the Eng term.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
The issue with ethical egoism is that ethical egoists disagree on the type of good one should be seeking (Civic & Magmata, 2013, p. 52). Different people can identify the good to be different things, such as money, knowledge, power, pleasure, excitement, happiness, or self-esteem. In business decision making, the “good” is viewed as money and the self-interest is based on monetary profits (Civic & Magmata, 2013, p. 52). Therefore, business managers might have a problem in foreseeing and acting upon the good. Another disadvantage is the presence of conflict.
When people differ in their desires, ethical egoism does not provide any mechanism for settling their differences, causing conflict to take place. Civic, F. & Magmata, B. (2013). Business Ethics: The Moral Foundation of Effective Leadership, Management, and Entrepreneurship (3rd De). Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions. Gang S. Owe. Advantages and Disadvantages of Ethical Egoism. Retrieved from http://BMW. Owe. Com/ info_8330646_advantages-disadvantages-ethical-egoism. HTML 2. What exactly is “Machiavellian ethics,” and how could it be applied to equines management and entrepreneurship?
Must Machiavellian ethics be applied in order to achieve success in business today? (based on Business Ethics text Chapter 5; tied to course competencies 3 and 4) Niccole Machiavelli focused on “what is” in terms of people’s behavior and how society should be run. Machiavellian major premise is that people are predominately egoistic and selfish, unscrupulous and treacherous, envious and greedy, fearful and cowardly, passionate and irrational, and, above all, short-sighted, gullible, and stupid (Civic & Magmata, 201 3, p. ). He had a very pessimistic view about human nature. He believed that strong power is required to guide and regulate people from destroying themselves (Civic & Magmata, 201 3, p. 64). His virtues consisted of managing others so as to serve one’s advantage, win people over, persuade them that one is devoted to their welfare, and lastly appear more virtuous than one’s rivals. In addition, if all else fails, make oneself feared, even at the risk of being hated.
Machiavelli believed that in order to create your own legacy, one must do things fervently; rebel against the old way of doing things, while keeping what worked. Our textbook mentions that Machiavellian commentary on the manipulation of people, and the orientation and tactics employed by manipulators, are subjects that the aspiring entrepreneur should be motivated to study. Don’t necessarily think that Machiavellian ethics are needed in order to achieve success in business today.
I think strong leadership is needed in the workforce to some extent but Machiavellian ethics go a bit over board. Civic, F. & Magmata, B. (2013). Business Ethics: The Moral Foundation of Effective Leadership, Management, and Entrepreneurship (3rd De). Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions. 3. What are some Of the advantages and disadvantages Of ethical relativism as an ethical philosophy for business managers? Do you agree with the basic “relativism” rationale justifying ethical relativism? Based on Business Ethics text Chapter 6 and Legal Challenges text Chapter 6; tied to course competencies 3 and 4) Ethical relativism is the position that there are no moral absolutes, no moral right and wrongs (Slick). Instead, right and wrong are based on social norms. One advantage of ethical relativism is that it allows for a wide variety of cultures and practices (Slick). It also allows people to adapt ethically as the culture, knowledge, and technology change in society.
The disadvantage of ethical relativism is that truth, right and wrong, and justice are all relative (Slick). Just because a group of people think that something is right does not make it so and slavery is a good example Of this. Our textbook mentions some drawbacks to ethical relativism, such as no comparative moral judgment. Since there is no impartial way of evaluating and deciding among efferent practices and beliefs, one cannot say that any practice or belief is better or worse from a moral perspective than any other (Civic & Magmata, 201 3, p. 4). Another is societal agreement. The norms in one society can very well differ from the norms in effect to another society. So what is right in one society may not be always be the same in another. However, under ethical relativism, what is right for one society is right for that society (Civic & Magmata, 201 3, p. 84). I don’t necessarily agree with this philosophy since it does not allow for the existence of an absolute set of ethics.
It seems that with ethical relativism, right and wrong are not absolute and must be determined in society by a combination of observation, logic, social preferences and patterns, experience, emotions, and “rules” that seem to bring the most benefit (Slick). Agree that there should be a consensus of right and wrong in order for a society to function well and ethical relativism undermines that.