Giving Voice to Values

The class discussion on giving voice to values touched on many different topics of great interest, not the least of which were the many different systems of values that exist. I have always found myself caught between ethical theories that emphasize intentions and those that emphasize effects, and I truly feel that different situations call for different understandings of right and wrong -- some situations might be best determined by a consideration of intentions, while others must be judged on the ultimate effects of a given action or set of actions. Determining which situation deserves which application of ethics is obviously highly subjective, and this was definitely highlighted in the class discussion. A large number of individual and cultural values were brought up that point out different features of specific cases or derive differing interpretations from an agreed upon set of circumstances to a degree that I found surprising.

As a French native and a member of the Western world that has largely created and maintained the value system in international business for several centuries, the reminder that other value systems and ethical emphases exists in varying cultures is highly valuable. It is easy to dismiss...

In fact, due to certain negative effects of Western trade dominance in the era of globalization, it could easily be argued that certain "non-traditional" ethical systems and values are actually preferable in certain situations to Western values and systems of ethics.
This also touches on another question that was focused on in the class discussion: the ability for different voices to be heard, and for values to be truly understood and acknowledged when they are not part of the mainstream system. Oftentimes, non-traditional values and those that hold them are at a double disadvantage from the get-go as they are both not traditionally a person that is listened to and are not speaking the same "truths" that are held by mainstream society. Even when the physical voices and logical arguments of non-traditional ethicists are heard, it can be difficult to truly assess them fairly given that they are speaking counter to the common mindset and preconceptions that are a part of mainstream ethics.