Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Honesty
Bayard Kip faces an ethical dilemma with respect to the writing off of Dahduh's yacht. The lesson he learns, however, is that honesty in and of itself does not always yield the most perfect result. In Bayard's situation, what happens is that his honesty is essentially turned against him. He had originally believed that his honesty would yield a specific result and was disappointed when the result turned out to be the opposite.
The lesson Bayard learns, then, is the way that honesty can manifest itself in inputs, rather than outputs. Honesty is not an end unto itself. The rational actor, therefore, can only control the honesty and not the result of the honest behavior. In this situation, Bayard benefited greatly from his honesty. This benefit was not the reason Bayard acted honestly, but was instead an unexpected benefit.
The story illustrates that in many cases the ethical dilemma can only be viewed and solved in terms of the inputs. Doing the right thing is important, and is essentially the only component of the dilemma that can be controlled. In many cases, people attempt to resolve ethical dilemmas by evaluating expected outcomes. When the outcomes turn out to be unexpected, however, this does not change the value of the original decision. If the original decision was made ethically, and the outcomes are not intended, this does not invalid that original decision. A decision can only be made with the knowledge at the time. While there is a reasonable expectation of foresight, there is no means by which the decision-maker can have perfect foresight. Thus, Bayard's foresight may have been deficient, but the ethics of his decision were not. His decision afterwards to ignore the outcomes of his decision-making is reasonable. However, he appears to view the rebuilding of his family name as an important outcome of his decision-making. This is a faulty assumption on Bayard's part, which detracts from the lesson and illustrates that he still views dilemmas in terms of their outcomes rather than their inputs.
Ethical Dilemma In the first scenario, the vice president of a beer company has been asked to organize a lobbying effort to reduce the drinking age to 18. From a strictly legal perspective, there is nothing wrong with this request. The company has the legal right to lobby government for legislative changes that it wants to see. Indeed, the Citizens United ruling expands the privilege of free speech in elections to
In such a case, moral code is not the only decision making tool (Harding, 2010). Many things come into play when one is confronted with an ethical dilemma. In this situation, the new officer would not want to go against his older and experienced officers. It would also not to be right to order for food freely when the restaurant is opened purposefully for business. The available choices build
Ethical dilemmas surrounding DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders Ethical dilemmas surrounding Do Not Resuscitate orders In carrying out their duties, health care givers face many ethical issues that sometimes affect their personal lives. These require that they make ethical decisions, which may affect them and their patients, as well. An example of a situation that puts the health care givers into an ethical dilemma is the application of the Do Not Resuscitate,
Ethical Dilemma I once worked as an office assistant at bank. Amongst other things, the office handled investments for clients. This business is fraught with ethical issues. In one situation, there was an employee - a stock broker -- who was pedaling to his clients a company in which he had an interest. This is considered to be unethical, because people who advise on investments are supposed to have a duty
4, para.2). Therefore, the presence of an underlying mental illness that did not render a defendant unable to appreciate that he was committing a crime or compel him to commit it, may still be sufficient to mitigate the crime. Furthermore, a lack of mental ability that does not rise to the level of mental retardation may be introduced to mitigate the crime. Therefore, the forensic psychologist needs to be able
This is an extraordinary ethical dilemma, historically speaking and thus reflected through the novel, because, from a utilitarian point-of-view, the action of allying with the Soviets during the Second World War is just: choosing the lesser of the evils to defeat the greatest evil manifesting itself at that time, the evil one is fighting. On the other hand, given the later implications, the evil force that the Soviet Union came