Volkswagen is a company that’s part of the world’s largest automaker group called the “Volkswagen Group”. Recently, it was discovered that for the past several years the company had been cheating on its emission inspections on their diesel power car. The company installed a computer software in the car that reported emissions much less than what the car actually produced. It was found that these cars emitted 40 times more nitrogen oxide pollutants in the environment than what the United States regulations allow. These levels of pollutants have the potential to cause many respiratory problems and other health concerns. This case resulted in Volkswagen agreeing to pay $15.3 billion dollars to its customers and regulations. The company’s engineer …show more content…
His theory suggests that categorical imperatives are what decides individual’s moral duties. Categorical imperatives differ from hypothetical imperatives in a way where in hypothetical, a person has a choice to follow a command and involves “if”, while categorical requires a person to follow a command unreservedly and involves “must”. An example of hypothetical imperative would be “you should drink your water”, in this case a person does not have to drink his water if he is not thirsty. An example of categorical imperative would be “you must not cheat on your test”, here the person must follow the command even if it results in poor test grade because it’s the morally right thing to do. Kant believes in notion of “good will” to determine the morality of one’s actions. He believes that a person must act in good will, where their action is based on good motive, that does not involve self-interest or includes personal gain. He believes that actions that are solely performed in self-interest or as “show off” are not praiseworthy. Kant’s theory requires a person to always do the right thing and never lie because it’s their …show more content…
Liang and Volkswagen actions were not morally correct according to both theories. As Vermont’s attorney general William Sorrell said “This was not a mistake. This was not a ‘whoops’ situation, This was intentional fraud on a massive scale.”. Mr. Liang and his team could not come up with a solution to meet United States’ stricter emission regulations, they deliberately decided to force the car through production by installing a software that basically deceived the regulators. This form of action is deception and since deception is a form of lie, their actions violate moral law of both theories. According to Kant, it is never ok lie. Their actions are not only causing harm to people that bought the car, but it also negatively affects the people around the world that live in the environment polluted by their cars. Their actions were solely based on self-interest to save money by deciding to not change engine’s design. It violates rule utilitarianism theory because the negative impact on the customers and other people in the world outweighs the benefits it produced for the
Kant argued that the Categorical Imperative (CI) was the test for morally permissible actions. The CI states: I must act in such a way that I can will that my maxim should become a universal law. Maxims which fail to pass the CI do so because they lead to a contradiction or impossibility. Kant believes this imperative stems from the rationality of the will itself, and thus it is necessary regardless of the particular ends of an individual; the CI is an innate constituent of being a rational individual. As a result, failure ...
Kant’s argues that his Categorical Imperative (CI) or, more properly, his multiple versions of the CI are universal in the sense that they apply to everyone at all times. If the CI actually is universal in this sense, it fulfills one of the major traits necessary for a moral principle (Pojman 7). The vagueness of the CI, however, makes its universalizability hard to assess. To simplify the issue, this paper will examine Kant’s response to Benjamin Constant’s objections to telling a murderer the truth. That examination will expose how the CI falls short of its claim as a universal principle through inevitable contradiction and, working from Kant’s own strategy of consequence-based reasoning,
Overall Kant’s concepts of ‘The Good Will’ and ‘The Categorical Imperative’ can be applied to any situation. His ideas of moral law, good will, duty, maxims, and universal law all intertwine to support his belief. As a whole his concept enables the Kingdom of Ends, which is the desired result of the morality of humanity. Everyone is to treat everyone based upon true good will actions instead of personal gains, this way no one gets used. In all Kant trusts if this is achieved there will be universal peace across humanity.
Ethical dilemmas have long been issues that have plagued all of mankind for generations. Since the beginning, the majority of humanity has struggled to do what is right when the answer wasn’t clear. Sometimes, however, the answer is not as difficult to realize, but is much more difficult to accept. In the case of the Gee-Whiz Mark 2 (GWM2), the dilemma that faces its respective company is whether or not the units that are defective should be exported to countries that have no enforceable rules to punish the marketing of said defective units. If the company does not do so and instead decides to scrap the units, there will be a loss of profit. For the company though, the answer is clear; though it may be challenging for its leaders to accept,
1. Kants theory says something about what makes a good person. his theory evaluates people, not their actions. if a persons actions are right or wrong, morally worthy or lacks
Companies that ignore the safety of their consumers in order to push a product to meet its deadline while saving some money are acting immorally. Ford knew their new automobile, the Pinto, had serious consequences to human welfare, yet ignored it and sold the product as is anyway. The Pinto did not meet the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s proposed standard for rear-impact collisions and failed every crash-test. This posed a serious safety concern considering that the Pinto represented a serious fire hazard when struck from the rear; even at low speed collisions. Even with this knowledge, Ford decided to push the product as is and ultimately ended up harming many people. Therefore, Ford acted immorally.
The Volkswagen emissions scandal is a series of choices made by the company and the people employed by Volkswagen to install a "cheat" button to alter the amount of emissions produced only under testing situations. Ordinarily, all vehicles on the road that run off of gasoline have a set about of CO2 and other harmful emissions produced by the burning of gasoline. Violation of these rules can result in fines and recalls. Due to an increased attention on car companies to fight global warming and air pollution a number of emissions have lowered in the over the year for tighter regulation on the amount of CO2 produced. Consequently, this reduction in the amount of CO2 produced is the source of the scandal. This change may come across as minor,
Kant 's moral theory focuses on the intention of the action, rather than any consequence attached to such action. According to Kant, an individual 's will is what animates the individual 's body, while the duty is the obedience to a moral law. An individual 's will is considered to be strong when it is aligned with duty, even if the consequences harm that individual. For example, a student can fail a test instead of cheating since he or she believes that cheating is wrong. "You should not cheat" is an example of a maxim, a subjective principle that governs action. In order for a maxim to be morally right, it must be a categorical imperative, taken from an individual to a universal scale. In other words, is it rationally possible...
The theories talked about by Kant and Mill deal with the moral qualities of choices or actions. Although they are very different, none of the theories shows concern in the ethics on what really constitutes a good human being. However, Kant’s theory is much deontological. This means that it locates the moral worth with an action within the action itself. Therefore, the main concern is not in the consequences associated with the specific action. On a more specific note, Kant’s point of view is that it is possible to have one duty or rule, which can be categorized or characterized as being the categorical imperative. He arrived at three different formulations pertaining to this imperative (Kant & Gregory, 1998).
Kant theory is saying that everyone must do things for the right reasons. According to Deontological ethics theory, an action is considered favourable sometimes because of some good aspect of action in itself without considering its good result from the action. This theory is much based upon the one’s morals and values which expresses the “sake of duty” and virtue. Deontology tells us to be fair and not to take advantage of others while teleology tells about doing whatever we want and it gives us a result that is good to us. [17]
In Kant’s book, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant talks about the three formulations of the categorical imperative. By these formulations, he describes his idea of organizing the moral principle for all rational beings. Kant also talks about the principles of humanity, rational ends, and the “realm of ends” which are constituted by the autonomous freedom of rational beings.
An act that has moral value when the will is perfectly aligned with duty can best summarize Kant’s theory. Kant believes the constraining of all rational people will be by the demand of duty which is the basis of their rationale. Duty is to have obedience to the moral law and act accordingly, regardless of the consequences the actions will produce. The Kantian philosophy also defines that morality is based on the purity of the will and not on the results of an action. Kant believes a person’s will can be trained and developed to overcome one’s inclinations, as well as animate our physical actions.
The universal law formula of the categorical imperative ("the CI") is an unconditional moral law stating that one should “act only on that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” A maxim is the motivating principle or reason for one’s actions. A moral act is an act by which its maxim can become universal law that would apply to all rational creatures. As a universal law, all rational creatures must act according to this maxim. The CI requires one to imagine a world where the maxim one wishes to act by becomes a universal law, in which all people must act according to this maxim. If one wills this maxim to become universal law that all rational creatures must follow, but there is a contradiction in conception or will, than this maxim cannot become universal law, and thus, the act is not morally permissible. A contradiction in conception occurs when by willing one’s maxim to become universal law, one is imagining a logically impossible world, for there is a contradiction in the very idea of every rational creature acting on this maxim. In contrast, a contradiction in will does not yield a logically impossible world, but there is a contradiction in willing what it is one proposes to do and in wanting the maxim to become universal law.
Last Sunday, the company’s then CEO, Martin Winterkorn, issued a brief statement declaring that the Board of Management at Volkswagen AG “takes these findings very seriously.” The findings revealed that the automaker used “defeat devices” to fool emissions testing, effectively concealing the reality that certain cars spew emissions some 10 to 40 times the legal limit.
Kant's Categorical Imperative Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted, regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant, who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “ The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willingness, i.e., it is good of itself”.