Ethical And Social Issues In The Everest Simulation

With the many ethical and social issues faced during the Everest simulation, came with many tough decisions that had to be made. As mentioned above, a specific example was the decision I as the leader was faced with in decision set 2. To take the utilitarian approach, which was to keep going and the photographer was to catch up with the group – resulting in the highest number of points for the team. Or the deontological approach which was to wait for the photographer but risk even more members of the group being recued. As stated above, Conway and Gawronski outlined that people immediately experience a negative emotional response to the idea of an individual getting hurt. In the case of the simulation it was leaving the photographer behind

to catch up. However, in the specific situation, there was sufficient time to think over the alternatives and the cognitive response kicked in. It wouldn’t have been wise to risk every other member’s life for the life of just one member, therefore the utilitarian approach was taken. However, Donaldson and Dunfee’s Articles outlines that the deotology approach is only able to provide the decision maker with the same decisions as other decisions makers, given the same environment and as for utilitarianism, it only provides the best outcome for the greater good. With these theories there is no middle, and are very generalised. In an attempt to find a middle which is able to deal with situations significant to cultural patterns of business Donaldson and Dunfee have created a new theory. With this gained knowledge about this theory, it is clear that it could have been used during various decision processes in the simulation.