More handpicked essays just for you.
Importants of communication ethics
Importants of communication ethics
Explain the basics of ethical communication
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Fairness
An example of a previous work experience where I had to exhibit fairness was while coaching a senior high girl’s soccer team for The Study School in Montreal, Quebec. I was put into a position where the most talented and high scoring player on the team missed a practice before a playoff game. Team rules were agreed upon and a commitment contract was signed by every player at the beginning of the season. One of these commitment rules was that all players were expected to attend all practices unless a valid excused absence and signed note was presented otherwise the player would be benched for the next game. Excused absences were considered medical appointments or academic meetings. These team rules were in place to ensure commitment and fairness amongst the players. As well, it was an expectation that all players who attended practice, no matter their skill level, were given the opportunity to play.
My action, after the player missed practice, was finding out her reasons and whether it was an excused absence. After determining that her lack of presence was for frivolous reasons, I implemented the agreed upon discipline and the player was required to attend the playoff game but would sit the bench for its entirety. Despite the fact that the benching this particular player would impact our chances of progressing past the playoff game, it was more important to maintain consistency and equitable treatment of all players. The outcome of this decision resulted in our team losing the playoff game, however, the player learned a valuable lesson of commitment and fairness and that even though she was talented, she was not exempt from the rules to which everyone else had to adhere. As well, the team learned that the commitment ...
... middle of paper ...
...as difficult to endure when attempting to bring the car in for servicing. Even though it took a year to come to completion and it probably would have been easier to drop the case, it was more important that the dealership correct their unethical behaviour and take responsibility for their actions, and that future consumers did not endure the unfortunate experience that I had. After my persistence, we recently were able to meet with the owner of the franchise in an attempt to resolve our issues. Upon explaining the events that unfolded previously, we were able to reach a mediated result. A conclusion was ultimately attained where both parties parted with a mutual understanding and both sides were better for it. This experience has taught me that even if it is a daunting and difficult task, it is ultimately better to follow the guidelines of appropriate ethics.
There have been several famous legal cases where an individual commits a crime decades ago before it was revealed. The question here is whether the person who committed the crime long ago should still be punished even though he/she has been clean ever since the wrongdoing. Some people would say that it depends on the severity of the crime; some would say you should pay for your crime no matter what you have committed. The matter of whether a person should be punished for what he/she has done long time ago arises in the Law and Order episode “White Rabbit”. In this episode, Susan Forest was found twenty-three years after she took part in a robbery intended as a protest against the Vietnam War. During the robbery, a policeman was killed and the case here is whether Susan should be punished for a crime she participated long time ago. According to rule and idea of Categorical Imperative given by Immanuel Kant in his work Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Susan should be sentenced for the crime she did no matter how long ago it happened or how upstanding of a member she is in the society.
Ensuring equality among the people promotes fairness and reduces conflict and jealousy. By treating everyone equally we maintain our respect and are able to work together better. The rule we create treats everyone the same and does not provide any special treatment to any specific person. As long as everyone does what is required of them they will obtain what is rightfully due to them.
Review of “Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character” by Rachana Kamtekatar
When we consider the case of the Ford Pinto, and its relative controversy, through the varied scope of ethical viewpoints, the results might surprise us. From a personal standpoint, as a consumer, the idea of selling a vehicle to the masses with such a potentially devastating flaw is completely unethical. When we consider the case from other directions and other ethical viewpoints, however, it makes it clear that often ethics are a matter of perspective and philosophy. It’s also clear that there are cases where more information will muddy the waters, rather than clear them.
The word “Ethics” has its root in the Greek word ‘ethos’, which means character, spirit and attitude of a group of people or culture. Ethics is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as: a system of moral principles, by which human actions may be judged good or bad or right or wrong, and the rules of conduct recognized in respect of a particular class of human actions.
Consequentialism and deontology are two different theories concerning with morality. Consequentialism believes in the concept of the end justifies the means. On the other hand, deontology does not believe in the concept of the ends justifies the means. It believes that right actions are defined by duty. Deontology is the opposite of consequentialism when it comes to moral ethics, making it the better approach.
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the moral principles and values that govern our behavior as human beings. It is important in the human experience that we are able to grasp the idea of our own ethical code in order to become the most sensible human beings. But in that process, can ethics be taught to us? Or later in a person’s life, can he or she teach ethics the way they learned it? It is a unique and challenging concept because it is difficult to attempt to answer that question objectively because everybody has his or her own sense of morality. And at the same time, another person could have a completely different set of morals. Depending on the state of the person’s life and how they have morally developed vary from one human
Human beings are confronted with numerous issues throughout his or her lifetime that would require him or her to examine the best action to take to avoid the damaging consequences. In most cases, individuals restrain his or her action to take into consideration the consequences that may lead to the right or wrong behavior. One’s ethical and moral standards are first learned at an early age from his or her culture, how he or she is raised, religious background, and social system. Scientifically, there are various ethical theories, such as the virtue theory, deontological ethics, and utilitarianism (Boylan, 2009). By understanding these theories one can compare, contrast and uncover the reasoning behind his or her ethical and moral standards.
Whether put simply or scrutinized, morality cannot be defined simply by looking at it from one or two perspectives. One must acknowledge the fact that there are several different factors that affect judgment between “right” and “wrong”. Only after taking into account everything that could possibly change the definition of righteousness can one begin to define morality. Harriet Baber, a professor at San Diego State University, defines morality as “the system through which we determine right and wrong conduct”. Baber refers to morality as a process or method when she calls it a “system”. In saying “we” she then means to say that this concept does not only apply to her but also to everyone else. Through morality, according to her, one can look at an action, idea, or situation and determine its righteousness and its consequences.
One of the most pervasive problems in theoretical ethics has been the attempt to reconcile the good for the individual with the good for all. It is a problem which appears in contemporary discussions (like those initiated by Alasdair MacIntyre in After Virtue) as a debate between emotivism and rationalism, and in more traditional debates between relativism and absolutism. I believe that a vital cause of this difficulty arises from a failure to ground ethics in metaphysics. It is crucial, it seems to me, to begin with "the way the world is" before we begin to speculate about the way it ought to be. And, the most significant "way the world is" for ethics is that it is individuals in community. This paper attempts to develop an ethical theory based solidly on Whitehead’s metaphysics, and to address precisely the problem of the relation between the good for the individual and the common good, in such a way as to be sympathetic to both.
In order to understand ethical responsibility, it is necessary to understand the meaning of the word “ethics”. Ethics is the study of moral values, or individual and societal convictions that allow a person to distinguish right from wrong (Macrina, 2005). In a more objective sense, ethics can also be described as the analysis of reasoning—the “logic” behind decision-making. Ethical values are the framework of any civilized society, often resulting in common behavioral codes that are accepted across a particular group or culture (Macrina, 2005). In fact, the study of ethics is not restricted to political or social behavior. Applied ethics, or ethics in the workplace, refer to the compliance with principles found in specific fields or occupations. Scientific professions, like other professions, observe certain ethical standards (Macrina, 2005).
Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Nietzsche all had their own ideas for which one could reach happiness in his/her life. All have similarities in there reasoning except Nietzshe, who contradicts the others entirely.
Ethics is the philosophical study of morality. These days our society is changing due to advanced technology, hence the study of ethics is very important than the previous decades. In fact, the study of ethics is not a new issue but Socrates and Plato used ethical reasoning to explain different unjust issues before 2000 years. Ethics is one of the major issues, which does have not any guideline to a particular activity that is morally good, bad or neutral. However, everyone has different understanding and judgment about ethics depend on their cultural, economical, and family back ground. For instance, lying is unethical in most society and it is normal for some other cultures. Therefore, it is difficult to give universal meaning about morality as it depends on a given culture. For this reason, I would say there is not a single universal standard to label someone’s ethical decision as right and wrong. However, all countries should adopt ethical behavior with their environment in order to have honesty and caring society. An Individual can choose among different alternatives based on his or her ethical decision, but it is very difficult to say his or her ethical decision is right or wrong.
The concept of morality differs for every individual. Morality is one 's concept of right and wrong as defined by the individual 's society, family, religion, ethnicity and even gender. It is also subject to the individual 's interpretation and experience. This lends credence to the idea that no one 's morality is exactly the same. The next logical question to answer would be how does one develop their morality? Developmental behaviorist such as Piaget and Kohlberg developed theories for this moral development and how it progresses from childhood into adulthood (Barsky, 2010). Kohlberg 's theory centers around three levels of growth: preconventional reasoning, conventional reasoning, and postconventional reasoning. The levels progress from