Make ethical decisions at home and at work

First, a definition of ethics, principles of human duty, rules of conduct and duty to be honest. In a nutshell: Being ethical is doing the right thing.

There is much talk of ethics and we all agree that they have. But what is "theirs?" Lets face the first business ethics, because it is simple and straight forward. The problem arises when requested by the supervisor to do something that you're not sure if it's the right thing to do.

There are two parts to the question of business ethics:

What to do when you're asked to do something, would your action is ethical?
When you personally have to make decisions: How do you make ethically?

Following orders

This part is simple. You must understand your loyalty:

Be true to yourself.

Next, be loyal to the company

And, finally, be faithful to your supervisor.

Remember the sequence: Yourself, the company and the supervisor.

Texas Instruments has a simple rule in three steps to follow if you question the ethical merits of a directive:

If you know it's wrong, just do not.

If you are unsure, ask.

I keep asking until you get an answer.

What if you're asked to do unethical and there is no way out? You should always have "Go to hell money" on hand to say just that. It should be 'hell and let the chips fall where they may. Resignation is far superior to reduce your standards.

Make ethical decisions

This is a short article I wrote when I was studying ethics. First a brief history, followed by a brief description of the school of ethics I live by (utilitarian ethics) and then the "how-to" of making ethical decisions. This is an easy to read because the rates of Word the article as suitable for the degree eight readers.

Those who specialize in studying and writing about ethics are called Ethicans. For each definition are very strange. Their main job is to criticize others ethicans and every school of ethical thought, except those they favor.

Ethicans groped to create a school of ethics that applies to every occasion. The research is a unifying system of ethics is very much like the search for a unifying theory of physics. It can happen in physics, but not in ethics. Ethics is an emotional identity, trying to appear as a logical and rational discipline. It 'fails miserably.

Moreover, ethical thinkers are not logical thinkers. They bicker with each other and pretend to be great thinkers. If you want to read the classic examples of poor writing, logic and corrupt meanness, read the classic writers of ethics. Yet they were exceptional.

For example, John Stuart Mills (1806-1873), regarded as the great advocate of utilitarian ethic was brilliant. By the age of seventeen he had completed advanced studies in Greek literature and philosophy, chemistry, botany, psychology and law. As a member of the British parliament was considered a radical, scandalous as it has supported measures such as public ownership of natural resources, equality for women, compulsory education, and birth control. It 'was one of the founders of the movement for women's suffrage.

His 1863 essay on utilitarian ethics is considered the cornerstone of utilitarian principles. It is a shameful example of writing. For example, the 60-phrase is two words. And things only get worse. Word processing controllers grammatical serious indigestion trying to analyze it.

Since 1863 I doubt that a dozen people have read the document of 24,000 words from beginning to end. I am not one of them. It 'a masterpiece of confusion, bad grammar and poor punctuation makes little sense. The concept is correct, but the explanation is so inept Mill, bordering on criminal.

Indeed, the concept can be expressed well in less than five hundred words. Throw in some examples, and two thousand words would be right. Strange, that's about the length of this essay.

I said they were very mad. Consider the founder of utilitarian ethics, Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). It was quite a man: he was a child prodigy, reading serious works at the age of three years, playing the violin at the age of five years, and studying French and Latin at six years. He entered Oxford University at the age of 12 years, he studied law and was admitted to the bar. Rather than a man.

In 1771, thirty years before the industrial revolution, invented Jeremy Betham's Panopticon. A Panopticon was to remove all prisoners privacy by putting them behind a transparent wall that surrounds a watchtower.

Jeremy was so impressed with his invention was decided to have a Panopticon as his coffin be placed on public display. Certainly odd request. But there is a difference between being funny and being disgusting.

Lord, if you're a bit 'picky you may not want to listen to this so please close your eyes. In accordance with his wishes, his body was dissected in front of his friends. His skeleton, fully clothed and with a wax head (the original being mummified), is preserved in a glass case at University College, which he helped found. He may be displayed on the Web with the updated picture every fifteen minutes.

Her head was embalmed and preserved by the University.

There are about fifteen schools of ethics. Including minor variations, there are an unknown number. After reviewing many of the traditional schools, I can honestly say I have no idea what they're talking except for utilitarian ethics.

Fool that I am, I thoroughly utilitarian ethics as it did make sense to apply to my lifestyle.

My ethical system is based on utilitarian ethics, the doctrine that what is good is good, and, therefore, that the ethical value of conduct is determined the utility of the result. Freely, his proposition is that the ultimate goal of moral action is the realization that the greatest good for the greatest number. This objective is also considered the goal of all legislation and is the ultimate criterion of all social institutions, including businesses.

Like all other ethical systems, if we can not expect to solve all ethical problems. No ethical system can solve a wide range of issues ranging from government to businesses to individual ethical issues.

Fortunately, I have serious limitations which I am grateful. Seeking answers to my problems and opportunities. I do not have the capacity nor the need to resolve issues such as abortion, euthanasia and suicide. Nor can I solve the problems of the world. As I said, are beyond my ability and for that I am thankful for my limitations.

One beauty of utilitarian ethics is that it only has two definitions: Good and Evil. Good is defined as the good feeling of everyone ranging from the pleasures of the flesh at temperatures of self-sacrifice. Between these extremes are included such things as material rewards. Evil is defined as an injury to an individual ranging from minor irritants such as a splinter in his finger for mali Hitler. Again, in some part there is loss of material.

One other point: morality. He arrives at the table with your customs and religious beliefs. Ethics does not teach or suggest a moral belief. You are what you are. If you are morally corrupt, a thief or completely indifferent, ethics is of little use to you. The only way to improve their moral values ​​is probably through some form of revelation.

Living as an ethical system does not conflict with your religion or lack of it. All major religions, whether based on love or law, I urge you to be kind to others, minimizing the evil in all its forms. Ethics provides a simple method to help you achieve your religious obligation to do the right thing, while minimizing the bad. A religious belief is not a requirement to be ethical.

Resolution of ethical problems that use utilitarian ethics has almost mathematical logic, step-by-step approach to it.

Suppose you want to take a business decision. If you do not hit people, there is no ethical consideration. Ethics concerns itself only with the people. This does not mean that your able to abuse animals. Neither allow you to burn your house, even if you own it. Wanton destruction is unacceptable.

It is the slaughter of animals for human consumption ethic? How about using animals to test them hurt? I have no idea how you feel about this topic. But I know it could be used in such industries, but I benefit from their practices. As I said, I have serious limitations of my thought processes when it comes to resolving key issues.

Fortunately, all these difficult problems I face. In truth, I'm not sure which is likely to leave them alone to solve.

So, the reality of everyday life:

Suppose that we are thinking of installing some form of safety device or pollution.

We think of three possible methods, A, B and C. And throw in a fourth option D, simply do nothing. Let's make a list showing all the benefits (good) for ourselves and others. Now consider the disadvantages (Evil) to themselves and others. Assess both good and evil, not only us but to everyone involved. Consider employees, shareholders, suppliers, community, and government.

The first test was to benefit from any bad side effects? The test is solved considering that, if somehow, the side effects of evil is not successful, you would still benefit? If you would benefit only if the event occurred evil, then the act is not ethical. It 's immoral to benefit from some form of harm inflicted on others. This test quickly determines that theft, murder, fraud, and most forms of lying are immoral acts.

With the list done, consider what method has less mali. Assuming that all three methods to achieve your goals, only the method with the lesser evil is ethical. To select a method that minimizes the consequences of evil is not ethical.

Consider the ethical merits-off people for lack of work. It happens all the time. Now, the lack of work may vary from fewer orders than expected to receive just short of money, ie a builder lays off its workers-because they ran out of money. The house is still there to be completed, but there is no money. Employees are certainly affected by the dismissal. We pass the first test, as we do not benefit from their difficulties.

Now consider what happens if the dismissal is made. Eventually the company will lose money, they become less competitive and the problems are multiplied by the lack of layoffs. The result can be just as many other employees, suppliers, shareholders and the community will be seriously damaged if the company fails. This is regrettable, dismissal for lack of work ethic, not nice, but ethical.

Therefore, the method is simple. Consider all the alternatives and choose the one with the least damage to everyone. Easier said than done.

Time passes, the act is done, and you or someone else thinks of something better, thank goodness for the problem or opportunity. It was the opening act ethical? Yes You tried your best to be ethical. Not being smart enough not a sin. You must learn to live with joy in the gift of God and your limitations.

More time passes. Given the same problem there is no guarantee that the ethical decision you made in the past would be unethical now. Times are changing priorities. What was important then it may not be important now. What was a minor consideration, and then may be a major concern now.

In business we are trying to find the best balance for all: employees, shareholders, customers, suppliers, government and the community. Needs of each change with time. For example, in recent years governments drive to improve the health and safety at work, minimizing pollution and control have come to the fore. Twenty years ago there were only thought to be. Forty years ago, were non-issues. Times are changing. The new balance must be found with the changing times.

If you pay too much for supplies and salaries, the costs become excessive and we lose our competitiveness. Layoffs and maybe a business problem occurs to corrupt all of the employees, shareholders, our suppliers, customers etc.

If our employees wages are low we loose the good and their skills, endangering the business.

Our family life goes through similar changes. The balance of the changes that affect your children, calling for a rebalancing of your private life. Consider the balance when the children were small, as you have an empty nest. Both logic and ethics asks to be nice to your children. Be good to your children. Always remember: take your old age home.

I can understand if they are opposed to my ethical system. But to oppose the mine while having none of it yourself, this is silly.
This was written to clarify my thoughts and to develop an ethical way of thinking suits my lifestyle. Over the years I have discovered to be a great problem solver when it comes to staffing problems, both at home and at work....