Summary of Kantian ethics
Kantian ethics allows individuals to pursue their happiness by providing supplements and additives of their choice and making a profit out of business. It points out restrictions that individuals should adhere to as they pursue happiness as well as the benefit that provides respect every rational individual through making people demonstrate their rationality and that of other in the process of purchasing the supplements and additives. Kantian ethics help people make a sound decision by providing accurate information on the products and allowing the customers to make choices that they deem to be appropriate for themselves before purchase (Salazar, n.d). The ethics also respect people’s autonomy, equity, honesty, and honoring good relationship with customers. The business aims to gain profit from the products; however, the shop does not force individuals to buy the products. They avail the supplements and additives to those willing to buy despite the side effects.
- What are the strengths and weaknesses of deontology in relation to business ethics?
The strengths of deontology include providing the basis of dignity to individuals in supply and purchase of products, ensure justice to every individual despite the circumstances, provides solutions various problems related to utilitarianism, ensure that commitments, contracts and promises in business processes are kept, and ensures intrinsic value to products and services. Weaknesses include providing excuses for supernatural occurrences and does not integrate ideas of self-defence in business processes.
- How would a Kantian deontologist approach the “Challenger Disaster”?
A Kantian deontologist would approach the challenger disaster through ensuring rational actions and ensuring necessary precautions in the case of a crash, thus minimizing damages that may occur. Failures that may occur, such as the disintegration of solid rock booster would be appropriately handled to ensure the right condition (Wall, 2016).
- How would Friedman respond? How would, Freeman?
Friedman would argue that the company needs to develop value to all its stakeholders. He provides business and management ethics to address values and morals in company management. NASA should be responsible for compensating the victims of the Challenger disaster as part of management responsibility and restoring their importance in the organization (Wall, 2016).
References
Salazar, H. (n.d). Systems of moral evaluation.
Wall, M. (2016). Challenger Disaster 30 Years Ago Shocked the World, Changed NASA.