Universal ethics and Utilitarianism

A healthy company, interpersonal relationships, and the global economy all depend on ethics. There are several methods that can be used to address emerging ethical problems, and they may be based on utilitarianism, which emphasizes utility maximization, or universal ethics, which focuses on what is right. Employees in an organization occasionally have to choose between acting ethically and acting in ways that might produce beneficial results despite being unethical.

Luke’s Ethical Dilemma

Luke is faced with an ethical dilemma of disclosing the company information concerning the construction of an “adult entertainment retail store” that would affect the value of land and properties in the neighborhood to his close brother Owen. As a brother and a friend to Owen, Luke should offer truthful information that would save him form any incoming trouble or loss. On doing so, Luke will have disrespected the company ethics on confidentiality of information. The information would be important to Owen since he would make a more informed decision concerning the sale of his house at a better price before being devalued after the announcement of the ABC project in a month’s time.

Discussion

Ideologies from a philosopher Jeremy Bentham, well known for the utilitarianism principle could be helpful in dealing with this ethical issue (Riley 70). The utilitarian ethics philosophy focuses on the outcome and the impact of the decision or actions taken to the parties involved. The theory therefore supports those actions that brings pleasure and not pain to the larger community (Riley 93).

In Luke’s scenario disclosing the company information on the project violates the company confidentiality clause that does not affect an individual but the organization as a whole. The information would be helpful to the brother but, on the other hand, his client would face the negative consequences of depreciation. By choosing to protect the company information, Luke would be observing the utilitarian principle for acting for the good of the greatest number which is the ABC Company. Some of the challenges associated with the use of this principle is that despite making the decision based on the consequences, it is difficult to predict the outcome in some situations (Riley 105). For instance, the outcome of Owens actions if Luke discloses the information on the project is not predictable, he could use this information to his benefit and sell the house or to discourage investors in the region which could affect the progress of the project among others.

According to Kant, a philosopher categorical imperative ethics, humans have a moral obligation that they ought to obey regardless of the ones opinion and other binding obligations. This ethical argument requires the use of personal intellect and is based on ”pure reason (Montefiore 76).” Here the action taken should adhere to the universal law on ethics and respect particular maxims involved.

As a brother, Luke ought to give honest information to Owen that would help him make the right decision. On the other hand, as an employee at ABC he should be accountable and protect the company integrity (Montefiore 78). If he chooses to give a warning message on the potential depreciation of the land he would be lying to him. Luke will be agreeing to the maxim of lying or giving misleading information that is likely to bring loss and regrets to his brother in future. But according to Kant, it is immoral to be untruthful behind the reasons of respecting the company privacy policies. Hence according to Kant’s categorical imperative argument Luke should engage in the morally right action which is advising Owen about the sale of the house based on truthful facts (Montefiore 81). This ethical theory has challenges because for instance, in this case, telling the truth may risk the company plan, the outcome of actions done following t Kant’s categorical imperative may not always bring joy or positive outcome as opposed to the utilitarian philosophy.

Conclusion

It is barely a month’s time towards the declaration of the ABC project to the public and before then, it is good for Luke to let his friend know about the plan. The outcome of this may be unknown but it is important that Owen makes the right decision having known that the likelihood of the land appreciating is minimal. I would recommend the use of the Kant’s categorical comparative in deciding the right action to take which is telling the truth to Owen. In this incidence Luke may be forced to advice Owen to sell the house, because of suspicious depreciative factors. Luke’s advice may not necessarily focus on the company plan but should send a message of a likelihood of land depreciation. Though Owen’s response to the advice may be unknown, Luke will not be responsible for the consequences of failing to give truthful information. Luke should advice Owen to sell the property at the current real estate price factoring in the possibilities which could lead to land devaluating such as the ABC construction plan.

Works Cited

Montefiore, Alan. ”Kant And The Categorical Imperative”. Think 2.05 (2009): 75-82. Web.

Riley, J. ”Mill’s Extraordinary Utilitarian Moral Theory”. Politics, Philosophy & Economics 9.1 (2010): 67-116. Web.