Under deontology, an act may be considered right even if the act produces a bad consequence,  if it follows the rule or moral law. According to the deontological view, people have a duty to act in a way that does those things that are inherently good as acts "truth-telling" for exampleor follow an objectively obligatory rule as in rule utilitarianism. Immanuel Kant's theory of ethics is considered deontological for several different reasons. Kant's argument that to act in the morally right way, one must act from duty, begins with an argument that the highest good must be both good in itself, and good without qualification.
Let me rephrase to make it more general. Answering this question was essentially the goal of this book, so I will point to the section in the book that address key issues.
If we all perceive sensory things and emotional things differently; who among us is to be trusted as the arbiter of ethical truth? Understanding the correct ethical path is relatively easy, simply use the golden rule. The first part of the book is relatively short and provides a proof of this axiom.
The section on understanding ethics addresses how an individual or group can derive ethical truths.
There are baseline requirements for understanding ethics. The section on when things go wrong tries to address two common forms of malice. The section on personal framing addresses how we all see the world through skewed eyes.
With ethical understanding we can hopefully see the world more clearly and help others to do the same. Diving down the rabbit hole addresses your concerns straight on… at least I think so.
The driving analogy for ethics is used to illustrate through analogy the reality of a distribution of knowledge and understanding exists; which is a varied as the number of individuals.
You can train people to get better but they have to care enough about improvement to do so. Some care deeply, others are deeply apathetic.
In general the system works but it could always be improved. People and cultures vary in their development; the rules of the road vary a bit too. Good driving practices are timeless and transcend culture.
The discussion on cultural memes provides a window in how leaders can get good people to do bad things. I compared ethics to love because both exist in the mind, so they are hard to prove.
Individuals and cultures acknowledge both love and ethics. Ethics is constant, ethical climates can ebb and flow. In sexy ethicsI discuss the how many of the seemingly relativistic moral codes as they apply to ethics often have core unchanging ethical principles that they are derived from.
I also acknowledge here and in other sections that cultures are typically the arbiters of justice; they define what is right and wrong, and the people implicitly agree by their obedience to the rules. People make up cultures and both have a tendency to be wrong a good deal of the time; so their is always room for improvement.
Again, this is where ethical knowledge and understanding is useful. So hopefully that addresses the gray… On the God issue, that is partly more complex and partly simple.
I highly doubt anyone of faith will read it because to do so would be against the first commandment. The power of the meme of God for self-sensorship truly amazes me. I was raised in the Catholic faith but was liberal enough to question it and my search for knowledge and understanding led me to seek a better understanding of the people and world around me.
By questioning and thinking about God I came to understand the meme. God is a powerful idea, but it is simply that. This book is in part thanks to religion, to an unethical corporate culture, and to the power of an inquisitive mind. This was the second book I wrote, the first one was on corporate ethics; which has not been published yet.
To discuss corporate ethics, I had to first define ethics.
If you are concerned about questioning your faith, if the thought of that creates an inner fear, then I will let you in on a little secret; there is nothing to fear.
I have been to that mountain top, there is no boogie man; just your own fear. Let go of the fear and start asking questions… the world will light up.
The simple answer to the God problem as it relates to ethics is two fold.illustrate effective or ineffective handling of administrative, ethical, or legal decisions by management. Users of this material are prohibited from claiming this material as their own, emailing it to others, or placing it on the Internet.
Apr 01, · In this lesson, we explore ethical dilemmas that face normal people around the world, in all walks of life. Each example features individuals who followed the guidance of their own moral code, often risking personal injury or community censure to do so.
The Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct (Code and Standards) are the ethical benchmark for investment professionals around the globe. HR professionals help lay out the expectations for employees by developing written standards of ethical workplace conduct, providing training to make sure everyone is aware of the expectations and.
The IE Code of Ethical Conduct Explained: Reasoning behind the Code, Rights, and Responsibilities 4 the Code Ethical Conduct).
What are my rights if I am accused of an It is our firm belief that people are good and that everybody at IE. ibly declare that its own code of ethics is enough. We think that we need an ethical code to cover everybody involved in health care, and we have embarked on the search for such a code.