This brooding essay was divided into five parts. In the first portion. there is a brief description of the first tutorials entry and my new point of views of it. Second. I provide a brief description of my larning journey. Then. there are my apprehension of Kant’s moralss and how it relates to my larning journey. After that. I used Kant’s moralss to analysis a instance. Finally. there is a description of the moral contemplation on my larning journey. 1. 1 Description of the first tutorials entry
In the first tutorial. I submitted a text about “what is responsible commercialism and is it of import? ” In that entry. I defined that responsible commercialism as a concern which was responsible for some groups of people and organisations. In that article. I hold the point that responsible commercialism was of import for two grounds: foremost. responsible commercialism will hold good repute. which meant this concern can borrow money easy ; secondly. a responsible commercialism can makes people who take portion in work expeditiously. 1. 2 New point of views of duty commercialism
After larning this class. I got more assurance to state that responsible commercialism is of import. The two grounds “responsible commercialism will has good reputation” and “a responsible commercialism can do the people who take portion in work efficiently” considered it from consequentialist theory. ( Shaw. Barry. and Sansbury. 2009 ) On the other manus. consequentially. the company will gain net income from merely being a responsible commercialism. Now I besides can look at it from non-consequentialist position. A company should acknowledge that they have the responsibility to supply goods and services for human existences. ( Shaw. et Al. 2009. p. 74. ) For illustration. foremost. a company can donate some net income yearly to charity organisations. Second. mills can besides cut down pollution by puting a bound on the sum of pollutants. ( Lewis. & A ; Roehrich 2009 ) 2. Description of my acquisition journey
During the survey in the COMM101. I get a deeper apprehension of moral doctrine and I can utilize the moral doctrine theories such as egoism and utilitarianism theories to analysis a commercial action. Besides that. I know more about capitalist economy and socialism. This class acquaints me with the background and features them. And so. I know more about economic distribution which is include the libertarian attack and Rawls’s theory. Furthermore. the portion of international concern and globalisations acquaint me with the definition of globalisation. This portion besides listed several moral issues such as democracy. equality. etc. moreover. this portion stress an of import corporate way-multinational corporations and explains the connexion between moral direction and MNCs. Next. this class explained the environment and work topographic point from moral position. I think the rules and theories such as environmental duty and official place is truly utile. because when I become a director in a house. I will necessitate them to pull off my house. ( Shaw. et Al. 2009 ) 3. 1 Understanding of Kant’s moralss
Kant’s moralss is from non-consequentialist position. his categorical imperative accent on moral motive and regard for people. We can look at this moralss from two facets. “Universal acceptability” and “Humanity as an end” . ( Shaw. et Al. 2009 ) Before giving my points about Kant’s moralss. I think it is necessary to be clear of what the consequentialist and non-consequentialists are. For consequentialist theory. if the effects are good. so the action is right. In contrast. non-consequentialist theory contents that if the action is right or incorrect is non determined by effect. ( Bajari. & A ; Tadelis. 2001 ) Kant’s categorical imperative analysis is from non-consequentialist position. which means we should merely judge whether if the action is right or non based on people’s intents. Categorical imperative accent the morality of any maxim depends on whether we can logically will it to go a cosmopolitan jurisprudence. ( Lewis. et Al. 2009. p. 125-142. ) Take an illustration. Jack promised me that he will impart me some money.
However. he did non maintain his words. By and large. public hold the sentiment that people should maintain their promise. In contrast. if Jack had an accident and he needed a big sum of money for his intervention. At the same clip. I’m non truly necessitate money. In this state of affairs. Jack can interrupt his promise because this axiom became a cosmopolitan jurisprudence. ( Benjamin. 2011 ) “Universal acceptability” is another manner to explicate the categorical jussive mood. The moral regulations we obey are non imposed on us. in contrast the regulations are self-imposed. However that non intend if we can utilize alibi to explicate it. the action is right. The regulations must be moral regulations. ( ibid ) But how to judge a regulation is a moral regulation? First. we check if the regulations are acceptable to all rational existences. In the consideration of slaying. we should non merely see from our ain point of views. but besides from the adult male who were killed. Second. when proving if a regulation is morality. we should handle others impartially. regardless of whether they are the actors or the receiving systems of the action. For illustration. when I sell a 2nd manus phone. one prevarication to the purchaser that it is a new one though I hate other prevarication to me. In this issue. I regard the receiving system of the action. therefore. the action is incorrect. ( David. 2002 ) “Humanity as an terminal. ne’er as simply a means” is another preparation of the nucleus thought of categorical jussive mood.
This preparation hole the sentiment that rational animals should ever handle other rational animals as terminals in themselves and ne’er as merely means to stop. This preparation of the nucleus thought requires us justice if an action is right from humanity position. which means when we doing determinations or making some other things. we must esteem ourselves and others from humanity position and the terminals are merely humanity. ( David. 2002. p. 23. ) For illustration. some international company donate their money to charity but in the following measure. this company concentrate on state the populace that they have donated a batch of money to advance its credibleness. The terminals of this action are non from humanity though the charity got money from this company really. Therefore this contribution is non right harmonizing to Kant’s moralss. ( ibid ) Besides our persons can utilize the moralss to see if out action is right. Kant’s moral theory can besides be applied for organisations. ( Shaw. et Al. 2009 )
First. the categorical jussive mood requires the moral regulations which do non depend on fortunes and effects. Because some action are ever incorrect no affair when and where it happens. For illustration. polluting is incorrect no affair in earlier and future. ( ibid ) Second. although bulk of companies are aim at earn net income. Kant insist that companies should handle worlds as mean to stop. For illustration. if a maker wants to handle worlds as agencies to terminals. the maker can seek to supply more occupations to hapless people. This manner. morally. this action is right. ( Arrowsmith. et Al. 2000 ) Finally. an action has moral worth merely if it is done from a sense of responsibility. On the other words. even an action helps others finally. However. the motivated is non for responsibility. it is non right. Take an illustration. a company offers applied scientists high salary. but the intent use the wage to promote applied scientists work harder alternatively of the sense of responsibility. the action is still incorrect. ( ibid ) 3. 2 Effectss of Kant’s moralss
The Kant’s moralss have a positive consequence on my values framework. First. Previously. I donate money merely because others do it. Now I realized this sort of action is incorrect and no morality worth because it is non form sense of responsibility. ( Sharan. 2005. p. 52. ) Second. I am ever a voluntary in nursing house. because I think I have the responsibility to take old people. Now I realized that it is right harmonizing to Kant’s moralss. which is Humanity as an terminal. ne’er as simply a agency. My ends merely to waiters old people from humanity. therefore I believe this action is right. I need go on to make it in future. 4. 1 Description of instance
I was a newsman in my hometown in China. In 2010 August. the primary school is traveling to a new trimester is traveling to get down. A nutrient company named Kangtai connected us and wanted to supply free tiffin for pupils to the school located in state side. We thought it is good for hapless pupils. so we helped the company acquire connect with three schools. One month subsequently. pupils told us through hot line that the Kangtai stopped supply pupils free nutrient. alternatively of at a sensible monetary value. I did non though excessively much no organisations force pupils to purchase it. However. 3 month subsequently. Hebei state Television station exposured that Kangtai provides mouldy nutrient and substandard nutrient for pupils. ( Kangtai and mouldy nutrient. 2010 ) 4. 2 Analysis
Harmonizing to Kant’s moralss. Kangtai’s actions are non right. First. provided free tiffin for pupils is non from humanity. In contrast. it was for make their nutrient popular in the schools. Harmonizing to the theory which is humanity as an terminal. ne’er as simply a agency. Kangtai’s actions treat supplying nutrient as simply a agencies alternatively of humanity as terminal. Thus Kangtai’s actions are incorrect. ( Caldwell. Roehrich. & A ; Davies. 2009 ) Second. supplying mouldy nutrient and substandard nutrient for pupils is incorrect. Harmonizing to Kant’s moralss. what determines if an action is right? Must harmonizing to if we can will it to go a cosmopolitan jurisprudence of behavior or non. However. how to look into if a jurisprudence is moral jurisprudence? We can utilize two points. One is to see if the jurisprudence bids would be acceptable to all rational being. ( Shaw. et Al. 2009. p. 76. ) Obviously. supplying pupils mouldy nutrient and substandard nutrient can non non be acceptable by public.
Another is if both of actors and receiving systems will accept that. I think there is no uncertainty that the Kangtai will non. Therefore. supplying mouldy nutrient and substandard nutrient for pupils is incorrect. ( Clegg. Koenberger. & A ; Pitsis 2001 ) Third. from Kant in an organisations context position. on one manus. supplying mouldy nutrient and substandard nutrient for pupils are against to the theory. which is companies should handle worlds as mean to stop. Kangtai usage moldy nutrient and substandard nutrient to moo down the cost. it did non see about homo. In contrast. Kangtai merely concentrate on net incomes. On the other manus. supplying free nutrient for publicity is against to the theory. which is an action has moral worth merely if it is done from a sense of responsibility. Therefore. the actions of Kangtai are non right and do non hold moral worth. ( David. 2002 ) 5. The moral contemplation on my acquisition journey
In my day-to-day life. I am seeking to link the moral rules and issues together which go on in our every day-to-day life. For illustration. when I have a place on MRT. I ever check if there are old people still standing. If there is person. I will give my place to him or her. Harmonizing to the non-consequentialists. Kant’s categorical jussive mood told me giving my place to old people is right. Because I think have the responsibility to assist others and I need to follow my built-in thoughts to make the moral actions. When I consider playing computing machine is right. harmonizing to the utilitarianism theory of consequentialist. which is if its effect brings more entire good than those of any alternate class of action. so it is right 1. Playing computing machine brings me less good than reading books. therefore. playing computing machine is incorrect. In the hereafter. when I become a director. I will besides utilize moral rules to pull off my group. If I am doing a determination about globalisation. environment and work topographic point. I can besides utilize the related rules in COMM101.
Arrowsmith. S. . Linarelli. J. . and Wallace. D. ( 2000 ) Analyzing moral issue. luwer Law International. The Hague. Bajari. P. and Tadelis. S. ( 2001 ) Media
moralss: issues and instance. Journal of moral. 32. 3. pp. 387-407. Benjamin. B. ( 2011 ) moral issues. accessed Oct 21st. 2012 Kant hypertext transfer protocol: //www. tutorialspoint. com/management_concepts. htm Caldwell. N. D. . Roehrich. J. K. . and Davies. A. C. ( 2009 ) Kant’s Theory of Mind: An Analysis of the Paralogisms of Pure Reason. moral issues. 15 3. pp. 178-186. Clegg. S. . Koenberger. M. and Pitsis. T. S. ( ED ) ( 2001 ) Kant’s Platonic Revolutio. SAGE Publications LTD. London. David. J. ( 2002 ) The Categorical Imperative ; a survey in Kant’s moral doctrine. Journal of Kant’s Fishner. S. ( 1989 ) Kant’s Ethical Thought. Camelot Publishers. Merrifield. Kangtai and moldy nutrient ( 2010 ) In Zhongguo Xinwen Zhoukan. 25th July. China. p. 3. Lewis. M. A. and Roehrich. J. K. ( 2009 ) Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy. Journal of moral issues. 2. 2. pp. 125-142. Sharan. A ( 2005 ) . A Kant Dictionary. Mason. USA
Shaw. w. h. . Barry. v. and Sansbury. G. ( 2009 ) Moral issues in concern. Cengage Learning. Australia.