Example Of Essay On Final Paper

1) Smithfield Farms did not follow Donaldson's three principles. First, the respect for core human values was not adhered to, especially when Smithfield made farmers take out loans from them to start their swine-raising, allowing Smithfield to make them indentured servants. Respecting local traditions was also nonexistent, due to the environment changes (the odd smell) that desecrated people's own territory. Also, they violated the position that context is important when making decisions; regardless of the consequences, they were still disruptive.
In terms of relativism, Smithfield's policies would be seen as acceptable. Given that the theory of relativism states that, provided the cultural customs and rules are adhered to in conducting their business, Smithfield Farms would be fine from a relativist perspective.
When discussing the 'earlier stage of development,' Donaldson refers to the previous era of American agriculture and business, where these kinds of activities were considered a little more acceptable. Given that it was the kind of business practice that worked previously, it stands to reason that these methods would work again, particularly the hiring of South American immigrants. Donaldson, therefore, thinks these methods are acceptable, basing the context on an earlier stage of development.
2) In order to prevent tobacco companies from lying about the addictive nature of smoking, the primary goal is to impose penalties on these companies that could not be circumvented. Jail time and fines could be levied against the company and its executives. Compliance programs could be put in place to mitigate punishments in favor of cooperation, but they must be strictly enforced.
At the same time, there is something to be said for self-governance, something that Bowie thinks would work quite well. Due to his negative thoughts about governmental control, he suggests that oversight happens from within the company, and that there should be some kind of system of checks and balances to prevent this duplicity from happening. I think that combining both inside oversight within the company and generalized federal oversight would help to prevent these lies from becoming an epidemic.
3) According to McIntosh, there is a significant flaw with white privilege that is often overlooked - namely that it places whites at a great responsibility for other races' shortcomings. Often, there is the risk that minorities could use the blanket excuse of white privilege to forgive themselves for objective lack of effort. It can also hurt race relations in the long run, because it places whites at an automatic status of villainy and negativity, making even those virtuous whites who wish to reconcile distrusted by minorities. White privilege grants power to whites, but it does not grant them the moral high ground - this can make race relations and possible equality difficult all around.
4) Universalism is difficult to apply to unethical business behavior found today, because there are so many circumstances and extenuating situations that occur within the world of business to make 'hard and fast' rules impossible. Different business cultures and different time periods have different reactions to unethical behavior, and unique ways of solving problems. Due to universalism's credo of 'what works for one, works for all,' actions from this perspective are pinpointed to if/then situations, which is not practical when examining business culture at a specific time in a specific place. What may be unethical in one business culture may not be in another; as times change, so do the rules. This makes universalism a dangerous theory to apply to the modern unethical business world.
5) Friedman would highly oppose the green initiatives of today, because he thinks it would interfere with the sole responsibility of business - to make money. Making changes to policy and business strategy toward that end would simply serve to interfere with that goal for the sake of public relations and social responsibility. Since reducing emissions is not profitable, Friedman would not go for it.
At the same time, he might approve of reducing fossil fuel dependence - due to the increasing price of fossil fuels, that would cut into profits dramatically by its continued use. If a more efficient fuel source would be found, Friedman would advocate its use, as that increases the profit margin even further.
6) I believe that Bowie is pro-capitalism, as he sees the system as something that works on an intrinsic level; however, he is a big advocate for responsible businessmaking, and ethical and moral choices being made within the structure of capitalism. Therefore, he may be anti-crony capitalism, if anything. He thinks that "corporate responsibility" should have a high moral standard and an obligation to society; capitalism serves the society that it works within, not the other way around. Societal rules and morals should be heavily considered by a business when discussing and implementing strategies for profitmaking. By acting within an ethical framework, a business can still profit and grow, while not sacrificing the moral good that it must be held to.