You are on page 1of 5

Professional Ethics

GEN 301/ PHI 200

Spring 2016

Submitted to
Ms. Mira Qweider
Submitted by
Salem Hadi Saeed Al Ameri

Discuss how in an organization diffusion of responsibility and

conformity can lead people to act unethically.

Diffusion of responsibility within a corporation will weaken peoples sense of

ethical responsibility. Pressure to conform to the cluster and to stick to its
norms and beliefs will result in the surrender of individual ethical autonomy.
This tendency is increased by the actual fact that cluster actions oftentimes
involve the participation of the many folks. As a result, responsibility for what
a corporation will become fragmented or subtle throughout the cluster, with
no single individual seeing him or her as answerable for what happens.
Indeed, it's going to} be tough to mention specifically UN agency should be
command responsible. This diffusion of responsibility within a corporation
leads people to own a diluted or diminished sense of their own personal
ethical responsibilities.
They tend to envision themselves merely as little players during a method or
as cogs during a machine, over that they need no management and that
they're unaccountable. They rationalize to themselves causative to actions,
policies, or events that they'd refuse to perform or to authorize if they
thought the choice were entirely up to them. Its not my fault, they
suppose. This would happen anyway, with or while not Maine. Diffusion of
responsibility encourages the moral myopia of thinking Im simply doing my
job, rather than taking a 20/20 consider the larger image.
Pressure to conform to structure norms and a diminished sense of private
responsibility for cluster behavior undermine individual integrity and ethical
Organizations exert pressure on their members to evolve to norms and goals.
What might not be therefore wide acknowledged is however simply people is
iatrogenic to behave as those around them do.

Compare between consequentialist and non-consequentialist

theories outlining an advantage and disadvantage of each.




Those that determine the
moral rightness or
wrongness of an action
based on the actions
consequences or results.
Practical, Resultsoriented View
Relatively clear how
to make ethical
Our self-interest can
promote others as

How can we know all

the consequences of
an action?
How can we
compare utility from
person to person?
Do we include all
generations? All
Will utilitarianism
lead us to

Those that determine the
moral rightness or wrongness
of an action based on the
actions intrinsic features or
Kants Theory

Do not have to compute

Provide strong guidance
in rules
Ground systems on
something other than
consequences and avoid
cost-benefit analysis

Ignores consequences of
acts or rules
Divided over which rules
are best to follow and
Unclear how to resolve
conflict between rules
Seems to close down
moral discussion
Virtue ethics seems to
assume that humans
have a purpose, that
morality is innate and

Problems of Egoism
Psychological egoism
is not a sound theory
Ethical egoism is not
really a moral theory
at all
Ethical egoism
ignores blatant

that the virtues are

clearly recognizable
Cant reconcile multiple
obligations. For
examples, promises.

Explain John Rawls veil of ignorance and discuss if it would ensure

justice for all.
Rawl's theory of justice
Modern alternative to utilitarianism. One compatible with belief that justice
must be associated with fairness and moral equality of persons. Wishes to
avoid reducing justice to matter of social utility
Rawls two principles
1. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total
system of equal basic liberty compatible with a similar system of
liberty for all
2. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two condition :first, they
are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions
of fair equality of opportunity; and second, they are to be to the
greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society
How to handle simply distribution of wealth, Rawl's believed that folks would
opt for safest choice. Rawl asks North American nation to imagine folks
meeting within the original position to decide on the essential principles that

are to manipulate their society. People will choose for supported self-interest
that is below the veil of mental object.
People within the original position ignoramus regarding themselves in person
or regarding what their individual state of affairs are once the foundations
are chosen and veil is raised.