INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH

(IMDR), PUNE

POST GRADUATION DIPLOMA IN

MANAGEMENT (PGDM)

Batch 2019-2021

Subject – Business Ethics

Topic- Case Study on the Movie- The Gods must be Crazy

SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED TO:

Arena Makani Dr. Giribala Dewasthale

Roll no- 29
 Case Study on the movie-
The Gods Must be Crazy
Summary of the Movie

The Gods Must be Crazy is set in the Southern African region. The movie describes a series of
incidents in the life of a Bushman, Xi, who finds a Coca-Cola bottle in the middle of the desert.
The movie is from the point of view of Xi who has no relation to civilization or technology.
They are pure at heart and peace-loving. They thank the gods for nature and use only what is
necessary for survival. They even apologize to the prey for killing them.

The movie talks about different groups The Bushman, Johannesburg Citizens, Villagers, and
Terrorists. San Tribe and the Johannesburg citizens both are very different from each other. San
tribe live a very simple, peaceful and happy life whereas the citizens live a chaotic life adapting
to changing environments time to time.

Xi finds the Coca-Cola bottle but as it is the only one, he sees that it brings jealousy and anger in
his tribe. Xi therefore decides to throw the bottle down from the end of the world. When Xi
enters civilization from the jungle and is confused by the technology and traditions. He does not
understand ownership and kills someone else’s goat as food and gets punished for it.
But Xi understands the universal morals of care, good and bad. The bushmen had also helped
Mpudi in the past and cured him when he was found in the desert. Xi also saves Mpudi from the
Lion, and helps save the hostage children.

San Tribe do not know what is evil and live for basic needs whereas the Johannesburg citizens
give each other competition in the work. San tribe’s basic way of surviving is hunting, when Xi
does the same to one of the animal in the herd he is sent to a prison. For the villagers it was a
theft. Thus, we can say the villagers are not sensitive to ethical relativism. Terrorists have no
moral responsibility and do not consider the condition of the kids. The Johannesburg citizens
have ethical standards close to universal moral standards as they earn to live, are kind and
helping- Kate, and have good moral standards.

We can see that because the cultures and backgrounds of the people are so different, relativism
becomes very important. Andrew understands the bushman’s situation and helps him.

The most important lesson from the film is understanding the differences between people and
being more sensitive and tolerant to their practices.

Business Ethics Concepts understood from the movie-

1. Relativism-
Ethical Relativism states that there are no absolute ethical standards that can and should
be applied to all companies and people of the societies.
Ethical Relativism sensitises us the value of tolerance for other people’s different ethical
standards.
In this case, it can be understood that the cultures and background of the people are so
different, relativism becomes very important and thus Andrew understands bushman’s
situation and helps him
2. Systemic Issues-
A system consists of many entities that interact with each other. Thus this interaction may
create certain issues among the system e.g. Use of child labour is a systemic issue, often
government addresses systemic issues which have connotations
Under this circumstance we would point out certain systemic issues where there where no
strict restrictions at the minister’s office
 3. Individual Issue/ Moral Responsibility-
Moral Responsibility is the voluntary attributable responsibility ensuring that acts
knowingly and intentionally carried out by rational human beings don’t cause injury to
other individuals
Here under this case we could see moral responsibilities and many individual issues
being addressed- one incidents where there was an attack on minister’s office
4. Legal Right-
Some rights are enshrined in a country’s legal system and are called as legal rights. One
Legal right that can be pointed out in this case would be immediate protection for the
boy.

Question 1-

Compare and Contrast the ethical standards of different social Groups-

San Tribe

Johannesburg Citizens

Villagers

Terrorists

1. San tribe-
San tribe live a very simple, peaceful and happy life whereas the citizens live a chaotic
life adapting to changing environments time to time. They were highly dependable on the
environment to survive, they had informal institutions of the family, did not have any
formal law All they knew was survival in rigorous environment, unknown about what
evil means, had sense of ownership
2. Johannesburg Citizens-
 As compared to San Tribe the Johannesburg citizens where very different they believed
in chaotic lives, they adopted to changing environment as they had self-created
environment, they were more rebellious as they disrespected environment and had less
unity.
They did not have legal rights and any authoritative figure for the working of the society
3. Villagers-
From the incidents occurred we can say the villagers where not sensitive to ethical
relativism as they misinterpret Xi, and did not even give him a chance to explain
4. Terrorists-
Terrorists on the other hand had no moral responsibility, had unethical motives and did
not care about the kids of the villagers

Question 2-

Which of these groups according to you have ethical standards close to

universal moral standards?

According to my understanding, the Johannesburg Citizens had the most ethical standards
close to universal moral standards because-

1) Johannesburg society is more advanced in every aspect. So they had certain

understanding about ethics and standards.

2) They have much higher population as compared to tribal groups. So they are bound to
follow rules and be ethical.

3) They have to deal with other parties for goods and services. So laying down rules is
important.

4) Tribes have their own practices and they are not linked universally.

5) Civilized societies are linked to each other and due to communication, things which
are right and wrong comes up.