Ethics and profits are not incompatible.

- Ethics and profits are not incompatible, this is because a business who runs ethically will always have profits even
small amounts. For example, if a business shoes to cheat or exploit their clients, although they had business at that
time, the client will most likely not do business with you again. If they were fair and ethical, in the future they will
have repeat business with same client, additionally that client will recommend them to other businesses. This does
not only apply to business-client relationships but business-employee as well. As a client, I wouldn’t want to
transact with a business if they are not treating their employees fairly and their benefits and wages are not
rightfully provided. I wouldn’t want to be involved in that even if their goods and services are the lowest in the
market.
- If a business considers money and profits as the only measurement of their success, maybe they’ll survive now but
they will soon face the consequences.

Culture is not an appropriate standard for ethical decision making.

- Ethics is not about following culturally accepted norms because we have cultural differences, for example, in some
culture human sacrifice is practiced. I personally don’t think that’s acceptable because it’s not my culture, it’s also
unethical because they are not giving the person a choice same with a lot of practices in different cultures.
- In decision making, if culture ang would be the basis, the decision would be biased. Most of the time, it will only
favor those people who follow the same culture. But for me not all cultural practices are bad because most of the
time, culture serves as a guide to act ethically. For example, as Christians we follow a certain guideline and that is to
be good and merciful like Christ.

All of the approaches to ethics should be considered in ethical decision making.

- Approaches to ethics:
- Utilitarianism – most good, least harm. Make the world a better place. Bring most benefit to all of humanity.
Producing good consequences, not having good intentions
Machiavellianism – the ends justify the means
Put aside self interest for the sake of the whole
CONCERNED EXCLUSIVELY WITH THE CONSEQUENCES, NOT INTENTIONS
- Rights – something that one is entitled to do or have in the basis of need, custom or law
To choose freely what we do with our lives. We have the duty to respect other’s rights.
- Justice and fairness -
- Care
- Virtue
- It’s not always possible to apply all the approaches to ethics when it comes to decision making because for example
sir if utilitarianism is applied, it’s possible that the rights of others would be compromised, so with that you didn’t
apply approach for rights. For example sir if a person was sentence to ng death, it’s only fair that they pay for their
unjust action but while justice is being served, the right of the accused is being ignored. As they say in the bill of
rights, if a person took the life of another, to sentence them to death is revenge and not justice. So it will be justice
and fairness vs rights. Because different cultures, different countries they have different definitions of justice so
there is atleast one approach that will be compromised. It may not be all applied but it should all be considered.

Ignorance is an obstacle to ethical decision making.

- For me sir ignorance is always an obstacle to anything especially pa with decision making. For example sir. There is a
person who lived all his life in the mountains and there, they were used to share everything, food, other needs and
it’s okay. But if they go here and they take a random person’s food, that will be considered as stealing and of
course, once they get caught their reason is that they didn’t know that it’s already considered stealing because that
is normal in their culture. That’s why culture is not an appropriate standard for decision making and since they also
didn’t know that, that would be their obstacle, they can’t decide ethically even if they want to.

Transcending the limitations of the self is an aid to ethical behavior.

- I think the principle to be applied here is utilitarianism where you put your self interest aside for the betterment of
many. So even if you push yourself to the limit, there would be instances that you should do what is right even if
you don’t want to because it’s for the good of many. Another example is when your worst enemy, the person who
bullied you all your life becomes your employee and you’re his boss, even if you really want to get your revenge,
make his work very difficult, or even fire him, since you have to act ethically even though you don’t want to, you
won’t because your priority is to always act ethically.

How you make profits is more important than what you do with profits.
- For me sir, this is the cliché that the end does not justify the means, opposite of machiavellianism. For example sir,
I’m a politician and this big medical company offered me 5million so that I will favor their product during the
bidding of hospital equipment. The hospital personnel said that the medical device that they are selling is not as
effective as the other one and might even cause burns on the patients occasionally. Even though I already know
that fact, I still chose to accept the 5million peso bribe but I used that money to build a public library for the
students. Even if I didn’t take the money for myself, even if I donated it to build a library, what I did was still illegal
and might even cause harm to the patients that will use the equipment. Even though my intention was to help the
students, I still did it in an unethical way. So for it’s better to have small profits and donate in small amounts rather
that compromise our ethics.