Kant's Deontological Ethics: Personal Narrative

The potential benefit of hiring Ms. Jenkins is the fact that she is a reregister nurse with a bachelors’ degree behind her. She has been practicing for a significant amount of time and is known around the community, from working with a PR actioner. Due to her prior work, she probably knows many elderly in the area. She also has a four-year degree and the administrators like that more than applicants with two-year degrees. However, Ms. Jenkins was involved in an abusive relationship and did commit a crime that was made very public in the town. While she was released early from jail and her license to practice was given

If Sarah wants to make a balanced decision, the last decision seems like a reasonable one to take. If she adds John’s personal history, but does not give too much information, she might increase his chances while remaining ethical. If she explains John’s employment history truthfully, and adds in the personal factors, John should have a decent chance of getting hired. He also has to be truthful with his interviewer about asking for a second

Over the course we’ve studied three ethical theories, those theories are Kantian deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics. These theories focus on different philosophies or views that are used to either explain or make a judgment in regards to what is considered right or wrong in a given situation. To begin with, ethical theories help explain why an individual believes that an action is right or wrong. It gives one an understanding of how an individual chooses to make ethical decisions. Which is why different ethical theories are not congruent with a different situation.

Taking advantage of someone and lying to them is morally wrong. In the article it even states “we don’t do anything to break the law” which basically says we know we are taking advantage of the law and fortunately you won’t even know about it. I can understand trying to make a sale and gaining profit while also pleasing the client, but to lie and deceive someone is just not acceptable. Even if using the technique will result in her making more money she will be doing so by lying to all of her

Starling (2011) describes, matters that involve one using deception to hide poor work performance is never justified, nor is using deception

First Deputy County Clerk Christie Baird has a decision to make, one that should be based on logic and rational reasons. However, since the hiring process of new employee, Heather, was not based on best practices, there is at least one moral issue that comes into play. First, Heather was chosen from a pool of potential candidates that were minimally qualified. Second, Heather’s age was used as an assumption (that she would probably stay at the office and not move on to another job), and third, unless “most people in the office) were part of the hiring committee, I do not believe that is was professional to discuss any information regarding the hiring process of Heather. Therefore, the moral issue to consider is that some of the fault, of Heather’s

To begin with, lying to keep someone from harm or from hurting their feelings can sometimes be acceptable. In the AP-lpsos, percent of those questioned said it was sometimes OK to lie to avoid hurting someone’s feelings, even though 52 percent said lying, overall, was never justified (NBCNEWS, 2006). “People who say lying is wrong are often in abstract.” Very little of people would admit to thinking it is ok to lie on a resume.

Immanuel Kant was a moral philosopher. His theory, better known as deontological theory, holds that intent, reason, rationality, and good will are motivating factors in the ethical decision making process. The purpose of this paper is to describe and explain major elements of his theory, its essential points, how it is used in the decision making process, and how it intersects with the teams values.

Kant’s deontology gives us questions that can be ask to determined how ethical the using of the information would be. These questions are called Kant’s categorical imperative. The fist categorical is, “Act only on that maxim that you can will as a universal law?” This means that you should only act in a way that you would allow others to act in the same way. In this case, you would have to be okay with being treated the same way that the Jewish prisoners were treated. It would be most likely that you would not want to be treated in the way. If for any reason the answer to this question is yes, then you would need to ask the second categorical imperative. The second categorical imperative is “Always treat humanity, whether in your own person

“There is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in this world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualifications, except a good will.” (Kant, pg.7 393). No other thing that may appear good can be unqualifiedly good, as even “Talents of the mind…Gifts of power…[Other] qualities…Have no intrinsic unconditional worth, but they always presuppose, rather, a good will, which restricts the high esteem in which they are otherwise rightly held.” (Kant, pg.7 393-394). So Immanuel Kant introduces the public to his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, which results not in simply a grounding work, but one that is utterly groundbreaking. This opener, wholly devoted to the establishment of the importance of will and intention, notes the guiding characteristics of a good will. As enumerated previously, Kant recognizes the plausible potential positivity of plenty concepts, but remains of the mind that none of these are good in themselves without the efforts of a good will to guide and restrict them in a manner that perpetuates their positivity.

Do you believe a lie should be permissible and/or not permissible based on the situation at hand?

Why might some withhold information and is withholding lying or always motivated by the need to deceive

In Article 2 we learn about a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. He believes that lying cannot be justified in any circumstance. He states that “ a lie, even if it does not wrong any particular individual, it always harms mankind individually.” His statement talks about how a lie will always harm someone no matter how big or small the lie is and it won’t matter whether it was your intention to harm or not. He also talks about how lying harms the liar by “ destroying his human dignity and making him more worthless than a small thing.” This statement alone shows how damaging lying can be especially if you care about your dignity and self worth. His evidence clearly supports honesty and why lying just can’t be justified.

Kant had the believe that to live a good life, it had to be led by happiness, but it doesn’t also mean that it should only bring you pleasure and satisfaction. It explains that when one’s wants to live in a state of peace they have to live a moral life.

I would think this would be the best option because I believe honesty is the best policy and it would just makes things easier since it’s a definite answer and so no need to go investigate to find the truth. Additionally, it would show to the job supervisor that Shanna is an honest person and whatever she says from now on will carry more meaning to the supervisor since he can trust her. It would also show the progression that Jen has made to improve herself and I believe that every person should get a second chance to fix their wrongs and with Jen it shows she did just that by becoming an excellent student at their college. This decision would impact Jen and Shanna because depending on the outcome this could keep their friendship alive or destroy it. It also impacts the job supervisor because he now’s needs to use his best judgment to decide if Jen is a good representative of the college and whether or not she should get the job. Lastly this impacts the college its self because depending the supervisors’ decision he may or may not be benefiting the school by rejecting Jen for the position. Lastly if everyone made the same decision I made I would believe that more people could find jobs because since most jobs do some kind of criminal background check there’s no point in hiding and by coming out from the get go it shows