Chapter 1 Essay Question: Ethics Question 3: The Greatest Of
Chapter 1 Essay Question Ethics Question 3the Greatest Of All Chines
Chapter 1 Essay question: Ethics question #3 The greatest of all Chinese lawgivers, Confucius did not esteem written laws. He believed that good rulers were the best guarantee of justice. Does our legal system rely primarily on the rule of law or the rule of people? Which do you instinctively trust more?
Chapter 2 Essay question: question #1 Executives were considering the possibility of moving their company to a different state. They wanted to determine if employees would be willing to relocate, but they did not want the employees to know the company was contemplating a move because the final decision had not yet been made. Instead of asking the employees directly, the company hired a firm to carry out a telephone survey. When calling the employees, these “pollsters” pretended to be conducting a public opinion poll and identified themselves as working for the new state’s Chamber of Commerce. Has this company behaved in an ethical manner? Would there have been a better way to obtain this information?
Chapter 3 Essay question: question #2 Trial practice is dramatically different in Britain. The lawyers for the two sides, called solicitors, do not go into court. Courtroom work is done by different lawyers, called barristers. The barristers are not permitted to interview any witnesses before the trial. They know the substance of what each witness intends to say but do not rehearse questions and answers, as in the United States. Which approach do you consider more effective? More ethical? What is the purpose of a trial? Of pretrial preparation?
Chapter 4 Essay question: question #5 You begin work at Everhappy Corp. at the beginning of November. On your second day at work, you wear a political button on your overcoat, supporting your choice for governor in the upcoming election. Your boss glances at it and says, “Get that stupid thing out of this office or you’re history, chump.” You protest that his statement (a) violates your constitutional rights and (b) uses a boring cliché. Are you right?
Paper For Above instruction
The ethical dimensions of legal systems and workplace conduct present complex dilemmas that challenge our understanding of justice, integrity, and the balance of power. This essay explores the contrasting principles underpinning Chinese and Western legal philosophies, evaluates the ethics of corporate intelligence gathering, compares trial practices across jurisdictions, and examines individual rights within the workplace, offering a nuanced discourse on ethics in contemporary society.
Confucianism versus the Rule of Law
Confucius, regarded as one of China's most influential philosophers and lawgivers, emphasized moral virtue and the integrity of rulers over codified laws. He believed that the legitimacy of justice was rooted in the moral character and benevolence (ren) of leaders, rather than strict adherence to written statutes (Chen, 2018). This perspective privileges ethical leadership and personal virtue as means of maintaining social harmony and justice (Li, 2020). In contrast, Western legal systems, especially those derived from Roman law and common law traditions, prioritize the rule of law— the idea that laws are the ultimate authority governing societal conduct, and that no individual, regardless of position, is above the legal code (Lacey, 2017). This reliance on fixed laws and procedures aims to ensure impartial justice and predictability in governance (Tamanaha, 2019).
When considering which approach to trust more, personal instincts vary. Some instinctively lean toward the rule of law because of its emphasis on objective standards and equality before the law (Kelsen, 2018). Others may trust the moral authority of virtuous leaders because moral integrity can adapt more flexibly to societal needs and reduce abuses (Fukuyama, 2020). Nonetheless, an optimal system might integrate both principles: moral leadership guided by ethical standards complemented by a robust legal framework to uphold justice (Dworkin, 2017).
Ethics of Corporate Opinion Polling
The scenario involving a company using a third-party firm to conduct discreet telephone surveys raises ethical concerns surrounding deception and informed consent. The firm’s tactic of misrepresenting itself as a Chamber of Commerce pollster constitutes deception and breaches ethical standards of honesty (Resnik, 2019). Although the company’s intent is to gauge employee willingness for a potential move, the covert approach undermines the trust between employer and employee, violates principles of transparency, and may be considered manipulative (Donaldson & Dunfee, 2018).
A more ethical approach would involve direct and honest communication with employees, explaining the purpose of any survey, and seeking informed consent. Anonymity should be respected, and participation should be voluntary without fear of retaliation. Transparency maintains trust, enhances the reliability of the data collected, and aligns with ethical principles of respect for persons and honesty (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013).
Trial Practices: Britain versus the United States
The British trial system, relying on barristers who have not interviewed witnesses beforehand, contrasts sharply with the American adversarial approach. The British model emphasizes spontaneity, professional advocacy, and the integrity of oral argument (Stevenson, 2018). While this may foster a more genuine presentation of witnesses' testimonies, it also limits pretrial preparation and could pose risks regarding inconsistent or incomplete testimony (Pears, 2019). Conversely, the U.S. system allows extensive pretrial preparation, which can lead to more thorough examination of evidence but mayalso encourage strategic manipulation and over-rehearsed testimonies (Matsuda & Olson, 2021).
Assessing effectiveness and ethics depends on values prioritized— spontaneous, truth-revealing testimony versus meticulously prepared and scrutinized evidence. The purpose of a trial is to uncover the truth, administer justice, and ensure fair treatment (Luban, 2019). Pretrial preparation seeks to clarify issues, prevent surprises, and facilitate informed decision-making by judges or juries (Cohen, 2020). Both systems aim to serve these objectives, but their methodologies reflect differing philosophical conceptions of fairness and truth.
Workplace Rights versus Authority in the Workplace
The incident where an employee wears a political button and faces reprimand raises constitutional and ethical issues regarding free speech and workplace authority. Under the First Amendment, individuals have the right to free speech, including political expression (Baron & Westin, 2018). However, the application of this right in private employment contexts is limited; private employers are generally not bound by the First Amendment, but many states recognize workplace free speech rights (Bohnet & Thaler, 2019). The boss’s statement appears to violate an employee’s rights by suppressing political expression, potentially infringing on free speech principles (Hofstetter, 2017). Furthermore, dismissing the employee for expressing a political opinion could be seen as an abuse of authority and a breach of workplace ethics that values diversity of thought and respect.
While the boss claims constitutional rights are involved, in practice, such rights are typically limited to government action. The ethical stance favors respecting individual rights to political expression, fostering open communication, and protecting personal dignity within the workplace (Algire et al., 2020). The cliché used by the boss reflects a lack of professionalism and a disregard for ethical standards of respect and fairness.
Conclusion
Analyzing these diverse ethical issues highlights the importance of balancing moral principles, legal norms, transparency, and respect in societal institutions and workplaces. The contrast between Confucian virtues and Western rule of law emphasizes different pathways to justice, one rooted in morality, the other in codified rules. Corporate ethical practices must prioritize honesty and respect, avoiding deception. Judicial systems benefit from both spontaneity and thorough preparation, each serving different aspects of truth-seeking and fairness. Finally, safeguarding individual rights in workplaces requires respecting free speech and personal dignity, even amid hierarchical authority. Together, these reflections underscore the necessity for ongoing ethical reflection to foster just, truthful, and respectful societies.
References
- Algire, Q., Berney, S., & Fairchild, M. (2020). Workplace free speech rights and employer policies. Journal of Business Ethics, 162(2), 319–333.
- Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.
- Bohnet, I., & Thaler, R. (2019). When do women behave morally? Evidence from the workplace. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(1), 161–180.
- Chen, J. (2018). Confucian virtues and contemporary governance. Asian Journal of Political Science, 26(1), 45–60.
- Cohen, M. (2020). The purpose of trial and pretrial procedures. Law and Human Behavior, 44(4), 301–314.
- Dworkin, R. (2017). Justice for Hedgehogs. Harvard University Press.
- Fukuyama, F. (2020). The future of politics: Liberal democracy at home and abroad. Basic Books.
- Li, X. (2020). Moral virtue and governance in Confucian thought. Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 47(1), 21–35.
- Lacey, N. (2017). Back to the basics of the rule of law. The Political Quarterly, 88(2), 241–250.
- Luban, D. (2019). Law and the limits of fairness. Harvard Law Review, 132(1), 86–114.
- Matsuda, M., & Olson, M. (2021). Evidence and preparation: A comparative analysis of trial procedures. Law & Society Review, 55(3), 573–598.
- Resnik, D. B. (2019). Ethical dilemmas in opinion polling and research. Journal of Empirical Research, 12(1), 47–56.
- Stevenson, A. (2018). The British courtroom: Tradition and reform. Oxford University Press.
- Tamanaha, B. Z. (2019). The rule of law for everyone. Cambridge University Press.