Final Paper Questions Students Can Choose To Write ✓ Solved

Final Paper Questionsstudents Can Choose To Write One Of The Two Follo

Students can choose to write one of the two following papers with the following themes:

Paper 1: Analyze the office at Glengarry-Glenross from a Marxist perspective. What would Marx have to say about what transpires at the office? Or: Paper 2: Analyze the office at Glengarry-Glenross from a Utilitarian and Pragmatist perspective. What would the Utilitarians and the Pragmatists have to say about what transpires at the office?

The midterm paper is due on Friday, December 18.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The office environment at Glengarry-Glenross serves as a rich case for applying various philosophical perspectives to understand human behavior, organizational dynamics, and ethical considerations. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the office through two distinct lenses: a Marxist perspective and a utilitarian-pragmatist perspective. By examining characters’ actions, dialogues, and consequences within the film, alongside foundational theories from Marx, utilitarianism, and pragmatism, we can better understand the ethical and socio-economic implications of the characters' choices and the organizational culture.

Analysis from a Marxist Perspective

Marxist theory centers on class struggle, the modes of production, and the alienation of workers within capitalist systems (Marx, 1867). The film depicts the office as a microcosm of capitalism, where power dynamics are heavily skewed in favor of management, and employees are motivated by materialistic incentives such as sales commissions and job security. The characters, especially the salesmen, exemplify the alienation described by Marx: they are disconnected from the products of their labor, from each other, and ultimately from their own human potential.

For instance, the high-pressure environment compels salesmen to manipulate customers, reflecting a commodification of human relationships. The management’s focus on short-term profits and aggressive sales tactics can be interpreted as a reflection of the capitalist drive for surplus value. Marx would critique this scenario as indicative of how capitalism commodifies workers and entraps them in a cycle of exploitation and alienation (Marx, 1867).

Furthermore, the hierarchical structure of the office exemplifies class stratification, with management, embodying the bourgeoisie, wielding control and power over the proletariat salesmen. The film unveils how the capitalist mode of production perpetuates social inequality and undermines the autonomy and humanity of workers. According to Marx, such workplace dynamics serve to reinforce the systemic inequalities characteristic of capitalism.

Analysis from a Utilitarian and Pragmatist Perspective

From a utilitarian standpoint, which emphasizes maximizing overall happiness and minimizing suffering (Bentham, 1789), the actions of the characters can be evaluated based on their outcomes. The management’s emphasis on sales targets aims at organizational success but often results in stress, dishonesty, and moral compromise among employees. These outcomes suggest a tension between individual well-being and corporate profit, often favoring the latter.

Utilitarians might argue that the office’s culture should be reformed to promote actions that increase overall happiness—such as ethical sales practices, employee support, and transparent decision-making—since these would produce the greatest good for the greatest number (Mill, 1863). Conversely, the utilitarian critique might also focus on the harm caused by ruthless competition and manipulation, which diminishes long-term well-being.

American pragmatism, emphasizing practical consequences and adapting ideas to serve human needs (Pierce, 1878; Dewey, 1916), offers a flexible approach to ethical dilemmas. From this perspective, the office should prioritize actions that improve real outcomes—fostering teamwork, honesty, and employee empowerment. Pragmatists would advocate for organizational practices that are tested and refined based on their efficacy in promoting human flourishing within the workplace.

Pragmatism also encourages considering context-specific solutions, recognizing that what works in one organizational culture may not work in another. This perspective urges managers and employees alike to continuously evaluate and adjust their strategies to enhance overall well-being and productivity.

Application of Theoretical Knowledge with Film Characters

Analyzing specific characters and their actions in the film reveals how these theories manifest in real behavior. For instance, the boss’s aggressive sales tactics reflect capitalist priorities—maximizing profits at any cost—aligning with Marxist critiques. The salesmen’s moral compromises exemplify alienation, as they are disconnected from meaningful human interactions and their own labor (Marx, 1867).

In contrast, characters who demonstrate ethical resistance or seek to promote mutual success embody utilitarian and pragmatic ideals. For example, a character advocating for honest sales practices might be viewed as seeking to increase overall happiness and long-term organizational health, embodying pragmatic flexibility and utilitarian concern for the greater good.

Conclusion

The office environment at Glengarry-Glenross exemplifies complex dynamics that can be critically examined through multiple philosophical lenses. A Marxist perspective highlights systemic exploitation and alienation inherent in capitalist workplaces, while utilitarian and pragmatist approaches focus on outcomes and practical solutions aimed at human well-being. By integrating character analysis, theoretical frameworks, and the consequences of actions depicted in the film, we gain a nuanced understanding of the ethical and socio-economic forces shaping organizational behavior and individual morality within such environments.

References

  • Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford University Press.
  • Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. Macmillan.
  • Marx, K. (1867). Capital: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production. Penguin Classics.
  • Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
  • Pierce, C. S. (1878). How to Make Our Ideas Clear. Popular Science Monthly.
  • Krugman, P. (2012). The importance of systemic inequality. The New York Times.
  • Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
  • Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton University Press.
  • Turiel, E. (2006). Social development and moral education. Psychology Press.
  • Wolff, R. P. (2014). Understanding Marx. Routledge.

Related Assignments