Page 1 Of 4: General Turnitin Written Assignment Instruction

Page 1 Of 4general Turnitin Written Assignment Instructions Revised

Develop a memo analyzing an ethical issue involving confidentiality, property values, and ethical obligations using four ethical lenses: Utilitarianism, Universal Ethics (Kant’s categorical imperative), The Golden Rule, and Virtue Ethics. The context involves advising an employee, Luke, on how to proceed with confidential company plans to develop land for an adult entertainment store near his brother’s neighborhood, considering the ethical implications of withholding or revealing information about property sales and neighborhood impact.

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presents a complex ethical dilemma centered on confidentiality, honesty, and moral responsibilities in a corporate setting. Luke, an employee of ABC Company, has been involved in a project to develop land for an adult entertainment store. The location is significant because it is near his brother Owen’s residence, and the public announcement of the project is scheduled in one month. Luke is aware that revealing this plan prematurely could adversely affect property values in the neighborhood, yet he is also concerned about his obligation to maintain confidentiality for his employer. Additionally, Owen has received an offer to sell his house at a current market rate, but he is contemplating waiting for a potential future market improvement.

This situation raises critical ethical questions: Should Luke disclose the upcoming project or keep quiet? Is it ethical to withhold information that could influence Owen’s decision? What are Luke’s obligations toward his brother, his employer, and his personal integrity? To navigate these questions, we must analyze the issue through multiple ethical lenses, each offering a distinct perspective on what constitutes the morally right action.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall happiness and minimizing suffering (Mill, 1863). From this perspective, Luke must consider the consequences of revealing or concealing information. If Luke discloses the project prematurely, the resultant decrease in property values could harm Owen and other residents, causing distress and economic loss. Conversely, withholding information protects Owen’s immediate interests but at the expense of transparency and honesty, which might erode trust within the company and community if the project’s nature becomes secretive.

Applying utilitarian principles involves assessing which action yields the greatest good for the greatest number. Since the project’s public announcement is scheduled in a month, an argument can be made that waiting until then minimizes harm to the neighborhood while respecting the company's confidentiality. However, if the concealment leads to legal or ethical breaches—such as insider trading or misrepresentation—that could cause larger societal harm, disclosure might be justified. Ultimately, the utilitarian approach could support keeping the information confidential until the official announcement to prevent unnecessary distress, provided that the project’s disclosure aligns with honesty and does not cause greater harm.

Kant’s Universal Ethics (Categorical Imperative)

Kant’s philosophy stresses acting according to maxims that can be universally applied and respecting individuals as ends (Kant, 1785). The principle of honesty dictates that one should not deceive or withhold pertinent information that could influence others’ decisions. Under this lens, Luke’s obligation is to act consistently with the rule that one should be truthful and transparent. Concealing information about the project violates this principle because it involves deception or withholding critical facts that affect Owen’s property decision.

Furthermore, Kantian ethics emphasizes respecting the autonomy and dignity of individuals. Owen has a right to make an informed choice about his property sale, which implies that Luke should refrain from secretive behaviors. Therefore, from a Kantian perspective, Luke should disclose the project details publicly or at least to Owen, respecting his right to make a fully informed decision. Failure to do so would be treating Owen merely as a means to avoid conflict or protect the company’s interests, which is morally impermissible.

The Golden Rule

The Golden Rule, “Treat others as you would like to be treated,” (Luke 6:31; Bilson, 2005) advocates empathy and reciprocal fairness. Applying this principle, Luke should consider how he would feel if he were in Owen’s position. If Luke values honesty and transparency, he should extend these same principles toward Owen by informing him about the project and the potential impact on his property sale.

This perspective encourages Luke to be empathetic and honest, recognizing that withholding information could be seen as unfair or manipulative. Conversely, if Luke considers himself in Owen’s position and wishes to be fully informed when making a significant financial decision, he should ensure Owen receives complete information. Compliance with the Golden Rule supports openness and integrity, favoring disclosure over secrecy in this case.

Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics emphasizes moral character and virtues such as honesty, integrity, courage, and fairness (Aristotle, 4th century BC). From this standpoint, Luke’s action should reflect virtues that promote moral excellence. Honesty and integrity suggest that Luke ought to be truthful about the project and not deceive Owen. Courage is also relevant, as Luke might face personal or professional conflicts in choosing to disclose the information.

Virtue ethics would assess whether Luke’s decision aligns with the qualities of a good person. Concealing information for self-interest or to prevent short-term conflict could undermine virtues like honesty and fairness, leading to a less virtuous character. Conversely, acting transparently and respecting Owen’s right to know can cultivate moral virtues and demonstrate moral integrity. Therefore, a virtuous person would advise full disclosure or at least transparent communication with Owen to uphold the virtues critical for ethical behavior.

Conclusion

Considering the four ethical perspectives, the most morally sound action leans toward transparency and honesty. The utilitarian approach suggests minimizing harm by delaying disclosure until the official announcement. Kantian ethics strongly argue for full honesty, respecting Owen’s autonomy and right to information. The Golden Rule emphasizes fairness and empathetic communication, supporting informing Owen. Virtue ethics promote acting with moral integrity by embodying virtues like honesty and fairness. Overall, prioritizing open, honest communication aligns with the core principles of these ethical theories, fostering trust, respect, and moral character. Therefore, Luke should ethically disclose the project details to Owen, balancing confidentiality obligations with moral responsibilities to act rightly.

References

• Aristotle. (4th century BC). Nicomachean Ethics.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Bilson, A. (2005). The Ethical Dimensions of Business. Routledge.
• Bowden, P. (2008). Virtue Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method, and Point. Oxford University Press.
• MacIntyre, A. (1981). After Virtue. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Resnik, D. B. (2015). The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects. Routledge.
• Shaw, W. H. (2016). Business Ethics: A Text and Cases. Cengage Learning.