Rough Draft Of Final Paper In This Course You Have Lo 561187

Rough Draft Of Final Paperin This Course You Have Looked At Classical

In this course, you have looked at classical ethical theories of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. You have also examined different perspectives on ethical issues introduced by relativism, ethical egoism, and emotivism. For this paper, you will apply these theories and perspectives to a current issue, selected from the list of issues below. Choose one of the ethical issues from the list to research and write about. It is recommended that you choose a topic you are familiar with or that you have thought about previously, if possible.

For example, you might choose an issue that either worries you or enrages you; you might choose one that you have worked on; or you might choose one that relates to recent events in your community. Possible Issues include:

• Corporate executive compensation
• Corporate contributions to political campaigns
• Affirmative action
• The media and its responsibilities
• Domestic surveillance
• Whistle blowing in government or in a business
• Religion in the workplace
• Pornography
• Consumer tracking
• Ethical problems of gambling
• Progressive taxation rates
• Immigration
• Women’s equality

For your paper, you will apply the ethical theories and perspectives to the issue you select. You do not have to use all six theories, but you should apply at least two ethical theories and at least one ethical perspective in your paper.

Focus primarily on ethical topics and concepts; avoid distractions related to political, economic, religious, or legal perspectives. Describe, compare, and analyze the ethical theories and perspectives as they relate to your chosen issue. Explain your analysis of the ethical issues involved, including breaches of ethical behavior. Discuss how each theory could help individuals consider what constitutes virtuous or ethical behavior in this context.

Your draft must include at least three pages of text, a title page, and a references page. It should feature a clear thesis statement outlining your main argument and a list of sources you intend to use. You may utilize the Sociology Research Guide in the Ashford University Library.

Format your rough draft according to APA style, and properly cite and reference all sources as per APA guidelines. For further assistance, consult the Ashford Writing Center available within the course resources.

Note: The final version will be expanded to eight to ten pages, include an additional title page, and incorporate at least five academic sources.

Paper For Above instruction

Choosing the ethical issue of corporate contributions to political campaigns provides a compelling opportunity to analyze the ethical implications through multiple theoretical lenses. This issue raises significant questions about the influence of money in politics, the integrity of democratic processes, and the ethical responsibilities of corporations within society. By applying utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, along with perspectives such as relativism, we can explore the moral dimensions and assess the ethicality of corporate political contributions.

Introduction

The role of corporate contributions to political campaigns has become increasingly controversial, influencing policy decisions and potentially undermining democratic integrity. Ethical analysis of this issue is crucial, as it involves balancing corporate interests with societal good and transparency. The central thesis of this paper posits that while corporate donations can be justified under certain ethical frameworks, they often pose significant ethical dilemmas that demand careful scrutiny through various theories and perspectives.

Ethical Theories Applied to Corporate Contributions

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism evaluates the morality of actions based on their outcomes, aiming to maximize overall happiness and reduce suffering. Applying this theory to corporate contributions, one might argue that donations are ethical if they contribute to societal benefits, such as supporting charitable causes or promoting policies that improve community well-being. However, when corporate donations aim primarily to safeguard corporate interests, potentially at the expense of public good, utilitarian calculus may reveal ethical deficiencies. For example, funding campaigns that lead to harmful policies, even if beneficial to shareholders, can result in greater societal harm, thus rendering such donations unethical.

Deontological Ethics

Deontology focuses on duty and adherence to moral rules, emphasizing principles such as honesty, fairness, and transparency. From this perspective, corporate contributions could be deemed unethical if they involve clandestine dealings, influence peddling, or violate legal standards of political integrity. It stresses that corporations have a moral duty to uphold democratic principles and avoid corrupting influences, regardless of the consequences. Consequently, anonymous or undisclosed donations violate the deontological imperative of transparency and honesty, making them ethically problematic.

Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics emphasizes moral character and virtues such as integrity, justice, and prudence. Analyzing corporate contributions through this lens suggests that ethical corporations should foster virtues that enhance societal trust and demonstrate responsibility. Contributions aligned with virtuous motives, such as supporting community development or promoting fairness, are considered ethical. Conversely, using campaign donations to gain undue influence or to serve selfish interests reflects vices such as greed and dishonesty, undermining virtues essential to ethical corporate behavior.

Perspectives on Ethical Behavior

Relativism, which asserts that ethical standards are culturally or contextually based, complicates judgments about corporate contributions. From a relativist standpoint, what is considered ethical in one society might be unacceptable in another. However, this perspective risks justifying practices that undermine universal principles of fairness and justice. Ethical egoism, which advocates for actions that maximize self-interest, might justify corporate donations if they benefit the company, but this neglects broader societal impacts and moral responsibilities.

Emotivism, which regards moral judgments as expressions of emotional attitudes, suggests that evaluations of corporate donations may be driven more by emotional reactions than reasoned analysis. While emotional responses to perceived corruption or fairness are valid, policy decisions should ideally be rooted in rational ethical reasoning rather than solely emotional appeals.

Discussion and Ethical Implications

The ethical analysis demonstrates that corporate contributions to political campaigns present multifaceted moral issues. While some contributions might be justified when they serve the public interest, many raise concerns about undue influence, inequality, and corruption. According to deontological principles, transparency and adherence to democratic norms are non-negotiable. Virtue ethics emphasizes that corporations should embody virtues that promote societal trust and integrity. Utilitarian considerations highlight the need to assess the broader societal impacts of such donations.

Breaches of ethical behavior include undisclosed donations, attempts to sway policies unlawfully, and donations that prioritize corporate interests over societal well-being. Addressing these breaches requires establishing clear ethical standards and regulatory oversight that aligns corporate practices with societal ethical expectations.

Conclusion

In conclusion, understanding the ethical dimensions of corporate campaign contributions necessitates a multifaceted approach. By applying utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics, alongside perspectives like relativism and egoism, it becomes evident that ethical corporate behavior in political financing must prioritize transparency, societal benefit, and moral integrity. Future policies should focus on strengthening ethical standards and accountability to uphold democratic values and foster responsible corporate citizenship.

References

• Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. Harper & Brothers.
• Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press.
• Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. (Translated by Mary Gregor, 1998). Cambridge University Press.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Harvard University Press.
• Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2011). Ethics: Theory and practice. Pearson.
• Warren, M. A. (2000). Ethics in corporate social responsibility. Business and Society, 39(4), 416–441.