New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

PHIL 2274 Exam 1 Study Guide

by: Bridie Burke

PHIL 2274 Exam 1 Study Guide PHIL 2274

Marketplace > East Carolina University > PHIL-Philosophy > PHIL 2274 > PHIL 2274 Exam 1 Study Guide
Bridie Burke
GPA 3.68

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Study Guide for Exam 1
Business Ethics
Kenneth Ferguson
Study Guide
50 ?




Popular in Business Ethics

Popular in PHIL-Philosophy

This 7 page Study Guide was uploaded by Bridie Burke on Sunday February 7, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PHIL 2274 at East Carolina University taught by Kenneth Ferguson in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 114 views. For similar materials see Business Ethics in PHIL-Philosophy at East Carolina University.

Similar to PHIL 2274 at ECU


Reviews for PHIL 2274 Exam 1 Study Guide


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 02/07/16
PHIL 2274 Business Ethics Study Guide Exam 1 2/10/16 Philosophy Claim Association Notes Divine X is right/wrong only Commandments Command if God commands it Theory to be right/wrong Subjectivism Individual feels x is right (based on feeling) Cultural A culture feels x is Lord Patrick Follow your Relativism right (based on Devlin culture’s rules & emotion, not NEVER interfere rational) with other cultures Egoism X is right IFF x is inThomas the actor’s self Hobbes interest Ayn Rand (opposite of altruism) Utilitarianism X is right IFF x John Stuart Mill Utility = pleasure maximizes utility for – pain affected group (what’s best for whole group) Categorical X is right ITT you Immanuel Kant Imperative can will X to be a universal law (must be followed under any condition) Contractarianis X is morally John Rawls Contract can be m obligatory IFF you written or verbal ‘signed’ a contract agreeing to do X Deontologism X is morally good if x is good in itself Consequentialis X is morally good if m x brings about good consequences Business Ethics – doing the right thing Moral claims = normative (opinion based) Subjective Objective based on something based on something inside subject outside subject (opinion) (truth) St. Thomas Aquinas  believed objected should be used for intended purpose, if it wasn’t being used for purpose  it was immoral  Ex. Sex organs  for reproduction; if not being used for reproduction it’s immoral Actions Are: If they are: Normative Language Good Right  permissible/allowed “may”  obligatory/required “must” “should” Bad Wrong  impermissible “must not” Ethics vs Law We hope everything legal is legally good/moral We hope everything illegal is based on immoral values So we select law officials based on moral values – if they hold same values as you Moral/Ethical Theory – attempt to explain right vs. wrong Divine Command Theory – something is right/wrong only if God commands it as such Divine Command Theory Subjectivism authoritative (applies to ‘everyone’) Cultural Relativism don’t need any justification Woldfendon Report – recommend to make these legal:  Homosexuality  Prostitution  Pimping (managing prostitutes) * these were all frowned upon by culture, nothing ‘legally’ wrong with them Lord Patrick Devlin (Cultural Relativism) Said you shouldn’t legalize something that is immoral. In order to find out what is moral or not  ask those in the culture. He asked people about homosexuality and the majority didn’t like it so he concluded that it was immoral Thomas Hobbes (Egoist) Was a friend of Queen Elizabeth, he was approached by a beggar, so he gave the beggar money. He didn’t help the beggar for moral reasons, but said he enjoys giving away money and since it made him feel good  egoism Ayn Rand (Egoist) Rejects duties of benevolence, thinks you can’t help others because they will become dependent and not be able to do things for themselves Duties: Benevolence Nonmalevalence Duty to help others Duty not to harm others As much as you can while Don’t steal, kill, hurt still helping yourself Everyone gets a small form of satisfaction in helping others. Even egoists, especially when the sacrifice is minor compared to the pleasure received Psychological Egosim (theory) – we are all egoists by nature John Stuart Mills (Utilitarianism) Studied views of Jeremy Bentham. Believed there are 2 sovereign masters & their job is to determine what you shall do / should do (pleasure + pain) PLEASURE: sex, recognition, accomplishment, food, exercise PAIN:death, grief, injury, disease, deprivation [ utility = pleasure – pain ] Immanuel Kant (Categorical Imperative) Studied “The Golden Rule” originally given by Confucius “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Kant didn’t believe in this Golden Rule because people wish to be treated differently. Friedrich Nietzsche also didn’t like Golden Rule because he believed in living with power, so we can’t all be equal. He created the categorical imperative as a command which must be followed under any condition. Case Studies Case 2.1 (Harvard Business School) HBS was sending out acceptance/rejection letters months later, so applicants found a way to hack the school’s system to view the letter. They couldn’t change the decision, but could view it earlier than others. In 9 hours, 119 applicants logged in to view results – these 119 applicants were then rejected for ‘hacking’. In 1970s, Harvard admission stopped looking at applicants’ legacy & solely viewed grades – they lost so much money that they had to start letting legacies back in Case 2.2 (The Pinto Car) The public wanted a smaller, fuel efficient car so Lee Iacocca with Ford made cheaper, fuel efficient car. Pinto made a small, compact car with a gas tank in the back, however the tank kept exploding. They had already manufactured 12.5 million cars, and to add a small metal bar above the gas tank would fix the problem at 11$ per bar. They calculated the estimated totals if they didn’t add a bar ($200,000 in death cost, $67,000 in burn cost and $700 in repair cost). It would cost $137million to add a bar to every car, so it was more expensive to change the car than from the losses totaled  so they didn’t change the bar Case 3.1 (Eminent Domain) Eminent Domain – gov can take private property for public use with proper compensation Kelo vs New London (2005) New London was a naval base that was closing and Pfizer wanted to come in with a business and employ professionals. The area around the base was full of unlivable houses – Pfizer used eminent domain to buy all houses around, but was resisted by Suzette Kelo. Kelo claimed the buying of houses wasn’t for public use. Pfizer argued it was for public use because employees would live in nice houses and pay for nice school and benefit the economy. Congress voted 5/4 in favor of New London Case 3.2 (Sanctuary Spring/Nestle) Sanctuary Spring, MI – Nestle came in and bought a 99 year lease on water rights for the spring. They set up pump from the spring (since spring replenishes with water from water table) Nestle ended up draining water table and ended up taking water from local rivers which resulted in the death of many fish. They decided to put a max cap on the water Nestle was allowed to pump from spring (250 gallons) Marginal Utility – utility of one additional unit of something (give a dollar to a homeless man or give a dollar to Bill Gates  homeless man would get more utility from it) Libertarianism – gove shouldn’t interfere with distribution of wealth (Robert Nozick) said no salary is too high or too low Economy Production Distribution Egalitarianism – based on equal Doesn’t matter Distribute equally distribution no matter what you did Communism – work to meet To full capability Need based needs & full capability  leads to no surplus Capitalism – gov doesn’t Unregulated by Competitiveness interfere w production, pay gov based on competitiveness of profession Libertarianism – gov doesn’t Unregulated by Unreg except for interfere until violation of gov enforcing negative negative rights (no rights paternalism)


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

50 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Janice Dongeun University of Washington

"I used the money I made selling my notes & study guides to pay for spring break in Olympia, Washington...which was Sweet!"

Jim McGreen Ohio University

"Knowing I can count on the Elite Notetaker in my class allows me to focus on what the professor is saying instead of just scribbling notes the whole time and falling behind."


"Their 'Elite Notetakers' are making over $1,200/month in sales by creating high quality content that helps their classmates in a time of need."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.