Ethic theory on the Workplace Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Ethic theory on the Workplace - Case Study Example First, there are two kinds of ethical theories, consequentialist and non-consequentialist. There are two consequentialist theories that include egoism and utilitarianism (Shaw et al., 2009). Ethical egoism is the first theory that can be used to give an answer as to what Kehal should do. According to the theory, Kehal should give the gifts that the influential individuals are demanding. In this way, he will be acting in his own interest as prescribed by the theory. This is because it is assured that the airline will be granted the landing rights once the influential individuals receive what they demanded. Once the company has obtained the landing rights, Kehal will receive the promotion as well as a bonus. This will help him to cater for the medical expenses of his ailing parents and sort out all his commitments. Egoism is largely viewed as a consequentialist theory since it focuses on the consequence of an action for the agent instead of the final outcome. In other words, the theory is based on self interest and its major strength is that it evades the possibility of a conflict between self interest and morality. It would be rational for Kemal to offer the gifts to the influential individuals since by pursuing his interest morality is equated to rationality.   The second consequentialist theory that can help in cracking the ethical dilemma is utilitarianism. Based on this theory Kemal should not hand the gifts demanded by the local manager to be given to the influential individuals.

Hamiltons and Jefferson's political philosophy Essay

Hamiltons and Jefferson's political philosophy - Essay Example Hamilton’s and Jefferson's political philosophy There were two camps who came head to head over advocating different ideologies; on one side there was Alexander Hamilton, the secretary of treasury under Washington who advocated a strong centralized government, while on the other hand there was Thomas Jefferson, the secretary of state under Washington and the third President of the U.S. who was against a centralized government and favored a republican government that would have more to do with foreign affairs and less with the laws that have been imposed in any state of the country. Jefferson opposed a centralized form of government feeling that it would threaten the notions of freedom laid down by the Constitution. Jefferson did everything that was in his power to make sure that America did not become the â€Å"new† England under King George III, which would be disastrous to the cause of the revolution on which basis the American nation had been founded. Alexander Hamilton had a different point of view. Alexander Hamilton could be considered an elitist who advocated that rich and well-born are the chosen ones to rule the country (Nagel 76). Alexander Hamilton believed that a country like America would not survive if it gives too much freedom to its states as doing that would mean fueling their desire of their own independence. Hamilton was like a deputy to George Washington and was quite effective in formulating the policy of incorporation of centralized government in the United States.... According to Hamilton, I believe the British government forms the best model the world has ever produced...This government has for its object public strength and individual security. (Pollard 69) He viewed the British form of government in the exact opposite context as was seen by Thomas Jefferson. Hamilton was accepting the good points of a centralized government point of view in the British form of government against the bad points of freedom laid down by the same government. The section of the U.S. politics from which Hamilton originated was very concerned with the survival of the 13 states that made up the United States of America back in that time, regardless of what the role of government was defined. However, he was quite sure that the vision put forward by Thomas Jefferson, a republican form of government, was in no way practical for the survival of states. Jefferson interpreted the constitution as sacred text that defines the rights of the government. According to Jefferson the government shall be defined in the following way: "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (Baghatur 239) He wanted to prove Hamilton wrong who proclaimed that a government with limited powers will not be able to guarantee the survival of