Case Study Ford Pinto
Ford Pinto Case study
The moral issue of the Ford Pinto case is whether or not Ford Company is responsible for the explosion caused by the failed tank. Ford is morally responsible for the incident since it could have been prevented, public safety should be their top priority when designing their products, and they have disregarded the utilitarianism principle.
Ford is responsible for the Ford Pinto incident because of many reasons. First of all the engineers and the top managers of the company knew of the risks involved in placing the car on the market. They had many alternatives instead of this model, but since profit is the main factor in their decision, they went ahead and market the product. When a company decides to place a product on the market the responsible thing to do is to test it and verify that it does not impose any danger to the public. Responsible decision making is composed of deontological considerations, rational goals and respect for those involved.
As a respected company with a good reputation, Ford should consider public safety as its main priority when designing a product. It is unethical to allow people to die or be injured because of the cost incurred in order to prevent that. Ford should have taken precautious measures in advance in order to prevent harm. But they have already forecasted and assumed future liability from a defective product. They have adopted a policy of allowing a certain number of people to die or be injured even though it could be prevented. There is an ongoing debate whether it is possible to put a price on a life, to use it in the calculations that lead to a positive economic outcome. Since Ford is evidently a profit oriented company and their social responsibilities are low, it is evident that they consider profit as its main priority when making decisions in regard to their design.
The company disregarded the utilitarianism principle since they went against the right of happiness for the people involved.
The moral issue of the Ford Pinto case is whether or not Ford Company is responsible for the explosion caused by the failed tank. Ford is morally responsible for the incident since it could have been prevented, public safety should be their top priority when designing their products, and they have disregarded the utilitarianism principle.
Ford is responsible for the Ford Pinto incident because of many reasons. First of all the engineers and the top managers of the company knew of the risks involved in placing the car on the market. They had many alternatives instead of this model, but since profit is the main factor in their decision, they went ahead and market the product. When a company decides to place a product on the market the responsible thing to do is to test it and verify that it does not impose any danger to the public. Responsible decision making is composed of deontological considerations, rational goals and respect for those involved.
As a respected company with a good reputation, Ford should consider public safety as its main priority when designing a product. It is unethical to allow people to die or be injured because of the cost incurred in order to prevent that. Ford should have taken precautious measures in advance in order to prevent harm. But they have already forecasted and assumed future liability from a defective product. They have adopted a policy of allowing a certain number of people to die or be injured even though it could be prevented. There is an ongoing debate whether it is possible to put a price on a life, to use it in the calculations that lead to a positive economic outcome. Since Ford is evidently a profit oriented company and their social responsibilities are low, it is evident that they consider profit as its main priority when making decisions in regard to their design.
The company disregarded the utilitarianism principle since they went against the right of happiness for the people involved.