Comparing Kantianism, Utilitarianism, And Virtue Ethics

Business ethics main concern is how to give solutions to ethical problems that arise in a business environment and/ or working place. (White, Lecture #2, September, 9). Through years different philosophers have created and developed different theories that would help a business person solve these issues in order to assure the success of a business organization. However, three are the widest spread approaches that try to make the life in an organization easier and happier: Kantianism, Utilitarianism, and Virtue Ethics. This essay will describe these three approaches by concerning some of the main points of each approach. In addition to that, the essay will discuss another, not so commonly used approach, which is Pragmatism. The purpose of this
The first theories to be described are the Kantian theories. Kantianism is an ethical theory developed by Immanuel Kant. According to Bowie, who is a professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota, Kant puts a great emphasis on the principle of “respect for persons” (published in Frederick, p.3). Based on this principle one’s intention should never be to make profits on expense of other people, because it he/she does then the action is considered as immoral. Bowie discusses that from Kant’s point of view what really matters is the good will one puts into a certain action. Also, one should not concern about the consequences that the action might lead to as long as this action is performed on the basis of a good intention (published in Frederick, p.3). Following Bowie’s discussion a person is said to be a person of good will only when he/she does his/her duty for the simple reason
One should always act on those maxims that do not go beyond one’s capability and at the same time wills these maxims to become universal.
2. One should always treat other people the way he/she would like to be treated, that is one would like to be treated as the end and not only as means to this end.
3. Once one sets a maxim he/she should consider him/herself as a member of an ideal kingdom of ends where he/she can be either the one who sets the maxim or the one on whom the maxim will apply (published in Frederick, p.4).
To better understand this three formulations let us consider some examples. The first formulations means that the maxim one acts on, first of all should not excess one’s capability of acting and performing. In addition to that this maxim should be universally applicable. For example, let’s assume I would like to universalize the maxim where I ask someone to help me with my studies but at the same time I do not like to help someone who also needs help with his/her studies. This means that at some point everyone would ask for help but no one would be willing to help. As a result universalizing this maxim would result into