Immanuel Kant And Deontology
Deontology is a moral ideal that there is a clear distinction between what is morally right and wrong thing to do. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) outlined in his book Groundworks of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785). “reason tells us what we ought to do, and when we obey our own reason, only then are we truly free" (President and Harvard, 2011). Kant describes a situation where in life one should do the right thing not for appearances, but because doing the right thing is the morally correct thing to do.
Kant dictates that there is a fundamental principle of ethics, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." (Kemerling, 1997a). The meaning behind this ‘universal law’ is that if …show more content…
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means." (Kemerling, 1997b) This Imperative is taken that you should not treat people as objects that you should treat them with dignity and respect just as you would wish to be treated.
In my case study of sports direct I have seen where a modern company through its leadership in Mike Ashley have treated their workforce in the most inhumane manner contrary to the principles and virtues of Deontological Ethics. Mike Ashley was before MP’s this year in relation to his company’s treatment of staff, he was quoted as saying “I like to think I am kind to the right people,” (Lawrence, 2016). Yet his workforce was not treated kindly by any means ‘workers suffered chest pains, stroke, injury, and five births or miscarriages..., such was the fear’ (Lawrence, 2016)
The shear arrogance and lack of moral ethics in a modern company where the “new world of casualised work, ordinary people are dehumanised” (Lawrence, 2016) showing where a company does not follow true deontological principles can revert to the bassist instinct of Victorian industrial era relations with a workforce, that Sports Direct working practises “are closer to that of a Victorian workhouse than that of a modern, reputable High Street retailer" (BBC,
Kant dictates that there is a fundamental principle of ethics, "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." (Kemerling, 1997a). The meaning behind this ‘universal law’ is that if …show more content…
"Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means." (Kemerling, 1997b) This Imperative is taken that you should not treat people as objects that you should treat them with dignity and respect just as you would wish to be treated.
In my case study of sports direct I have seen where a modern company through its leadership in Mike Ashley have treated their workforce in the most inhumane manner contrary to the principles and virtues of Deontological Ethics. Mike Ashley was before MP’s this year in relation to his company’s treatment of staff, he was quoted as saying “I like to think I am kind to the right people,” (Lawrence, 2016). Yet his workforce was not treated kindly by any means ‘workers suffered chest pains, stroke, injury, and five births or miscarriages..., such was the fear’ (Lawrence, 2016)
The shear arrogance and lack of moral ethics in a modern company where the “new world of casualised work, ordinary people are dehumanised” (Lawrence, 2016) showing where a company does not follow true deontological principles can revert to the bassist instinct of Victorian industrial era relations with a workforce, that Sports Direct working practises “are closer to that of a Victorian workhouse than that of a modern, reputable High Street retailer" (BBC,