While some moral imperatives may be universally significant, many principles are defined by the systemic culture. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) Systems that embrace moral ideals can increase the frequency of positive behaviors by establishing appropriate procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) To ensure appropriate organizational motivations, the legitimacy of the authority and culture should be continuously evaluated in the context of objective assessments. (Kilmann, Saxton, & Serpa, 1986) Effective policies are adopted when the ideology of an organization is founded on valid perceptions regarding the nature of the environment rather than illegitimate distortions of reality.
Although concepts like justice and fairness may be independent of organizational values, other principles are often established to maintain the continuity of systemic arrangements. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) The culture of an organization is a representation of the essential values embraced by the hierarchical authorities. (Zimbardo, 2007) Values are the abstract motivations that guide and justify the attitudes and behaviors of an individual. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) A positive organizational culture promotes behaviors that serve the purpose of the institution. (Kilmann et al., 1986)
Systems are power structures that implement procedures in order to promote the achievement of authority motivations. (Zimbardo, 2007) An institution establishes specific procedures to generate particular situations and behaviors that are consistent with the general objectives of the organizational culture. (Zimbardo, 2007) The definitive policies of an organization include behavioral prescriptions that describe the nature of appropriate relationships within the system. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) In almost all institutions, the moral judgment of individual behaviors is relative to these systemic priorities. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011)
An organization may ensure the universal application of essential principles by emphasizing the individuality of each person. (Zimbardo, 2007) By acknowledging the intrinsic value of all subjects, the institution inhibits dehumanization through labels and stereotypes. (Zimbardo, 2007) Additionally, recognizing each person’s unique identity may prevent many moral transgressions that are enabled by de-individuation. (Zimbardo, 2007) By encouraging personal accountability, systems may elicit behaviors that are consistent with moral standards. (Zimbardo, 2007) To prevent deviations from the expectations of the organization, no person should be allowed to diffuse or defer responsibility for their actions. (Zimbardo, 2007)
An organization may promote moral and ethical standards by prioritizing the validity of authority and policy over any other ideal. Systemic principles should be founded on authentic assessments in order to create appropriate procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) The legitimacy of the authority should be continuously measured by the degree to which the organizational priorities are consistent with objective evaluations. (Kilmann et al., 1986) A moral system should be open to continuous criticism to enable the identification of invalid motivations. (Zimbardo, 2007) By preventing the imposition of a single set of perceptions, an organization may avoid culture founded on subjective distortions of reality. (Zimbardo, 2007)
While the collective arrangement may be maintained by universal priorities of security and stability, the dominant culture defines many behavior expectations within the system. (Vauclair & Fischer, 2011) The culture is founded on an ideology that is created by the authorities to justify the operations of the institution. (Zimbardo, 2007) In order to maintain effective policies, an organizational culture must be able to adapt to shifting conditions. (Kilmann et al., 1986) The validity of institutional procedures is increased by continuous evaluations of progress in the context of objective measures. (Kilmann et al., 1986)
References
Kilmann, R. H., Saxton, M. J., & Serpa, R. (1986) Issues in understanding and changing culture. California Management Review. 28(2), 87-94.
Vauclair, C., & Fischer, R. (2011) Do cultural values predict individuals’ moral attitudes? A cross-cultural multilevel approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 645-657. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.794
Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York
Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label justice. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Politics and Ethics
Politics is the practical application of ethical theories. The principal ethical function of government is the promotion of prosperity. However, utilitarian motivations may conflict with other moral values. (Brulde, 2010) General happiness should only be promoted through morally permissible means. (Brulde, 2010) Moral politics must perform utilitarian actions that are compliant with acceptable ethical principles.
The term ethics refers to the individual attributes of a person. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Normative ethics are the values that result in behavioral imperatives. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Morality is the function of ethical characteristics in social interactions. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) The purpose of moral politics is the application of paramount ethical principles. (Brulde, 2010)
If happiness is the supreme human value, political actions should reflect utilitarian motivations that are within the boundaries of moral constraints. (Brulde, 2010) Consequentialist ethical reasoning operates within the confines of certain deontological obligations. (Brulde, 2010) These moral prohibitions represent the ethical priorities of justice and fairness. (Brulde, 2010) Suspensions of utilitarian criteria may be necessary in order to ensure the well being of society. (Brulde, 2010) Happiness may be the ideal that politics aims to achieve, but this is not the only consideration of an action. (Brulde, 2010)
Immanuel Kant categorical imperative defines moral actions as universal. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) This deontological criterion identifies ethics as absolute rules that must be reversibly applicable in all situations without contradiction. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Another moral principle of Kant is the practical imperative prohibition of human exploitation. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) According to this principle, each individual must be respected as an end in themselves. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Many actions motivated by utilitarian reasoning would be prohibited by these restrictions.
The resolution of the conflict between the teleological and deontological prescriptions is inherent in the definition of rights. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Since interpersonal influence is inevitable, the ideal of autonomy must include egalitarian considerations of the scope of individual discretion. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Possession of a right necessarily asserts the authority to limit the freedom others. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Preservation of rights requires the maintenance of equality though restrictions of activity. (Pallikkathayil, 2010)
A formal social contract is a voluntary exchange of some freedom in order to secure essential rights. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) A moral government is constructed to impartially protect the rights of citizens through legislation and enforcement. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) The resulting institution establishes conclusive rights that are merely provisional in nature. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Moving from the state of nature to the impartial judgment procedures of a civilization requires surrender to the enforcement of government conclusions. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) The social contract authorizes the institution to enforce egalitarian and utilitarian restrictions. (Pallikkathayil, 2010)
The justice as fairness described by John Rawls provides a model for a system that promotes happiness while remaining compatible with deontological requirements. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) The equality principle provides each individual with the maximum liberty that enables the same freedom for others. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Inequalities are permitted only when universally beneficial and acquired from equal opportunity. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012)
Justice as fairness is developed through the original position of the veil of ignorance. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Each principle must be adopted from a neutral perspective to ensure equal opportunity to all. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) This foundation constructs a government that is able to promote a utilitarian agenda using only means that are agreed upon by all members. The political actions of this institution promote happiness for everyone while complying with essential moral principles.
The government is authorized only to interpret and protect ethical principles by means allowed in the constitution of the institution. Individuals who defy the authority of the institution transgress the moral obligations of the community. However, any government that violates the social contract is unjust and must be replaced. The principles that establish an ethical system are paramount and must be protected from perversions.
References
Brulde, B. (2010) Happiness, morality and politics. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 567-583
Pallikkathayil, J. (2010) Deriving morality from politics: rethinking the formula of humanity. Ethics, 121, 116-147
Thiroux, J.P., & Krasemann, K.W. (2012) Ethics: Theory and practice. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.
The term ethics refers to the individual attributes of a person. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Normative ethics are the values that result in behavioral imperatives. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Morality is the function of ethical characteristics in social interactions. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) The purpose of moral politics is the application of paramount ethical principles. (Brulde, 2010)
If happiness is the supreme human value, political actions should reflect utilitarian motivations that are within the boundaries of moral constraints. (Brulde, 2010) Consequentialist ethical reasoning operates within the confines of certain deontological obligations. (Brulde, 2010) These moral prohibitions represent the ethical priorities of justice and fairness. (Brulde, 2010) Suspensions of utilitarian criteria may be necessary in order to ensure the well being of society. (Brulde, 2010) Happiness may be the ideal that politics aims to achieve, but this is not the only consideration of an action. (Brulde, 2010)
Immanuel Kant categorical imperative defines moral actions as universal. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) This deontological criterion identifies ethics as absolute rules that must be reversibly applicable in all situations without contradiction. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Another moral principle of Kant is the practical imperative prohibition of human exploitation. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) According to this principle, each individual must be respected as an end in themselves. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Many actions motivated by utilitarian reasoning would be prohibited by these restrictions.
The resolution of the conflict between the teleological and deontological prescriptions is inherent in the definition of rights. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Since interpersonal influence is inevitable, the ideal of autonomy must include egalitarian considerations of the scope of individual discretion. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Possession of a right necessarily asserts the authority to limit the freedom others. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Preservation of rights requires the maintenance of equality though restrictions of activity. (Pallikkathayil, 2010)
A formal social contract is a voluntary exchange of some freedom in order to secure essential rights. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) A moral government is constructed to impartially protect the rights of citizens through legislation and enforcement. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) The resulting institution establishes conclusive rights that are merely provisional in nature. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) Moving from the state of nature to the impartial judgment procedures of a civilization requires surrender to the enforcement of government conclusions. (Pallikkathayil, 2010) The social contract authorizes the institution to enforce egalitarian and utilitarian restrictions. (Pallikkathayil, 2010)
The justice as fairness described by John Rawls provides a model for a system that promotes happiness while remaining compatible with deontological requirements. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) The equality principle provides each individual with the maximum liberty that enables the same freedom for others. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Inequalities are permitted only when universally beneficial and acquired from equal opportunity. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012)
Justice as fairness is developed through the original position of the veil of ignorance. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) Each principle must be adopted from a neutral perspective to ensure equal opportunity to all. (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012) This foundation constructs a government that is able to promote a utilitarian agenda using only means that are agreed upon by all members. The political actions of this institution promote happiness for everyone while complying with essential moral principles.
The government is authorized only to interpret and protect ethical principles by means allowed in the constitution of the institution. Individuals who defy the authority of the institution transgress the moral obligations of the community. However, any government that violates the social contract is unjust and must be replaced. The principles that establish an ethical system are paramount and must be protected from perversions.
References
Brulde, B. (2010) Happiness, morality and politics. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11, 567-583
Pallikkathayil, J. (2010) Deriving morality from politics: rethinking the formula of humanity. Ethics, 121, 116-147
Thiroux, J.P., & Krasemann, K.W. (2012) Ethics: Theory and practice. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)