Ethical Decision making....or not?

As I match up all the ethical theories we have learned thus far with the business practices and labor conditions of Apple (that I have learned from recent news articles), I am horrified to see that the company has in some way gone against all of them. So that got me to thinking...what is the ethical theory that guides its decision making? What morals and values drive its behavior?

• Maximization at any cost- more products, more revenue....even if it means exploiting the workers that make the materials that ultimately make up the Iphones, Ipods and Ipads so common among us. What seems to be a contradiction to this belief can be seen in its stores, where a minimalist approach is clearly at work. Exploit the few for the benefit of many...what a second this does sound familiar. Utilitarianism.

• Innovation- This comes straight from the Apple website (in the Investor Relations section):

         What is Apple's mission statement? Apple designs Macs, the best personal computers in the world, along with OS X, iLife, iWork and professional software. Apple leads the digital music revolution with its iPods and iTunes online store. Apple has reinvented the mobile phone with its revolutionary iPhone and App Store, and is defining the future of mobile media and computing devices with iPad.

As I read this mission statement words like power, superior, domination, cockiness are coming to mind. I also realize that similar adjectives have been used to describe the former CEO Steve Jobs. Hmmm...is this a coincidence? I do not think so. I think that the atmosphere and mindset and of every company probably has some and most likely everything to do with the character and mindset of its leader. 

This mission statement also carries a tone that seems to be trying to convince the consumers its products are superior and taking a shot at competitors inadvertently saying those company's products fail miserably in comparison.

A fellow technology company, HP has a whole section titled "shared values" on their website. The overall themes in this text are teamwork, cooperation, consideration and openness. 

This sounds safe, but in reading Apple's mission statement I almost get a feeling of intimidation.

The Taliban announced that it was suspending peace talks with Americans....no surprise there. President Hamid Karzai declared U.S. should confine troops to major bases next year in reaction to an American soldier's killing of 16 civilians in Kandahar Sunday.

Obama responded to the Sunday's killings saying a "thorough investigation," would be conducted into the incident and would not alter the policy or timetable for war in Afghanistan. No details about the circumstances about the attack have been released. At this point, I am ok with this because I do not think it is smart to rush to judgment, but the truth is the whole world has already made their judgments and maybe having the facts out there would help refute any incorrect thoughts.

The first thought I have is what will happen to this soldier, the second what is the best approach for America in terms of handling the situation from a public relations standpoint because right now this incident has definitely shot some holes in the country's trust and credibility. Probably the best thing to do is publicly acknowledge there was wrong-doing and provide some small explanation of how this happened. This would provide some resolution and show others the country is not just going to push this issue under the rug. I think it is in the best interest of the public as a whole to be upfront with this situation, as long as it does not endanger any troops.

Veil of Ignorance

I had not thought of this before, but Tuesday's presentation on the veil of ignorance made me think of this decision-making system in a different way. The basic premise of this thought process requires one to make decisions by stripping away any biases and labels such as race,gender and ethnicity. This seems impossible to realistically put into practice. It presents an ideal and Utopian-like thought.

However interpreting this ethical approach in a different way can bring a more rational application. It also essentially means making decisions without taking into consideration what is best for you and instead possibly thinking of what is based for a group of people, say that cannot speak for themselves. When you think about it in this way I think the ethical approach can be more realistically applied. It can be seen as the response to utilitarianism because rather than thinking about the majority, you are thinking about the minority or the least powerful and making decisions that will do the least harm to people that fall in those groups.

Happy Medium

Is our system broken? After spending about two minutes with any Washingtonian and probably any citizen for that matter, the answer will be a resounding yes. This gloom and doom question seems to always make its way into conversation. We are left to wonder about the functionality of government, when one hears on the news the threat of government shutdowns and the constant indecisive nature of Congress. The year of 2011 seemed to be a year for this news.

Each person has a different idea about the problem, but what seems to be at the root of it is the lack of compromise. We have a group of people on two sides of the political spectrum and nobody is willing to meet halfway. This idea of finding a middle road is exactly what Aristotle was suggesting when he said find the happy medium between the two extremes. This is a simple solution on the surface, but the truth is if you have two clear cut sides, than what’s in the middle is obscure and fuzzy, making it hard to find exactly where the midpoint lies.


I think "people" is the key word here. I tend to agree with those that say its the people in government and not the system that's the problem. I am not saying everyone is a problem, but there is a definite stigma out there that people in government are not considering the interests of the nation as a whole. That they are not following the thought of utilitarianism and doing what's best for the greatest number and surely are not considering every citizen. 


It will be interesting to see how this next election plays out. Will the voting reflect the public's outcry for a government more willing to work together? And with their disenchantment with the people in government? I guess we will see.