Someone have to do it submitted 1 month ago by Inspector-Telonosky 3 comments share save hide report all 3 comments sorted by: best top new controversial old random q&a live (beta) Want to add to the discussion? If this research doesn’t have potential social value, it’s considered unethical to expose people to risks — even if you pay them, and even if you inform them. You also have to make sure that you’re exposing people to risk for a good social cause.
Fraud is illegal and punishable, but say they’re committing a form of deception that’s clearly unethical but falls in one of the loopholes in the law. A report published in VoxEU shows that American commuters save around 54 minutes a day by not traveling to work. I think there’s an ethical difference there. EnglishForward.com | The Internet's Largest Learn English Community | The mountain has a winding road, so going up that road is going to be dangerous. Hughes: I’m thinking specifically about physical risks, so I mentioned risk to life or risk to limb.
This can explain a lot of very commonly held moral judgments. It’s not OK to eat dogs. It’s known as the “Formula of Humanity,” which says you shouldn’t treat people or people’s humanity merely as a means. Some people have to take the bus to work, and some have to take the train.
Hughes: So that raises two important points. And I think it can be especially tempting in a business context, when you feel pressure from competitors. So reasoning about morality is possible.
But we don’t need to be worried about whether this job has any kind of special social value. I’m also going to be thinking specifically about two more particular issues — one being fair pay. “Who has the right answer to this question — the business community or the medical ethics community? Now imagine they get to the top of that mountain, and they realize they forgot something. Get a free English lesson every week! One is that in a lot of developing countries (and not just developing countries — this happens here, too) a lot of laws are on the books that are not well-enforced. Now teaching and journalism are both socially essential jobs. And they really want the truffles. "some" by itself can mean "some people", so you can have. But if you’re just satisfying consumer preferences — that’s all you’re doing — the only reason for people to take this job is money. Robert Hughes: This research came out of my experience at the National Institutes of Health as a fellow in the Bioethics Department. And in the context of this paper, you shouldn’t deliberately expose someone to risk as a means to the end of higher pay.
If it is ANYONE, and they are telling you to do something illegal, then you don’t have to. I think some teachers today could argue that maybe they didn’t realize when they took the job that they could be at risk of being the victim of a school shooting — or having to protect their students from one.
Here it comes: Someone HAS to do the dirty job.
Fishing and logging are the two most dangerous jobs in the United States.
What are those next two questions? It’s not enough to take minimization measures.
This saved time is used for childcare and leisure. Or another example might be journalism. Hughes: This is part of a larger project on thinking about the limits of informed consent.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. They wanted some truffles for their dinner, and they forgot the truffles.
Whether it’s OK to eat an animal depends on how smart the animal is.
I’m not going to pass judgment on the couple when they choose to go up the mountain. For employees, the office provides a place for face-to-face interactions that technology will struggle to replicate, such as social interaction, mentoring and managing.
So would you have advice for them, as far as how to guide yourself in these sorts of situations? And the other big takeaway from my paper is that workers’ preferences between safety and money shouldn’t settle the question. Republished with permission from Knowledge@Wharton, the online research and business analysis journal of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Or some kind of — let’s say not fraud.
We’re going to take the drive even though it’s dangerous.” They’re taking a risk. A new paper by Wharton legal studies and business ethics professor Robert Hughes takes a closer look at the ethical questions facing companies that employ workers in physically dangerous jobs. They were illegal factories, but the laws against these factories weren’t well enforced.
First example: A couple is on vacation — they are going on vacation on a mountain — and a storm starts. They know they’re taking a risk, but it’s only foreseen. One of the things I learned while I was a fellow there is that there’s a big difference in the attitudes that people have toward risk in medicine and in business. Hughes: Maybe it would be helpful to say a little bit about my field, which is moral philosophy. It must be written as one word "someone".
But the second issue is that sometimes ethics is more demanding than the law on the books. We need to look out and ask some more questions.
It’s actually part of what’s getting him what he wants. Knowledge@Wharton: Can you talk a little bit about how you arrived at the argument you make in this paper?