Applying the Utilitarianism Theory: Case Study

A utilitarianism upon applying utilitarianism theory to Tom’s current situation, Tom would maximize the greatest good and increase the happiness of more people and parties by exaggerating his work experience.

The first party that would benefit from this Is his parents. As was said in the case study (2014), Tom’s mother had lost her Job a few years ago and has remained unemployed since. Tom’s father has also not been doing well financially, as his business has not been doing well as of lately, which would lead to less Income for the family.

Tom’s parents would be better off financially, as they will no longer need to support Tom If he were to be hired by the accounting firm. Another party that would achieve happiness from Tom’s actions would be a child of a developing nation that Tom has committed to sponsor when he earns full time wage.

Because Tom has not yet been able to earn full time wage, he cannot afford to sponsor a child. The third party that would benefit is Tom himself. As was stated in the case study (2014), many firms have reduced or halted their graduate intake as of 2014.

It is apparent that Tom is struggling to find work, and is currently unemployed and not earning a income. It also known that Tom would be supervised for his first year of work (case study, 2014), which would benefit Tom himself as he lacks experience within accounting firms, and this would provide him with new skills.

Parties that would not benefit however are the more honest Job applicants and current employees of the firm. Tom’s action would cause an unhappiness to these stakeholders because if Tom were to be employed, his actions would be unfair.

Tom old be employed for false and exaggerated information, where as the other job applicants would have provided truthful information and the other employees would have had to earn their experience and skills minored to be employed by the accounting firm. One last stakeholder that Tom’s actions would affect Is the accounting firm Itself and the clients. The accounting firm Is seeking for a Job applicant with proper skills and work experience for applicant to apply to the workplace, If Tom were to be hired however, he may not be to fulfill the requirements the firm had needed.

Clients of the rim may also receive poor or lower than expected of service quality from Tom due to the fact that Tom lacks experience wealth accounting firm work.

Kantian unaware Kantian tenure loom snout’s exaggerate Nils curriculum velvet, ten reasoning will be found upon applying two different formulations of Kantian to Tom’s situation. Formulation one will be universal acceptability, and formulation two will be respect.

Upon applying formulation one to Tom’s situation, the rule would be “To become a successful Job applicant, you will need to exaggerate and give false information on your curriculum vitae. If this rule was made to be made a universal rule the workforce would consist of more unskilled and under experienced workers. This would lead to a larger output of bad services and bad products due to the lack of skills from the workforce. Many employees would be earning wages that they don’t deserve as their skill level doesn’t match their high pay.

Therefore the rule is not universally acceptable as when made a universal rule, there would be a larger output of bad services, bad products, and unfair wages. The second formulation is respect. By exaggerating Tom’s curriculum vitae, he is not wowing respect to other stakeholders such as the other Job seekers, the accounting firm itself, clients to the firm, and all the employees that had been hired by the firm. Tom’s action does not show respect to these stakeholders as Tom is providing false information about himself to the accounting firm.

By providing false information, Tom is being unfair to other Job applicants and employees who may have provided truthful information and earned their experience and skills themselves rather than lying.

The accounting firm and the clients would also expect proper service, experience and skills from Tom, which Tom has falsely claimed he has. Thus, by exaggerating his curriculum vitae, Tom is disrespecting the stakeholders of the firm. Virtue Ethics As for applying virtue ethics to Tom’s situation, the relevant virtue identified for the dilemma is truthfulness.

Tom believes that if he exaggerates his curriculum vitae his chances of being hired is higher. However this action would not be virtuous, and is the vice of excess to the chosen virtue, known as boastfulness.

The remaining corresponding vice is self-deprecating, which is a vice of deficiency. By being self- deprecating, Tom would have to under-exaggerate himself on his curriculum vitae. The virtue truthfulness’ is chosen because truthfulness lies between boastfulness and self-deprecating, in which boastfulness is seen relevant to the dilemma.

By applying the virtue truthfulness’ to the dilemma, Tom would have to be honest about his work experience rather than exaggerate it; thus making Tom more virtuous. Ranking of ethical theories It is personally believed that Virtue ethics is the most useful, utilitarianism as least useful, and Kantian in between. Virtue ethics was chosen as most useful because users of the theory make decisions based on what’s most virtuous rather than what outcome there is to the decision.

Virtue ethics theories provide more socially responsible decisions. Kantian theory was chosen as neither most useful and least setup as It proposes users Walt ten most Tall classless or most universally accepted decision. Utilitarianism theory is viewed as least useful as it is seen as the least socially responsible theory, because decisions made with Utilitarianism is based on the greatest good. Part B The chosen view or whether food companies have a social responsibility to reduce childhood obesity is the narrow view.

The narrow view has been chosen as it is believed that food companies do not have the social responsibility to reduce childhood obesity as it is not profitable, which in turn would put some companies at risk against the competition.

According to Milton Friedman businesses only have one social responsibility, which is to increase profits without breaking laws such as deception and fraud. 0 An example to this would be the Pepsi CEO Indri Onion’s socially responsible vision