Morals and Ethics, Essay Example

Introduction

Immanuel Kant established the concept of categorical imperative which the categorical means unconditional, without exceptions and is ultimately definitive in nature (Grenberg, 103). What is right is clearly right and must be followed. The rules, once established, must always be followed no matter how arduous or extreme the measures that must be taken in order to follow the rule. The concept of categorical imperative relies upon the adherence and conformity to the established rules and the consistent application of those actions. This moral order would yield the opportunity for successful application to modern problems which ethics, morality and values become variables in the decision making process. The British Petroleum’s (BP) Deepwater Horizon oil spill occurred during the spring of 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico resulting in the largest oil spill in history. The categorical imperative to remedy the situation by BP, the moral and ethical action would be to clean up the oil spill and negate the potential hazards of the oil on the environment. The ethical dilemma begins with placing the accountability, acting on moral and ethical beliefs and remaining accountable for the established rules in which they must follow through no matter how difficult the task is.

Moral Order

Ethical and moral principles are critical guides to how an individual acts and performs in their environment. These contributing factors help facilitate decision making and provides a sense of guidance in difficult scenarios. Kant was a systematic philosopher and believed that a rigorous approach to moral philosophy would contribute to the overall depiction of good and evil or what is right and wrong. To fully understand the basis of Kant’s theory it is important to understand how the foundation is built and then proceed into how the rules or imperatives are determined and implemented. The entire basis is established based on the fact that there is an inherent good that does not need to be quantified. Good will is not dependent upon the results but is produced as a result of human action. The actions that humans take are morally right by virtue of the intrinsic good of their motive (Silber, 126). Morality is tested when duty of the individual is challenged by the person’s self-interest. The way the person acts is based upon their duty and the ethics that is built from repeated and learned cultural behaviors.

Overall, the principle of moral law would be so definitive that no matter the circumstance the law would guide the individual toward the right action not matter how it was applied in any scenario. The actions taken are acting in accordance to the moral laws often lead to intended results. This duality of action and purpose is called a hypothetical imperative. If an action leads to an intended result the person making the action is also confined to ensuring a specific result occurs. This would be difficult to maintain because the results of taking specific actions may or may not happen dependent upon factors outside of the control of the person taking the action. The categorical imperative focuses on the action of the person. This constraint defines the action. Kant’s focus was that the action should only be taken if the action can, at the same time, become a universal law. Each action should be made in such a fashion that at any time the same action could be made without moral or ethical dilemma. These actions for the theory of the categorical imperative and allows for concrete and practical method for evaluation of ethical and moral issues.

Morals and Ethics

Morals and ethics are the basis for all of humanities actions. They are key catalysts in the decisions that are made and the actions that are taken. Values and ethics are the epicenter of each person’s moral fiber. Those two aspects of humanity have guided leaders to greatness and caused entire empires to crumble. Values are those things that have a certain value or importance to someone. They embody what the person stands for and are the basis for their behavior. Values provide the foundation for judgment about what is important. Ethics or to behave ethically is to act in a manner consistent with morally based actions of the society in which the person resides. Ethics is a set of principles of a culture or by a particular class or group of society (Barsky,56).

The complexity comes when determining the relationship between values and ethics as well as how they balance individually as well as in a group.Ethics encompasses decisions between polar opposites and can be summated down to a decision of right or wrong. Ethics is a universal concept among a group of people in which a broad notion is accepted and is not up for interpretation or variance from central focus. Values although an important input to ethical behavior is held by the individual at the lowest level in which a decision is made. Values are not determined solely by a committee or group but by the individual and gravitates its basis around feelings, religious beliefs, societal influences and personal experience. In reality, ethics and values are somewhat confusing contexts due to the ambiguity and gray areas of decision making. Values relay up to ethics but ethics do not necessarily influence values. For example it is not ethical to commit murder. Committing the crime of murder is unethical and impacts a universal group. Values come into play when determining right or wrong on the issues of abortion. The interpretation on whether abortion is murder or it is not is based on the individual’s values. This is an extreme instance of values, what core concepts are worth to an individual, and ethics, what is right, and how they relate to each other.

Values become part of a complex and evolving attitude which influence a person’s behavior and interactions with others in their society. A key aspect of values is that it guides personal choices but also determines a person’s self-worth and the worth of others in their culture. This is a judgment of a person based on his or her sole actions in relation with the values held by the person viewing and interpreting the other person’s actions. Values measure the importance of the action and ethics represent the judgment of right or wrong (Shockley-Zalabak, 199). These examples are showing the extreme variability between one side and the other and these two could potentially be easier to separate between what is right and considered a categorical imperative to act in a specific fashion. The difficulty lies within the decision to act when the decision to act is diverted by placing blame or responsibility on a second or third party. This shift in responsibility diverts the activity of taking the responsibility and making the decisive action to remedy the situation.

In the case of the BP oil spill there are many factors that led to the oil leak. It ranged from single point of failure for prevention, multiple points of failure for reaction and multiple facets on the failure points for cleanup and mitigation. Each of these causes pointed to a different entity to maintain accountability. The focus of finding the responsible party ultimately led to increased duration of the entire situation and a difficult task in following Kant’s categorical imperative to act on the universal law of how to act. This practical method for evaluating a specific incident was not easily implemented because the individual acting on the incident did not take specific responsibility for the actions. Therefore the individuals did not have a specific and defined category to act.

This plays a significant role in the process of engaging ethical and moral behavior based on Kant’s evolution from good will to universal law. The relationship between values and ethics are interconnected but not necessarily bi-directional when it comes to interpretive areas. Values are held by each individual and are based upon the inputs and influences of their experiences. Ethics are what are right or wrong held by the culture or society. Values motivate a person to act a certain way and ethics constrain the activities of that same person. In conjunction they push a person to achieve their values without overstepping the ethical bounds of their society. The first step is to assign the accountability of the oil spill so that the issues of morals, ethics and assignment of accountability can progress through the imperatives for action.

Application to BP Oil Spill

The inherent weakness of Kant’s application of the categorical imperative is ensuring there is a person or entity to implement the principle. During the BP oil spill there are distinct parties involved, a significant issue that must be addressed and a series of actions that must be addressed to ensure the mitigation of the issue. The single point of failure is the issuance of the accountability of taking the action that would follow the categorical imperative. The BP oil spill left multiple parties to blame and each party tried to force blame on either the other entities or to just away from them. The cause of the spill was defective cement which damaged the integrity of the well. The rig operator, as well as the contractor, was also blamed in the incident. Ultimately, the United States government had to step in and determine who was at fault. The inherent problem with Kant’s philosophy was that there was an assignable party to make the action. Through the results of a governmental judicial action, BP was blamed for majority of the ramifications from the oil spill. The corporate ethics and moral obligations were put on hold as the entire situation had to be overseen and ruled upon by an outside entity. The spill itself was a horrific event that will have long lasting ramifications. While Kant’s philosophy is not necessarily in its best form in terms of retroactive actions it could have led to the prevention of the spill itself. When determining the many cost cutting activities, outsourcing critical components and activities to the lowest and less than qualified vendors and making risky decisions the values and guidance outlined under the critical imperative and ensuring the decisions were constrained by the principle of universalizability would have prevented the inadequate actions of BP.

Works Cited

Barsky, Allan Edward. Ethics and Values in Social Work, An Integrated Approach for a Comprehensive Curriculum. Oxford University Press, USA, 2009. Print.

Grenberg, Jeanine. Kant and the Ethics of Humility: A Story of Dependence, Corruption and Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2010. Print.

Silber, John. Kant’s Ethics: The Good, Freedom, and the Will. Boston: Walter De Gruyter, 2012. Print.

Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1999)Fundamentals of OrganisationalCommunication: Knowledge, Sensitivity, Skills, Values. Longman: New York, 1999. Print.