Making a moral decision:
The whistleblower: Imagine that you are employed by a large corporation that manufactures baby formula. You suspect that a flaw in the manufacturing process results in contamination of the formula in a small number of cases, and that this contamination can result in serious illness and even death. You have been told by your supervisor that “everything is under control” and you been warned that if you “blow the whistle” by going public, you will be putting the entire company in jeopardy from multi-million-dollar lawsuits. You will naturally be fired and blackballed in the industry, and as the sole provider in your household, your family is depending on you. What do you do? Why?
First, to analyze the problem in hand: my company is basically threatening to fire me if I would, at all expense, decide to reveal the life threatening flaw that may endanger or even cause the death of innocent babies who would buy the product. Of course, this public revelation could put my company out of business through lawsuits and such.
Using the nine ideals of morality, meaning the ways to interpret what is morally right and just, I will examine this issue and of course reveal what my true personal opinion and solution to the problem would be. Each theory views morality in a different manner and represents a decision that could be made facing the issue.
Ethical Subjectivism: Basically, what this theory is telling me is that I’m entitled to my own opinion and I must morally decide, on my own, what the best decision to make here is. Although it may seem somewhat selfish and too restricted to me and my benefits, it simply means that, using my views of ethical morality, I should decide what’s best for others as well. This view obviously differs from one individual to another and depends on how much I may care about people other than myself. Concerning The Whistleblower it would basically be my decision based on my personal moral beliefs....