Normative ethics distinguishes the differences between what is right and wrong (Feiser, 2005); what mom and dad taught us growing up. It is defined by what is accepted as the societal “norm” (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005). Is killing someone ok? No. Is saving a life ok? Yes. Is defending your life ok? Yes. If either the attacker or defendant dies in an act of self-defense for one’s life, who’s to blame? In our society, what is established as the norm is if the attacker dies, the defendant is not held responsible because they acted in self-defense. If the defendant dies, the established norm is that the attacker is held liable and responsible and is punished.
There really isn’t one moral philosophy that I can choose. All different divisions coincide with one another. Take the ever-controversial topic of abortion, for instance. According to metaethics, abortion stops a beating heart. Through conceptual ethics, we ask if stopping that beating heart is right, if it does any good, if it’s responsible, or if it is performed under obligation. Then, normative ethics come into play. In our society, one’s morals take hold of their conscience and we think back to what mom and dad said was ok. They said don’t hurt someone and don’t take someone’s life. Or we think to our religious beliefs, and Christians follow “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13 King James Version). Then what about this; the girl was raped and impregnated as a victim of a malicious sex crime. Now, going back to the morals mom and dad said about not hurting someone. Rape is considered a malicious sex crime because it hurt someone. Since the baby is on the way, is abortion ok then? You didn’t willfully conceive this child. Should the decision be made by the Federal government or should it be the woman’s personal choice whether she wants this done or not?
All of these questions and beliefs and nostalgic implications relate to any modern day controversy or concern. Many problems follow the pattern of using one, two or even all three of the philosophical approaches together, so the way I stand, when it comes to making business decisions, I cannot choose just one and put it on a pedestal as to why it is the best. They work together just like all employees in a business do. Application of one moral philosophy cannot be relied upon in the workplace. There is too much diversity and too many different goings-on at all times. We do the following at work…
Metaethics- A bikini fashionista decides to upsize or even globalize her clothing market. According to facts, this decision provides substantial relevancy in a much globalized world today.
Conceptual- A national self-defense team deciding to take part in helping stop nuclear bombs. Nuclear weapons are irresponsible and detrimentally life-threatening to anyone with any kind of contact, so to help stop them, you are acting forthright, emphasis on right, and just.
Normative- Management in a company that started small but has exponentially grown since decides that a Human Resources department needs to be implemented into the workplace to create a balanced environment. They are the parents of the employees, while they’re at work anyway.
In each scenario, all philosophies can be applied.
Beauchamp, Tom L. & Bowie, Norman E. (2005). Ethical Theory and Business, a Custom Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Custom Publishing.
Feiser, James. (2005). Ethics. Retrieved August 23, 2005 from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy website:
Exodus 20:13. (1999). The King James Slimline Bible. USA: Thomas Nelson.
