The issue in question has to do with an ethical dilemma that is forced upon the owner (Charles) of a small lumberyard. This lumberyard in particular sells lumber and building products to mainly local consumers including contractors and builders. Unfortunately, many larger competitors have opened in the near vicinity, which threatens the small lumberyard. Ideally, Charles would like to pay his employees a salary that would allow them to live comfortably. However, he cannot afford to do so, because the larger competitors are paying their employees at a much lower rate, and as a result are able to sell their products at a lower price than Charles.

There are several alternatives that Charles can pursue at this point. Firstly, Charles can lay off some of his workers in order to pay the rest of them a higher wage. Unfortunately, this would leave some workers out of work and unable to support themselves or their families. Secondly, Charles can lower wages in order to compete with the larger lumberyards. This would leave his workers and their families struggling to support themselves. Thirdly, Charles can keep his wages as they are and take the financial burden upon himself. Inevitably, this would push the lumberyard out of business, and leave Charles and his workers out of work.

There are several ethical decision making processes that can help Charles to make his decision. The first among these is teleology. Teleology is defined as what a “virtuous” person would do in this situation. As such, the decision making process here would involve Charles considering the most virtuous solution to his dilemma. To this end, he would need to decide what solution would do best in pursuing his own well-being and flourishing life. Unfortunately, these concerns are placed before those of others, such as his workers. Thus, if Charles decides to follow teleology to make his decision,