Ethical Relativism

Name:

Tutor:

College:

Course:

Date:

Introduction

Several cultures, individuals and historical periods have a belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong in ethics. They hold different views concerning what should and/or what should not be done. Therefore, ethical relativism can be defined as a predisposition to make ethical choices, on the basis of what seems to be precise or reasonable according to an individual’s value system or belief. It supports the theory that argues that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind, and the conditions for knowing. Ethical relativism views that there are several ethical truths that depend on the groups or individuals holding them. In the most basic terms, ethical relativism is the belief that different things are true and right, at different times, and for different people (Trevino & Nelson, (2011).

Ethical relativism can be applied in the solution of several problems in the society today. One of those problems is corruption, which has affected nearly all countries of the world today. There are more than a few forms of corruption practiced today. However, in the American culture, for instance, the main forms of corruption include bribery, graft, patronage, nepotism and cronyism, kickbacks, unholy alliance and embezzlement (Paul, Miller & Paul, (2008). The two forms of corruption that were discussed and found to affect the Kentucky Fried Beef Company were bribery and nepotism and cronyism. Therefore, this paper will critically examine the issue of bribery and how ethical relativism can be used to limit and prevent bribery in the American culture.

The behavior of the heath officer who inspected the Kentucky Fried Beef Company was not appealing. Rather than doing his job, and ensuring that the company upheld hygiene, and it did not engage in heath violations, he accepted bribes. He talked with the management to get beef. He also received money in return for granting the Kentucky Fried Beef Company a clean health bill. This type of corruption is unfortunately considered norm. It occurs in all types of business organizations. For instance, an individual who occupies a higher position in a company promotes another person in exchange for a professional courtesy (Macklin, (1999). The government also practices bribery in that, an elected candidate grants favors to the group of businesses that supported him or her during elections.

The fact that bribery is a norm behavior is awful. By being considered a norm, bribery becomes almost acceptable in several businesses. It is generally accepted as a cost of operating a business enterprise. This form of corruption becomes accepted in nearly all businesses when policies are overlooked, and the line between what is moral or immoral and what is wrong versus right becomes indistinct. However, even if majorities consider bribery as an acceptable behavior, it is still a form of corruption. For instance, the management of the Kentucky fried Beef Company was not displaying its corrupt behavior. However, it became more evident that they engaged in corruption when people who consumed their products became ill due to the unsanitary conditions that were not being addressed by the health officer and the management of the company (Trevino & Nelson, (2011).

By use of simple majority rules, several American subcultures can influence the majority’s view that bribery is a norm. In the same way, applying the concepts of ethical relativism can also be used to suggest ways of limiting, or even preventing the issue of bribery. For instance, in the case of the Kentucky Fried Beef Company manager and the health office, several efforts can be made to abolish bribery. The first method would be changing the mindset of the employees. Through this rule, the subcultures will ensure that the employees are aware of their rights. Additionally, employees will be assured of protection and hence, blow the whistle on any corrupt behavior without fear of losing their job. Third parties may not report any form of corruption to the appropriate parties due to fear of losing their job (Macklin, (1999).

American subcultures should also enact laws that monetarily reward those who report any types of corruption. This is the major positive step that should be used when eradicating bribery. If the report is valid, and has evidence, the person responsible for the report should receive some monetary compensation. When an allegation is verified, it should be clear that it is necessary to reward the truthful claims. However, force claims should not be rewarded. For instance, if the employees in the Kentucky Fried Meet Company reported the case and, were rewarded, they would be motivated to report similar cases to the health department. Through this, the health department would respond accordingly and, hence curb that type of corruption, bribery (Macklin, (1999).

In summation, ethical relativism is a good way of limiting as well as preventing any form of corruption in the society. This is because the use of this theory to limit bribery has a two fold achievement. First, it decreases or even eradicates the level of bribery. Second, the normal behavior of bribing is changed from being normal and acceptable to being a crime and an unacceptable behavior. As mentioned earlier, ethical relativism is the tendency of making choices on the basis of what is right or wrong. Therefore, by the use of this theory, the misconception that bribery is an acceptable behavior is changed. Consequently, the issue of corruption in the Kentucky Fried Meet Company would decline if only they applied the theory of ethical relativism.

References

Macklin, R. (1999). Against relativism: Cultural diversity and the search for ethical universals in medicine. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Paul, E. F., Miller, F. D., & Paul, J. (2008). Objectivism, subjectivism, and relativism in ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2011). Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right. New York: John Wiley