Details of this Paper

Is it morally right to balance personal injury and human




Is it morally right to balance personal injury and human life against economic gain?;Morally, for me, it is not acceptable to balance personal injury and human life against economic gain. Every life is precious but we are humans and prone to do horrible things to each other, even kill another human being for personal gain. I do not like to think I could kill anyone, but if a burglar breaks into my home while I am there and I have the means to stop him, dead, I will. It is my life or his, right? If an armed assailant accosts me in the street and I have the can defend myself by shooting him, I will. If I my child is in danger of being seriously hurt, my intervening will save him, and I die saving him, so be it. It is very difficult to say what life is worth saving but I like to believe that all human life is valuable, worth living, saving and immeasurable.;It is obvious monetary gain was more important to International Harvester than human life. The company became fully aware of the scope the gas geysering problems since 1963, yet they did nothing beyond produce new owners manuals and did not notify current owners. International Harvester allowed consumers to purchase trucks with defective gas tanks, allowing the company continued monetary gain. International Harvester unfair and deceptive act, a violation of FTC Act 5, cause substantial injuries and death to its customers.;Can decision-making processes such as the FTC?s ever be justified? Yes. International Harvester violation was objectionable, harmful and deceptive. The FTC actually should have prosecuted IH many years before it did because consumer harm was evident, substantial, did not outweigh any consumer or competitive benefit, and consumer could not have known of the risk or danger involved to avoid it.;If using ethical analysis instead of legal standards in the International Harvester decision, business should adhere to a standard of ethically or socially responsible behavior that is higher than the law (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers and Langvardt, 2010). Utilizing the Rights theory in ethics, every person?s right to life, liberty and property, International Harvester violated two of those rights by not informing consumers about the defects in the property purchased which cause harm and loss of life to 13 people


Paper#33459 | Written in 18-Jul-2015

Price : $26