In contemplating ethics, it is usually accepted that the intentional consequences of an action are of major significance in figuring out whether a choice was ethical. There are few cases by which a commitment to undertake an motion precludes the flexibility of an actor to cease activity at any time after it has begun. Ultimately, we check with actions as being moral or unethical, but every action is preceded by a call and it’s only here that ethics can have a significant affect.
The motion can also consist of a number of activities that occur, that are generally but not necessarily simultaneous. While some folks do argue that corporations have no moral standards to adhere to and solely people have. Whereas I do not discount the possibility that there could also be a role pertaining to the results of an action, I cannot immediately conceive of 1.
It was advised that, when considering the ethics of penalties , that there is limited value in considering the results of past actions, besides as a method of deriving steerage, from experience, for making decisions that will have penalties sooner or later.
Perusahaan memang seharusnya bersifat lebih perduli terhadap produk yang dihasilkannya : apakah aman bagi penggunanya, memberikan informasi yang jelas (mengenai tata cara penggunaan produk, mungkin informasi berapa kali diperlukan untuk perawatan untuk produk mobil, dan reminder kepada pengguna apabila telah jatuh tempo untuk perawatan berkala) karena asumsinya konsumen dan produsen tidak dalam posisi yang sama karena berbagai faktor.
But when objects have been thought of within the optimistic view – that which is true, good, or useful – my sense is that I’d arrive on the similar conclusion: that an object that’s designed or used to have a constructive effect just isn’t inherently proper or good, however is doubtlessly useful – and any moral assessment is made of the design, use, or provisioning of such an object for a helpful purpose.