The social contract theory, as an ethical theory, requests all individuals live in society to implicitly reach an agreement to abide by moral rules established to govern relations among citizens while a government is capable of enforcing these rules. What’s more, these rules ought to be collectively agreed to accept by rational people for their mutual benefit. On the condition that others are supposed to follow these rules as well. Besides these rules, John Rawls’s Principles of Justice is also needed to take account of. On the basis of Rawls’s opinions, for a just rule, it has to be the rights and liberties that every individual may claim and is consistent. Furthermore, as a just rule, it is supposed to guarantee the equality of both social
…show more content…
In Kantianism it looks at the idea of good will. This means that even if an action may cause harm it could still be considered good based on the good will behind it. For rules to be accepted by Kantianism it must pass two categorical imperatives. The first is "Act only from moral rules that you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws". The second imperative is "Act so that you always treat both yourself and other people as ends in themselves, and never only as a means to an end". By using both of these one can analyze the rule that Mercedes does not have to provide adequate customer service to Chinese customers.
Mercedes rule passes the first categorical imperative as it could be used universally because the rule is so specific. Changing the rule from this situation to a universal rule does not really change anything at all. It also does not contradict itself so it is viable to pass.
The rule would also pass the second categorical imperative. This is because Mercedes is not using the Chinese customer as a means to an end it is just the way that they run their business. They are not using anyone as a means to an end. One argument is that they would do this to save money and that is using the Chinese customer as a means to an end but the fact is that if they would lose money in the long run by not providing this service so they would not be using them for any type of
In Kantianism it looks at the idea of good will. This means that even if an action may cause harm it could still be considered good based on the good will behind it. For rules to be accepted by Kantianism it must pass two categorical imperatives. The first is "Act only from moral rules that you can at the same time will to be universal moral laws". The second imperative is "Act so that you always treat both yourself and other people as ends in themselves, and never only as a means to an end". By using both of these one can analyze the rule that Mercedes does not have to provide adequate customer service to Chinese customers.
Mercedes rule passes the first categorical imperative as it could be used universally because the rule is so specific. Changing the rule from this situation to a universal rule does not really change anything at all. It also does not contradict itself so it is viable to pass.
The rule would also pass the second categorical imperative. This is because Mercedes is not using the Chinese customer as a means to an end it is just the way that they run their business. They are not using anyone as a means to an end. One argument is that they would do this to save money and that is using the Chinese customer as a means to an end but the fact is that if they would lose money in the long run by not providing this service so they would not be using them for any type of