Q1. Do you agree with the author’s argument that automakers’ are only responsible for deaths and injuries attributable to unsafe automobile designs but not for deaths on the highway? Explain.
Q2. Businesspeople often argue that “Polluting a lake is not like injuring a human with a faulty product”. Do you agree with the above logic?
Q3. Do you agree with the author’s argument that businesses are not obligated to produce environmental friendly products unless the Government can convince consumers to purchase them?
1 comment:
GROUP 2
Q1: yes, we agree with author opinion that say only automakers responsible for death and injuries attributable to unsafe automibile design but not for death on the highway.It is a fundamental for ethic principle the ought-implies-can. This word means, someone can responsible as moral on event in his jurisdiction.
So,the automaker no need to responsible for death on the highway. A death always be on the highway are because of the driver attitude who driving their car with not properly.
The principle of the ought-implies-can also can used for avoid auto company from responsible for death and injuries from security defect the automaker don't will happen.This situation because company cannot expect to do anything.
From this problem,the author was used deontological theory where it assert something action are right or wrong not causes by benefit to oneself or other person but causes of measure quality or rule are followed.
Q2: We disagree, because pollute environment are like as injuring a human with a faulty product.This business no having obligation to protect environment like was say in country law.But a lot of company are don't care about their moral responsible and it give more negative impact toward environment.For example, waste toxoid illegally had cost their garbage dump into the lake. these waste had marred food chain system and wildlife habitat.
This case can looked in more theory who say that our tasks are more for protect human welfare and this idea was know as "ecology ethic" or " ocean ecology" which state that environment must be protect, regardless of either it gives direct effect to mankind or not.
Q3: We diagree with the author argument that business are not obligated to prodec environmental friendly product. the author regard as traditonally, it is a government task to eradicate natural world lack of energy and pollution.
To his fact, undeniably to produce environmentally friendly product need high cost. Hence, more company take action for not produce friendly product because they worried they will lose customer.
However, if all company take incentif to produce friendly product, they will help government tackle pollution problem decline natural and more. As the result our environment always protected their beuty.
This situation will combine with theological theory that mean something action right or wrong are determined by the result was made.The action was justify by the result it get not by the charecteristic of action. Concepts right or wrong are determined by look at the action who give more advantage then disadvantages.
NAME OF GROUP MEMBER:
HAZALIFAH BINTI ABDUL KHALID
NURUL ASMA BINTI ZAINUN
NORASIAH BINTI HUSSAIN
MOHD MUIZZULAHBAB BIN MORSID
NORHASHIMAWATI
Post a Comment