The Teleological Ethical Theories

The consequence decided the action of the person. The actions are justifiable based on the results of that action (Gregory, S. 2018). The more good consequence can an act produce the better it is. As mentioned, I was put under huge pressure to focus towards getting the job done, if not my managers will not be happy with my performance and I might get bad rating in my appraisal. Might even be denied a promotion since this is an important project for my team and failure is noticed at all levels. My actions were more towards the consequentialist ethics. This approval was supposed to bring in additional order and actual it did bring in huge new businesses to our plant following months. What could have happened if we did not get approval, can be we would have lost all the opportunities to get more orders and the operations team could be running out of new orders. This could potential lead to poor performance leading to job losses. The ethical dilemma was object to or not for modification. If I had objected to this change, my job was at stake and my company could have lost the right opportunities leading to job losses. If I had taken the change option there is what if the product fails at site due to the demanding condition and the consequence can be damage to other instrument or even can cause loss of human life. These are electrical protection equipment’s and when fault occur these instruments have to work accurately. What if they malfunction and the consequence can be disastrous. But when I was thinking over it my understand was this is an almost impossible event and so the chances are very remote. These products are robust and, in most cases, won’t fail. I faced ethical dilemma situation and had to go with decision of making the changes. As per the Teleological Theories, the concept of goodness was fundamental.

The Teleological Ethical Theories are also concerned about the consequences of actions talking about the choice of right or wrong based on the good or bad effects it generates. Teleological ethics is further subdivided into 1) Ethical Egoism, 2) Utilitarianism, and 3) Eudalmonism. My situation stated above falls under Utilitarianism where the action is termed as good since it maximum the welfare of maximum number of people who are likely to be affected by the actions which was revenue loss and people losing job. But when I read about the Eudalmonism which is defined as “that an action is good if it results in the fulfilment of goals along with the welfare of the human beings” (Business Jargons, 2018).

In other words, my actions to fulfil goal of getting success at work and also to meet the requirement of getting the approval to get more order describes my action on this theory or should I say the fear of loosing job was the reason to listen to my manager. The weakness of Teleological ethics on practical problem fits in well with my situation.

Works Cited

1. Business Jargons. (2018). Eudaimonism - Definition, Meaning, and Examples.
2. Gregory, S. (2018). Consequentialism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/consequentialism/
3. Johnson, R. (2017). Consequentialism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/consequentialism/
4. Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. London: Parker, Son, and Bourn.
5. Moore, G. E. (1903). Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.gutenberg.org/files/16728/16728-h/16728-h.htm
6. Moore, M. S. (2012). Utilitarianism: An Overview of the Moral Theory.
7. Rachels, J. (1999). The Elements of Moral Philosophy (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
8. Smart, J. J. C., & Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. West, H. R. (2004). An Introduction to Mill's Utilitarian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.