Referring to the concepts below, help me analyze this scenario:
Details: "Paying a large tip to secure a better table in a restaurant is the same as offering a bribe in business to secure a contract." Defend or oppose this statement. How is your response to this assignment consistent with the moral philosophy you described in the Unit 1 discussion board assignment? Explain. If it is not consistent with that philosophy, explain why your philosophy has changed.
Moral philosophy is defined as the area of philosophy that is concerned with theories of ethics, and how we should live our lives. There are three areas of moral philosophy i.e., meta-ethics, normative and applied ethics.
Meta-ethics ethics is considered to be the most abstract area of moral philosophy. It deals with questions about the nature of morality, about what morality is and what moral language means.
Normative ethics is more concerned with providing a moral framework that can be used in order to work out and define what kinds of action are good and bad, right and wrong.
Applied ethics seeks to apply normative ethical theories to specific cases to tell us what is right and what is wrong.
In my opinion Normative ethics is best suited for making business decisions because it is a good fit for an integrated approach involving the economic and legal points of view which business decisions are made. It also has two important features that are vital to a moral point of view, first, it shows a willingness to seek out and act on reasons, and second it requires us to be impartial.
I do not agree with this statement because the motives in both the cases are quite different. In the case of securing a better table by paying a tip to the waiter, we are not harming anyone and not depriving others of something that they ...
The solution is comprised of a discussion on the difference or similarities between paying a tip at a restaurant versus bribing to secure a contract.