Briefly list and explain the following (a) Right, wrong, and okay; (b) Distinguish wrong and harm; (c) Separating goals from constraints; (d) Personal preference and ethics; (e) Law and ethics.

4. Briefly list and explain the following (a) Right, wrong, and okay; (b) Distinguish wrong and harm; (c) Separating goals from constraints; (d) Personal preference and ethics; (e) Law and ethics. (Chp.1)

a) The difference between right, wrong and okay and ethically right and ethically wrong is that sometimes there are many ethically acceptable decisions of which none are required over the others. Those decisions would be considered okay.

b) The difference between harm and wrong is that harm is a consequence of an action and wrong is the ethical characterization of that action. An action that is considered wrong may not cause harm but would still be unethical. An example would be trespassing. Likewise an ethically correct action may cause harm as a side effect. Reporting the location of a wanted criminal could result in loss of income, food, or housing for that person’s family.

c) The easiest way to distinguish goals from constraints would be to characterize them as the Whats vs. the Hows. The goals are what you are trying to achieve or the milestones that you are trying to accomplish. The constraints are how you intend to accomplish those goals. A goal in and of itself is not necessarily unethical. It is how the goal is achieved that indicates if it was reached ethically or not. 

For example, a game of golf has the end goal of getting a golf ball into a hole in as few strokes as possible. The ethical constraint would be to count each stroke fairly and practice until one got the fewest strokes possible. An unethical constraint would be to cheat and alter the scorecard when nobody was looking.

d) Personal preference impacts ethics in that individuals often characterize the positions they support or disagree with as being morally right or wrong. By characterizing their position in ethical terms, they seek to strengthen their position.

e) Laws may enforce ethical rules (theft for example) or they may be independent of any ethical issue and be the result of societal or special interest demands. An example would be the law which bans flavored cigarettes but permits menthol cigarettes. Health rights activists lobbied to get flavored tobacco sales prohibited, but tobacco manufacturers used their influence with lawmakers to exempt menthol cigarettes, which are predominantly supplied by U.S. tobacco companies. Statistically, the law had little impact as menthol smokers far outnumber the smokers of other flavored cigarettes.

Saul, S. (2008). Cigarette Bill Treats Menthol With Leniency. The New York Times [online]. 513, [Accessed 4/17/2011 ], p.B5-B6. Available from: <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/business/13menthol.html?pagewanted=1>.