ETHICS ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED TO SIR MICHAEL SUBMITTED BY MOHAMMAD ALI PANJWANI 09-2644

CASE 1: Was National Semi conductor Morally Responsible?

1. WHO IS RIGHT IN DISPUTE, NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR OR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE? EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER. Ans: Department of defense is right because they had charged national semiconductor had sold the department computer parts without testing them properly and had falsified its records in order to hide the fraud 2. WHAT ARE THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACCEPTING THE POSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE? OF ACCEPTING THE POSITION OF NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR? IN LIGHT OF THESE PRACTICAL CONSIQUENCES, WHICH POSITION DO YOU THINK SOCIETY SHOULD ADOPT? Ans: If we accept the position of Department Of Defense then the members (employees and managers) of National Semiconductor are responsible for deficiency and they should be penalized. And if we accept the position of National Semiconductor Then Company is responsible instead of members as it clearly stated in its policy. If we talk about the society then it should adopt the position of Department of Defense because the members were not penalized and they will produce the defective items again and again which harm the society.

CASE 2 GUN MANUFACTURER AND RESPONSIBILITY

1. ARE BULLS EYE AND BUSH MASTER MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WASHINGTON, D.C. VICTIMES DEATHS? WHY OR WHY NOT? Ans) Quoting from Manuel Velasquezs statement, "a person or an agent or a party is morally responsible for an injury if they caused it, they knew what they were doing, and they could have prevented it." Therefore, besides the two assassinator, I believe both Bulls Eye and Bushmaster are morally responsible for the Washington, D.C victims death. However, the company and store are failed to prevent the homicide since they sell the product to the persons that already been prohibited by general laws for buying guns. 2. ARE GUN MANUFACTURERS OR GUN DEALERS EVER MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEATHS CAUSED BY THE USE OF THEIR GUNS? EXPLAIN. Ans) first of all, people kill people with guns. If they had no guns they would use other weapons, or even their bare hands. Moreover, gun Manufacturers or dealer not morally

responsible if it was legal sale However, different situation happen in this case. This is an obviously illegal sell since the federal laws prohibited Muhammad and Malvo for buying guns. Thus, I believe the concept of morality also applies to corporations as well. Companies been held morally responsible for injuries which they inflict on somebody else, injuries in which their product was defective, and also injuries in which one of their customers used one of their products to inflict an injury on a third party. They should ensure the distiburment of their product to proper party which will not misuse it. Unfortunately, in this case, Bushmaster Firearms, Inc. failed to hold that responsibility. 3. ARE MANUFACTURERS EVER MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEATHS CAUSED BY THE USE OF THEIR PRODUCTS? WHY OR WHY NOT? Ans) The manufacture is not responsible for the death cause but the use of their products because they make their products for a healthy purpose, but it depends on user how they take the product.

CASE 3 SLAVERY IN THE CHOCOLATE INDUSTRY

1. What are the systemic, corporate, and individual ethical issues raised by this case?

The case Slavery in the Chocolate Industry discusses labor exploitation in the chocolate industry. The cocoa farmers of these nations, however, often rely on slaves to harvest their beans, and in some cases, enslavement of young males .The systemic ethical issues raised by this case include economic, political, and legal questions. Let us first look at the economic repercussions.. If we were to refuse to do any business with these countries or the people associated with these countries, the costs of the products may be un-affordable to consumers. As far as political issues, country who does business with these other countries, and if we stop doing business with the ivory coast and Ghana the other countries that also do business with them may stop doing business

2. In your view, is the kind of

disapproves of slavery?

child slavery discussed in this case absolutely wrong no

matter what, or is it only relatively wrong, if one happens to live in a society that

I feel slavery of any kind is wrong whether the society approves or disapproves of it. However, throughout history slavery has been a common practice of most societies across the world. , I think the major moral issue here is the treatment of the boys and kidnapping them from different places and making them work rigorously against their will. Again kidnapping is violation of law

Who share in the moral responsibility for the slavery occurring in the chocolate industry? Chocolate companies? Farmers? Distributors? Consumers?

In conclusion. I believe there are multitude of people and groups that share the moral responsibility for slavery occurring in the chocolate industry. Through the various trade relations, many people are inevitably implicated in this problem, whether it is the Ivory Coast Government, the farmers, the chocolate manufacturers, or consumers who both knowingly and unknowingly buy chocolate (. As you will learn, however, the chocolate industry in general has done little to eliminate the slavery in its supply chain, and, indeed, has played a central role in creating and perpetuating it. The politicians, meanwhile, are all talk and no walk. Unfortunately, it seems that the industry will continue its evil ways, and lawmakers will continue to let them, so long as there is no public outcry against them. This is one way to tell them.