In order to address a variety of dilemmas, I select the Director of real estate Sam Early from the case and will address the dilemmas from this agent’s perspective. I think from his perspective. He could experience moral dilemma when he becomes aware that new William Jones was a reform slate candidate for this Executive Director position as Early does not trust reform slate members. Hence, it will be difficult for him to trust Jones and work with him effectively in this project.
Another situation where he could find himself in moral dilemma if his superior or commissioners asked him to direct this project in terms of land acquisition or to modify the architect plan to build condo toward their “friends in real estate agents” rather than qualifying and liable party. Therefore, in this situation he’s more likely to be in ethical dilemma to choose between whats ethically correct and would benefit the TCPA and public.
Applying the Kant’s categorical imperative in first situation, Early should trust his current TCPA director and his ability to work toward the betterment of TCPA. In the second example, if Early finds any altering with process of land acquisition or hint of conflict of interest (where the plan is directed towards friends in real estate to benefit them), then Early should gather an evidence and report it to the superiors of the commissioners to resolve this situation in an adequate way. Since Kent defines that we should treat other individual as individual and not as an object or a tool who can benefit us. Plus, he states we should do this based on the ethical duty that all human being have to each other, an ethical duty that every individual has to follow “universal Law” regardless of the situation. Moreover, Kent defines that principal of choice is merely based on our intentions that why we are making that decision and not based on the consequences after we implant our decision. Therefore, one must develop the ethical decision in a logical way and for legitimate reasons.
127 our experts are availableright now
I reason my decision from Sam Early perspective met the categorical imperative as I acted based on universal law rather then the consequences. Also, it is a reliable ethical guide to make a decision because it demonstrates a technique that one’s actions should be undertaken as if they are applicable generally. For instance if I think conflict of interest is right in my situation then it should be right in every situation. Having said that, Kent’s categorical imperative method does not recommend we should perform what is easy or what we like rather it suggests we must do what is logically right and acceptable.
