International management - Ethics - Moral relativism vs moral Essay

internationalist management - Ethics - Moral relativism vs moral universalism - Essay ExampleThis analysis starts with a brief translation of the debate between moral relativism and moral universalism. The second section presents an analysis of the case, which is Google in China, in legal injury of its connection to the ethics debate. Particularly, the analysis tries to determine whether Chinas Internet censorship approach is universalist or relativistic, and, more importantly, whether Googles response to the impenetrability of Chinas culture and ideals reflects a universalistic or relativistic model of morality. Overview of the Moral Relativism and Moral Universalism Debate Moral relativism is the view that moral standards argon particular or limpid to culture and personal judgments. It argues that a universal moral standard does not exist. On the other hand, moral universalism argues that morality is valid universally, irrespective of gender, race, religion, culture, nationali ty, or other unique attributes in the debate, Universalists claim that morality give way been concretely delineated in different international agreements and declarations whereas relativists relate to distinct heathen viewpoints (McDonald, 2010). The various morality theories are generated by various view of morality. These theories yield built divisions and barriers in human society. The influence of these moral views on peoples lives is considerable. It affects the moral attitude and behavior of individuals. Hence, on that point are dilemmas of ethical conflicts and double moral standards. Individuals are not certain of the form of morality they should set to, either moral universalism or moral relativism. This predicament is continuously experienced by Google in their carrying into action in China. Moral relativism, in duty, usually becomes traditional morality and unethical decisions are usually defended on the theory of commonly accepted practice (McDonald, 2010, 451). A number of scholars in international business have been distrustful of circumstances where moral relativism has been employed as a kind of moral sanctuary (McDonald, 2010, 451). For instance, companies may have carried out a decision which generally would be viewed as unethical but have asserted that the decision is ethical, or reasonable, since it falls within a particular cluster of moral norms promoted by the society where in they are in service. In reaction to this argument, which basically reinforces the arguments that deeds are ladder-proof to common moral standards because they originate from a particular set of standards or codes that surpass general norms, Roberts (1986 as cited in McDonald, 2010) has argued that, because of the intricacies of international business, there is a certain extent of excuse for companies demanding immunity from moral chew out by sheltering behind premises of moral relativism, particularly because of their need to make room for diverse cultura l situations. Unsurprisingly, this argument is controversial. It may be appealing to refuse to believe that there are universal principles that cigarette provide direction to those whose trade has to be carried out on a global arena. Maybe, multinational business firms should recognize and applaud relativism as a principle and proclaim itself in support of an ethic of withdraw that is situational, domestic, and local. The strength of relativism in international