Human Faculties and Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations
QUESTIONNAIRE – REVIEW-2010 RESPONSE STUDIED BY TEXT
1. What are the correct statements concerning the human faculties?
The human faculties are:
- Sound understanding and free will: These are two skills that only humans possess.
- Emotion and corporeality: The latter is the most obvious human right, which derives from the fact that every human being is an organic system that is material, limited, and perceived by the senses.
2. Capacity of human beings that belong to the immaterial or spiritual.
The reason why we can speak of man as a personal being is precisely its status as a rational animal, free and sensible. This makes him a unique animal, with understanding, will, and emotions, with a dimension which was once called spiritual, and in living people is inseparable from the body.
The person is able to think, want, and feel. And that makes each member of the human species unique and unrepeatable, worthy of the respect he deserves as exclusive. Here lies precisely one of the most important reasons behind the universality of the golden rule.
3. What are the distinctive features of the human faculties?
From the description of human faculties, as being characteristic of the person, some characteristics or hallmarks can be drawn:
- Rationality and freedom are unique to the individual.
- Sensitivity, combined with the sensory ability to perceive, is substantially different in humans, but common to other animals, being inseparable from the sensory faculties.
4. Significance of Understanding and Will
Understanding: It is the human faculty that allows us to think, so that its distinguishing characteristic is rationality. It allows us to know reality, the true, not false.
Will: It is the human faculty that enables willing, and its propriety is freedom. Guided by the view of reason about what is good here and now, it wants to decide what is good and avoid what is not.
5. Reasons for which one can speak of the human being as personal.
The reason why we can speak of man as a personal being is precisely its status as a rational animal, free and sensible, something that makes him a unique animal, with understanding, will and emotions, with a dimension which was once called spiritually, and in living people is inseparable from the body.
The person is able to think, want and feel. And that makes each member of the human species unique and unrepeatable, worthy of the respect he deserves as exclusive. Here lies precisely one of the most important reasons behind the universality of the golden rule.
6. Indicate other hallmarks of the person
The unity of the person and his action is a distinctive feature that emerges from the real inseparability of the human body dynamics, emotional, volitional and intellect. Man, understood as a conscious and free organic system, would be one of the most complex systems of nature, endowed with various elements inseparably connected and interrelated. Without the physical organ of the brain, one cannot think or decide, but it is the whole person who thinks and decides. In fact, neuronal failure can lead to an inability to judge and decide for the whole person.
The uniqueness of the person and their action is another of his hallmarks as a consequence of the intimate union of all his faculties, tangible and intangible, that make it capable of being so unique, to be conscious of itself (understanding), owner of their actions (will) and a unique ability to feel reality (inclination). In short, a unique animal with a unique inner world (privacy) and with the unique ability to express freely abroad. The uniqueness is based on the reality of the indissoluble unity between the tangible and intangible dimensions, or as the classics say, in the human condition of mind-body or spirit-body. Human beings, through their body, are able to express their individuality, their thoughts, desires and feelings that are unique. Something no other animal can do.
The tendency of the person and his action as a distinctive note refers to that human behavior is oriented to one or several purposes. This is one of the characteristics of any system, the purpose.
The perfectibility of the individual and his action is another of his hallmarks, as humans are able to grow not only physically, but in all his faculties: acquiring new knowledge, new habits and new feelings. Developing, in short, all the potential that their powers offer. Being able to be a better person, to gain in human qualities. On the basis of perfectibility as a hallmark of the person rests the very reason for ethics. Only humans can decide to become better or worse persons, more or less honest, more or less sincere, more or less polite, more or less fair. This can be improved with the act itself, which is unique to who has the characteristics of a unique being, corporeal and spiritual, intelligent, open and responsive, with purpose and capable of self-improvement. Ethics is a manifestation of the potential that every human being has to improve himself, something that is on task, on the art of living.
The rationality of the person and his action is the last of the hallmarks to be discussed here, which is derived from the human condition as an open system. This is the capacity that the person has to be in continuous interaction with their environment in a peculiar way. The person is not just a trend, not only seeks to achieve things, but that may manifest with its action, leaving itself and disclose their privacy, be herself with his work. It is therefore a rational animal capable of manifesting outward their uniqueness, their thoughts, desires and feelings. Able to give and give, which is impossible for other beings. The relational dimension of human beings is manifested in their sociability, described many centuries ago by ancient philosophers, which is the ability to establish more or less stable relationships with others, as indeed in organizations. These can only be human, because only the person is able to establish relationships freely, more or less stable, to achieve shared goals through working together.
7. The Fundamental Property of Individual Life
Life is perceived by reason as the first good of the person, because without it there would be no other. Capturing the sound of the good life leads to the need for their defense; it is perceived as a standard practice that dictates the rationality of the will, ultimately, an ethical standard. And similarly, the transmission of life, which is directed towards the sexual urge, is perceived as a good person. Unlike animals, humans can decide voluntarily and responsibly on both trends. Bringing a new human being into the world implies an act that is not purely instinctive to the person who is aware of the implications, precisely because of the highest value of new life.
8. Fundamental Property of The Good Person
The good, in an ethical sense, is one that is reached freely, which neither machines nor animals can do. The good in the person is what they will tend freely, guided by the view of reason. The evil would be the absence of good, or put another way, the error in the decision to have to choose something that really does not contribute to human excellence but to the dehumanization of the individual.
9. What are the different types of Liberty in a person?
- Physical Freedom
- Psycho-affective Freedom
- Cognitive liberty or ability to think
- Freedom of Ethics
10. Point to correct statements relating to physical freedom.
Physical liberty is the absence of coercion or physical constraint. The action may be done when no force prevents it. This concept of liberty belongs to the body. One kind of freedom given in physical bodies, in animals and people, which is characterized by limitations and admits degrees.
That freedom has physical limitations is logical, because there is no absolute physical freedom of the body. Every body is subject to limitations of its own corporeality. All bodies are subject to the laws of physical nature, so the law of gravity is an obvious limitation of physical liberty.
If there is no doubt that absolute physical freedom does not exist, it is reasonable to conclude that this kind of freedom supports degrees. The person who is in prison is deprived of physical freedom, but only to a certain level, as total deprivation would equal the immobility of death. Similarly, an animal can change the atmosphere to live up to the limits allowed by the faculties of his body.
This kind of freedom may have connotations in human behavior, because the degree of freedom of movement that is allowed in certain jobs can have a direct impact on the conduct of the person. When physical liberty is restricted, it may cause the feeling of disappointment and demotivation. But not all lack of freedom at this level has to be negative.
11. Point to correct statements concerning Psycho-Emotional Freedom.
Psycho-emotional freedom is the ability to do what you want, without demands or external constraints. At this level, the individual is free to do as it pleases as far as you want to achieve an end, but must make certain means to achieve it. In absolute terms, other individuals only limit this freedom when they are present. The example often used in traditional level of analysis is that of Robinson Crusoe, who was in the plane to psycho-emotional scene that appeared Friday in introducing obligations in your life. Clearly this level of freedom of action, freedom to do what you want, it conflicts with the concept of responsibility. Freedom understood as the capacity to do what I feel like not having to provide answers to one’s own act, which ultimately leads to individualism. So much so that this concept of freedom comes the maxim that you can still hear that your freedom ends where mine begins. When human freedom is understood only in the psycho-emotional level it conflicts with that of others, so that the other is seen as a problem, and we must reach agreement. The responsibility to society is, at this level of analysis, a restriction imposed. Individuals would be fully free in this level of action if they only had to do those things necessary for the purposes they want.
The immature person tends to think that this is the highest level of freedom. It’s what teenagers are looking for when they want to get rid of the obligations imposed by authority. Doing what you want seems to be the highest expression of freedom, but is opposed to doing what is required by parents, teachers or other persons in authority. However, closer examination reveals that simply doing what you want is not the last word on freedom.
There is no doubt that psycho-emotional release is necessary to achieve personal fulfillment, but an unlimited freedom at this level is impossible – and would be undesirable even if possible – for anyone who relates to others. Even animals live in groups and they instinctively move together to protect themselves. It is true that to be considered what others want, and this inevitably limits our freedom, but in fact, humans can pursue, or just enjoy a good if not with others. As noted, humans are social and this contributes to its growth as a person.
12. Point to correct statements concerning the Freedom of Ethics.
Ethical freedom is the ability to shape their own lives through choices; it is the ability to self-determination. In this sense it is also a freedom such as freedom of cognition, but here it requires the participation of understanding together with the will of wanting to act. In freedom, ethics come into play both of the higher faculties of man: intellect and will, and decisions are determined by the whole person, with the other powers governed rationally.
13. Role played by feelings in human action.
The psycho-affective or affective dimension encompasses the complex world of feelings, affects, emotions and moods. Strictly speaking, these dynamics are those of the individual and in a similar way although there is talk of feelings in animals, human affection is unique for being coupled with the ability of reflection and free will. It has been said that this dimension is relevant to human decisions and is a key element to explain behavior. Just as in the tangible or physical field are discovered in the person sensory tendencies, an inclination to grasp and perceive what impresses the external senses (sensation) and internal (perceptions). At the intermediate level is termed affection and that is between the material and immaterial, between the bodily and psychologically, appear in humans other inclinations that be different from the sensory trends can be designated as sensitive or feelings, involving attraction or repulsion inclination towards the pleasant or unpleasant in the subjective level and often influence behavior.
Overall, it is not easy to define feelings, precisely because they are complex dynamics that move between the material and immaterial. The Dictionary of the Real Academia de la Lengua defines feeling as an emotional state of mind produced by causes which deeply impressed. Excitement about a new project, the fear of a possible decision in the organization, the joy caused by an unexpected positive event that generates discouragement or lack of expected results, are examples of feelings that arise in daily work in the field of any organization.
14. Role played by feelings in the achievement of ethical goods.
15. Do feelings help or hinder taking ethically good action?
16. Are feelings good or bad?
17. Differences between acts of the person and human acts.
Acts of Person: Used for actions that occur in humans, but where the individual is not recognized as an author, not being subject to their free will, as may be the case with heart palpitations.
Human Acts: Refers to all voluntary actions in which the subject is presented as responsible because they are its author. In this sense, human actions are subject to ethical judgments, for entering into the game of understanding and will.
18. Define the Components of Human Action.
Human action is characterized by a free decision of will, motivated by an intention that may be more or less rational and more or less emotional. In other words, although the action is present, it can distinguish an intention that is the result of a trial beloved of reason, about the need to act or not, and in turn affected by feelings. Understanding, will and emotions are involved in all action. The intended target marks the result or purported result with the action. Finally, all human action will result in more or less predictable consequences, which although not part of the action itself, insofar as they are a reasonably foreseeable result of it, may have been considered by the one acting. The driver of a school bus who stops periodically to review their vehicle’s brakes has much to say about a fatal accident caused by the failure of these. The foreseeable consequences of action must be considered in the ethical judgments. The consequences of every action have implications for other people and other living beings (results in third parties) and on the reactions of those people or things that are acted upon (extrinsic results in the agent). But do not forget, just because it is key to understanding behavior in its ethical dimension, that every human action has, above all, an impact on the acting person. So, those who scam and cheat are acting without a continuous display of their success and are humble.
19. Points to consider in the ethical judgments of Action.
The ethical trial of an action should consider the decision itself, the intention that motivates it, the surrounding circumstances, and the consequences arising. The first two elements were present in the description of the decision-making process that became the beginning of the chapter, as the intention or objective in mind, is the proper diagnosis and design alternatives, while the choice of an alternative and its implementation is the subject of the action or decision itself. With regard to the circumstances, taken for granted at all stages of the decision-making process that was described, they were not made explicit. Similarly, the consequences were overlooked in the description of the process but it would not have been possible to speak of a period of review of the decision if it had not been derived results or consequences.
20. When mistrust comes in an Organization: Responsibility Ethics.
When an organization makes sentimental decisions, i.e., when decisions depend on the mood of the boss, or are the result of his feelings rather than their suitability for achieving common goals, then there is mistrust. If, for example, the criterion for allocating resources in an organization is reasonable, fair and known by all, any decision in this regard is likely to be assumed by everyone. When resources are distributed according to the dictates of a person’s preferences with emotional power, their desire, those who must obey do not find legitimacy in the command. They will obey out of fear, but these processes destroy confidence in the one who decides.
21. Causes in cases of ignorance of ethical judgments.
Ignorance occurs when there is evidence that the decision is wrong, but one does not want to acknowledge it out of ignorance or oversight for any reason, whether personal interest, sentimental type, etc. In this case, the lack of knowledge is guilty and action is due on the holder from the rational point of view. When no one wants to know the truth about the goodness or badness of one’s own performance, be responsible for it and its effects, despite this ignorance, precisely for not looking good. Who does not want to hear about the injustice of airing certain issues outside the organization may claim that he knows nothing about the secrecy, but whether to disclose improper information is guilty of ignorance of the action sought and injustice he commits.
22. What is beatable Ignorance?
Vincible ignorance of ethical judgments occurs when there are indications that the decision is wrong, and ignorance can be overcome by placing reasonable means, but there is no negligence, indifference to ask for advice or unjustifiable abandonment of the formation of conscience. In this case, the responsibility of acting evil is guilty and the action is due on the holder from the standpoint of ethical rationality.
23. Responsibility consisting of Commission and Responsibility by Default.
Responsibility for Commission: This corresponds to voluntary acts, made with the intention of achieving a goal or objective. As we have seen, any voluntary act is attributable directly to the user. In the voluntary acts of commission, there is own responsibility and reasonably predictable and avoidable consequences of the act. If a person is corrected in public for what he has done wrong, it is damaging his reputation and destroying trust in the relationship with that person. Anyone who commits this action is responsible for committing a wrongful act.
Liability for Failure: This occurs when acts are not performed when there was an obligation to do so and it was possible to do so. In these cases, there may be a direct voluntary act in the sense that a conscious and free decision has been made not to act, or an indirect voluntary act, in the sense that they missed warning or concern for negligence or recklessness. In the same example of the correction, there are times when correction is necessary, otherwise it will cause a greater evil to the whole organization. If the person has the right and duty to correct and does not, they are responsible for oversight and could be causing serious damage.
24. In what does vicarious liability of Decision consist?
The indirect responsibility for the decision refers to the consequences or effects of the decision itself in the actions of others. Such liability may be the result of induction of the behavior of others, or cooperation with the behavior of others.
DEVELOPMENT STUDIED BY TEXT
Can behavior of others be influenced to some extent, either by destroying or building trust?
Yes. If a person is corrected in public for what he has done wrong, it is damaging his reputation and destroying trust in the relationship with that person.
Four meanings of Liberty. To reject freedom, do we mean when we dominate others in an organization?
Freedom of Physics: Is the absence of coercion or physical constraint.
Psycho-emotional freedom: The ability to do what you want, without demands or external constraints.
Cognitive liberty or ability to think: What you want without internal barriers, has been described in many different ways.
Ethical freedom: Is the ability to shape their own lives through choices; it is the ability to self-determination.