Gekko, unlike Bud, never reached the third level of moral thinking as outlined by Kohlberg. He never progressed to the higher state of universal conscience (Velazquez 2002)
Then the capitalist motto seemed to become the epitome of the 'me' generation, to hell with anyone else, profits at all cost. Gordon Gekko, the financial wheeler-dealer giant in Oliver Stone's 1987 movie "Wall Street," summed it up brilliantly when he said, "Greed is good" (Stone 1987)
By happiness it is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure." (Davidson College, (2002)
Ethical egoism: is the perspective that each and every individual should act in the interest of themselves. Each person should consider their interests first before taking an action (Robert Shaver, 2010)
367) The very nature of teaching is such that presents the potential for conflict that is moral-based between teachers and principals, students, parents and other teachers and even "within individual teachers themselves who struggle to do the right thing amidst the complexity of knowing what is fair or honest or caring in specific situations." (Campbell, 2008, p
Thus, the greatest good or the greatest benefit is a dichotomous expression with no in-betweens. However, with the restrictions of human perception, understanding, and our restrictive physical presence it is extremely difficult to access or experience an absolute truth (Benedict, 1934)
¶ … duties of disclosure, confidentiality etc. defined in clinical and other professional relationships are binding in personal relationships (Fienberg, 2005)
This leads to a discussion of absolute and relative ethics. The notion of absolute ethics assumes that there are objective truths that can be known (Griffin, 1986)
If we assume that John's personal system of morals/ethics encompasses these classic definitions, then we can assume that John will inform his partner regarding his past; however, he is not bound by a "duty to warn" principle that relates to the principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance associated with clinical or other professional relationships (Zacharides & Cabrera, 2012). By informing his partner of his past he is being honest and open which are attributes he most likely expects from his partner, he is avoiding future issues associated with trust, he is demonstrating that he is willing to move forward with his life despite these issues, and he is acting in accordance with a classic notion of morality and human rights (Ward, Gannon, & Vess, 2009)
So, John needs to decide this issue from own perspective and according to his own needs, desires, and expectations; in other words based on his own personal sense of ethics. Ethics can be simply defined as the moral principles that should direct a group or a person's behavior (Williams, 2011)
The notion from utilitarianism that the guiding principle of human behavior should be to act in a manner that produces the greatest benefit for the greatest number of other people. If we assume that John's personal system of morals/ethics encompasses these classic definitions, then we can assume that John will inform his partner regarding his past; however, he is not bound by a "duty to warn" principle that relates to the principles of beneficence and non-malfeasance associated with clinical or other professional relationships (Zacharides & Cabrera, 2012)
In both countries, bribery is considered illegal; however, there are ways to get around this legal doctrine, and ways in which nepotism, favoritism, and gift giving can not only be accomplished but can even be expected (Joseph, 2012). For example, in India, it is common practice to give jobs in employment to family and friends, if you are a government worker, or if you own a business (Christie et al
162). Often times, there are conflict-of-issues laws that are in place among the various sectors and settings that prevent individuals from rewarding donors, supporters, friends, or family with jobs, titles, positions, or any form of gift to say thank you or to show appreciation or even favor (Menes, 2003)
Ethics and Gift-Giving Being familiar with both the cultures of India and of America, I can compare the legal codes of the two nations regarding gift giving. In both countries, bribery is considered illegal; however, there are ways to get around this legal doctrine, and ways in which nepotism, favoritism, and gift giving can not only be accomplished but can even be expected (Joseph, 2012)
, 2003). Persons in positions of power in India are accustomed to passing on to friends and relatives the benefits of their position, and it is largely expected; even bribery, while illegal, is expected and assumed among government officials (Shafiq, 2015)