Is it ethical to bind someone to a contract when they clearly did not know exactly what they were signing and what they were committing to, out of ignorance or not? Is it ethical for a lawyer to encourage the signing of a document if he or she clearly does not understand the document well? If one party has placed its trust in another party and that relationship is broken, the view of moral relativism will generally regard this situation as bad. Undue influence is usually an act of dishonesty and/or deception in a situation where one party recognizes its power over the other and exploits it. Deception and deception are not considered ethical values inherent in a person. Some conflicts of interest are ethically unacceptable, e.B. bid on jobs for which you decide who will be awarded the contract, but you can avoid other types of conflicts of interest with transparency. If a conflict of interest arises due to factors beyond your control, for example. B as if your company were considering a contract with a supplier in which a family member has an interest, you need to raise the issue publicly. Ideally, explain the conflict and refrain from participating in relevant decisions and can ask the family member to do the same. With respect to the ethical issue of cultural relativism, a company is required to operate in a manner acceptable to the host country, both legally and morally (Grace and Cohen, 2005, p. 19). But what if the contract does not necessarily depend on a “host country”? Is it morally reprehensible for a Western party to bind a Japanese party to the treaty when it is known that the Japanese side did not intend to be legally bound? Or is it unethical or immoral for the Japanese to sign such an agreement, even if they mean when they sign it, knowing that the Western side intended to be legally bound by the treaty, but even sees the treaty as a flexible agreement? After all, being ethical is not the same as “doing what society accepts.” In any society, most people accept standards that are indeed ethical. But norms of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical.
An entire society can become ethically corrupt. Nazi Germany is a good example of a morally corrupt society. An ethical agreement is usually established on moral guidelines for behavior within an organization, at an event, or during a transaction. The agreement is usually presented to a person before being allowed to join or continue with the transaction. Organizations often publish their ethical agreements and standards as a way to promote trust and a letter of intent. A few years ago, sociologist Raymond Baumhart asked business people, “What does ethics mean to you?” Among their answers were the following: The study of ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is the study of what is right, what is wrong, and why it should be so. An ethical agreement is a practical application of ethics called normative ethics, in which two or more parties agree to work within an established ethical standard and avoid violating an established ethical standard. Grace and Cohen (2005, 200) describe cultural relativism as the extent to which different societies and cultures have different values and ethical norms in the areas of business and organizational life. Those who embrace cultural relativism believe that all beliefs (religious, ethical, aesthetic and political) are relative to the individual within a culture. Types of relativism include morality (where ethics depends on the social assembly), situation (where good or evil depends on the situation), and cognitive (where truth itself has no objective norm).
The legislative system has more difficulty defining laws with the decreasing set of norms, and our judicial system has more difficulty interpreting them (Cultural Relativism – Illogical Standard 2006). “Ethics has to do with what my feelings tell me it`s right or wrong.” Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs. To be ethical is to do what the law requires. Ethics is standards of conduct that our society accepts. I don`t know what the word means. However, over time and as the total population grew, the ways in which people could meet their needs had to change. People slowly began to live together in small families, and then in small communities. Divisions of labor were introduced, both within and between families, and discoveries and inventions made life easier and gave rise to leisure. Such free time and greater closeness to each other inevitably led people to make comparisons between themselves and others, which led to the creation of systems of common good.
The most important, however, according to Rousseau, was the invention of private property, which was the decisive moment in social evolution, when the initial conditions of inequality became more pronounced. Although the violation of ethical agreements is generally not punishable by law, those who are generally bound by society to a higher ethical standard, such as politicians or doctors, may be held responsible for the violation of an ethics agreement by an ethics committee. These committees are often formed by peers – members of the same organization that drafted the ethics agreement. Business ethics is designed to ensure a certain level of trust between consumers and businesses and to treat the public fairly and equitably. .