FACTS
Luke is an employee of ABC Company and has been asked to work on a project to build an adult
retail store on ABC’s land. This plan will decrease the value of all surrounding properties
significantly, which includes Luke’s brother’s house. This plan is confidential until its later
announcement. However, Luke’s brother is undecided about whether to sell his house now or in
the future.
ISSUE
Should Luke inform his brother of the company’s plan or keep the information confidential? This
decision turns into an ethical dilemma as soon as Luke becomes aware of this plan, as he is
forced to choose between being loyal to his company or honest to his brother.
ANALYSIS
Utilitarianism
The first method Luke could apply to this situation is the utilitarianism view. This approach only
looks at the consequences or outcomes of actions, and views intention as irrelevant. Therefore,
the ‘correct’ approach through the utilitarian lense, is the one with the most positive outcomes
for the most people. Utilitarians also believe, in a moral sense, that each individual is equal to the
other, including yourself. Luke must apply these guidelines to his situation to consider which
outcome would result in the most positive result for everyone involved (Green, 2).
If Luke decides to communicate this confidential information to his brother, Luke could face
consequences such as being demoted or even losing his job. Though his brother may lose money
in selling his house, Luke must also analyze the consequences other stakeholders may face. If
Luke reveals this information to his brother, it could negatively affect the company by their plan
becoming public knowledge too early on. The public could voice their opinions against the store,
halting the company’s plan and making Luke’s brother unable to sell his house anyway due to
the uncertainty. The boss could also be affected by other employees' opinions and loss of respect
from sharing information with someone who could not be trusted. This could reduce productivity
and cause turmoil throughout the company, resulting in turnover and loss of jobs. If this is a
large corporation, their standing decreasing or eventual shut down could largely affect the
economy.
On the other hand, if Luke chooses to withhold the truth from his brother, his brother’s financial
situation could potentially suffer. His brother could wait to sell his house, resulting in a major
loss of profit, which his family could desperately need. If his brother realizes Luke knew about
the land development and neglected to share the information, it could result in their relationship
being severed.
The main criticism of the utilitarian approach is that it disregards the action being performed.
Because the focus is on outcomes and the greatest good, aspects such as friendships, justice, and
means are ignored.
Universal Ethics
Another moral lense to be applied is universal ethics. Universal ethics places emphasis on
intellect and reason, while also maintaining consideration for others. Using categorical
imperatives to view morality, this approach states there are “Commands you must follow,
regardless of your desires. Moral obligations are derived from pure reason.” Using this lense to
apply universal ethics simplifies the situation. If you universalize an ethical dilemma, the
solution becomes obvious with basic reasoning. Luke can use this approach to universalize both
outcomes in his ethical dilemma (Green, 1)
If Luke decides to tell his brother confidential company information, the universal ethics
approach states that everyone would be allowed to disclose confidential information. If everyone
shared private knowledge, in the future nothing would be kept secret. This would halt many
advancements, cause extensive chaos, and the joy of surprises would be obsolete. This could
hinder the company from future growth, and result in a failure of the company.
Adversely, if Luke lies to his brother by neglecting to share this sensitive information, that sets
the precedent for others to follow by lying. This directly interferes with the categorical
imperatives concept, that no one may lie or deceive, because if lying applied universally all trust
would be broken.
For this theory, a main criticism is that the concept can only apply to rational individuals. If
someone is not in their right mind, these concepts would not have such obvious answers.
Another hindrance is the ability for action to be applied. If one person lies, we cannot force every
other individual to lie. This concept simply lacks the ability to be seen through.
CONCLUSION
Luke should refrain from sharing the company’s confidential information with his brother. The
utilitarian approach shows the ripple effect this choice could have, should Luke decide to tell his
brother, on not only Luke but also the company and entire economy. The universal ethics
approach further argues this point, that drastic outcomes could result from Luke sharing sensitive
information for his brothers' gains. If Luke’s brother were to become aware that Luke was privy
to the information, the best response would be to explain the dilemma Luke was faced with.
Green, Hank. “Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35.” YouTube,
CrashCourse, 14 Nov. 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bIys6JoEDw.
Green, Hank. “Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36.” YouTube, CrashCourse, 21 Nov.
2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSI.