Discussion Post: Business & Society
Most of the ethical prescriptions of normative moral philosophy tend to fall into one of the following three categories: deontology, consequentialism, and virtue ethics. These categories in turn put an emphasis on different normative standards for judging what constitutes right and wrong actions.
Moral psychologists and behavioral economists such as Jonathan Haidt and Dan Ariely take a different approach: focusing not on some normative ethical framework for moral judgment, but rather on the psychological foundations of moral intuition and on the limitations that our human frailty places on real-world honesty, decency, and ethical commitments.
In this context, write a short essay (minimum 400 words) on what you see as the most important differences between the traditional normative philosophical approaches and the more recent empirical approach of moral psychology when it comes to ethics. As part of your answer also make sure that you discuss the implications of these differences.
The book that needs to be read and should be added to this discussion is Lieberman, Matthew D. Social: Why our brains are wired to connect. Oxford University Press, 2013 & Ariely, Dan. (2012 or 2013 edition) The (honest) truth about dishonesty: How we lie to everyone-especially ourselves. HarperCollins Publishers, 2012 or 2013 edition.
The response must include a reference list. One-inch margins, double-space, Using Times New Roman 12 pnt font and APA style of writing and citations.