Business Ethics in Sports - Kantian Deontology, Rawls Theory of Justice - Coursework Example

Business ethics in sports Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Introduction Ethics are the principles which enable an individual to identify and practice virtues as well as identifying vices and avoiding them. It helps to promote good values in the society. It is important that every sector and person should observe ethics because this helps to build trust among people and also promote the reputation of an individual. In the sports sector, there are some performances enhancing drugs which have been widely used drugs by sports people (Rosen 2003). It is argued that these drugs improve the performance of the sports people since they energize them. There has been debate weather to use the performance enhancing drugs or not. There are some theories which help to explore the significance of the performance enhancing drugs and they include utilitarianism, Kantian deontology, Rawls’ theory of justice, Rights and Normative ethical relativism. In this regard, this essay will discuss the debate about performance enhancing drugs and how it affects sports locally and internationally. Utilitarianism The first theory which can help to assess the use of the performance enhancing drugs is the utilitarianism theory. This theory explains that ethics helps to increase utility and reduces stress or straining. It is argued that utilitarianism is effective and can be applied if the act does not impact on others negatively (Rosen 2003). The theory further explains that the outcome determines a certain course of action. A certain course of action to be taken so as to achieve the desired target and that there are no negative impacts on other people. Utilitarianism theory puts more emphasis on the consequences of the act. An individual can take an action which will improve his happiness and avoid suffering. The theory holds that moral ethics is the one which helps to improve the performance of an individual and also considers the effects of taking a certain action on other people. The main aspects of utilitarianism are consequentialism which determines the effects of the act, hedonism, minimalism which helps to maximize the good and the universalism implying that the act should not affect other people. On the sports sector, it is argued that performance enhancing drugs can help to improve the performance of an individual. For instance in athletics, an athlete can take the performance enhancing drugs so as to improve the performance (Rosen 2003). The drugs can only improve the energy of the athlete and cannot affect other athletes. It is therefore moral to use performance enhancing drugs in sports to improve the results of the sports people. However, it is also argued that the performance enhancing drugs should not be used because they affect the health of the sports people. This is because the drugs affect the body system and this implies that body cannot perform well without the use of the drugs implying that the sports person should have to use the drug to improve the performance. The effect is that it leads to addiction, which affects the wellbeing of an individual (Rosen 2003). In this regard therefore, the drugs should not be used to enhance performance of an individual as they are considered unethical. Kantian deontology This theory focuses much on the nature of the action, but it does not focus on the goals to be achieved. This theory does not emphasize on the achievement of the goals and objectives of an individual, but on the interest of the agents and the actions to be taken. Kant argues that the result is not significant but the action taken (Gill 2006). This is one way in which individuals can achieve their desires. The theory explains further on how to accomplish goals more than what is to be achieved. In this regard, Kantian deontology theory argues that an action maybe morally wrong and can affect other people but can bring better results. The laws of drugs can be said to be deontological. Through sports, the society and individuals can be benefit since it helps to promote social values in the society. It is therefore unethical to use performance enhancing drugs with the aim of improving the performance. This is because the action can affect other people although it can enable an individual to win in sports (Waller 2005). Deontologist gives little regard to the positive impacts when arguing whether to use the drugs to enhance performance or not. It is therefore unethical to use performance enhancing drugs in sports because it is considered unethical. This is because this theory does not consider the effects of using the drugs on other people but only considers the action to be taken which can affect the wellbeing of other people. The managements of various sports activities should therefore structure laws which will regulate the use of performance enhancing drugs among the sports people since the practice is considered unethical in the society. Rawls’ Theory of Justice This theory takes into consideration both the aspects of utilitarianism and deontology theories. Rawls’ Theory of Justice combines all the positive aspect of the two theories and avoids their weaknesses. It is the most appropriate theory because it more ethical than the first two theories. The strengths are taken to explain the ethical issues in sports (Waller 2005). Rawls’ Theory of Justice looks at the ways in which it can promote and preserve the liberty of individual in sports sector. The Rawls’ Theory of Justice focuses on how to improve fairness among the people by ensuring there are no favors when performing tasks. It also helps to promote equality among individuals by improving the relationship among individuals and effective laws to all athletes. The individuals are also free to make their own choices as long the choices do not interfere with the lives of other people as well as their wellbeing. The principles of justice are applied to set ethical standards in sports field which help to guide the sports people in practicing ethical standards in the sports arena. This theory explains that each individual has equal right to the system which can help to improve his or her performance (Kelly 2006). The individuals are free to make their own choices which could help them improve their results and which do not affects the liberty of other people. The choices made should be of great benefit to both individual and the society as a whole. There are arrangements which are made to ensure that there is equality in both social and economic aspects. This is done to improve the results of the less disadvantaged in the society by ensuring they access the opportunities which they could not achieve if there is no equality. This is one way of treating people fairly in the society thus promoting harmony. The principles which govern the liberty of individuals as discussed above are social which helps to ensure effective system for promoting liberty among individuals and the second principle is the second principle is economic principle. This principle helps to there is effective distribution of good results among the people a part from the freedom they enjoy (Kamm 2007). This principle is better applied in the sports arena since it helps sports people to identify better ways of doing things and achieve better results without affecting the freedom of other people which are considered ethical. Ethical Relativism Ethical relativism theory explains that individual tend to behave in a way which is most practiced by many people. As people develop, the behavior of the individuals also develops which affects the ethical aspect which can be positive or negative. An individual can change his behavior as he or she grows (Andrew 2002). There are a number of factors which influence the ethical behavior in an individual and they include peer group influence and the desire to achieve better results. The peer group influence can influence the use of drugs which can enhance the performance of sport people. This is because when the peer group uses the drugs; all the friends will also use the drugs. This leads to unethical behavior among the individuals. On the other hand if the peer group engages in moral principles an individual can also learn to practice ethical principles. Descriptive approach to ethics is the approach in which one assesses the ways in which people in the society behave and it is also concerned with the beliefs of the people. Prescriptive approach to ethics on the other hand is the study of the ways in which people are supposed to behave (Drew 2002). These two approaches affect the sporting activities in various ways. In the first place, an individual can emulate the behavior of the people in society and also start behaving the same. In this regard, descriptive approach helps to shape the ethical behavior of an individual in that if the society uses performance enhancing drugs, an individual will also use the drugs but if the society does not the individual will also not use the drugs thus shaping the ethical behavior of the individual in sports. Prescriptive approach on the other hand enables an individual to learn the ethical aspects which everyone in the society should practice (Drew 2002). This will enable an individual to abandon using performance enhancing drugs. In this regard, the ethics among individuals is greatly influenced by the culture of the people since some cultures teach its people to uphold ethics in all aspects be it in sports hence can enable an individual to abandon the use of performance enhancing drugs. Rights Rights are the freedoms which an individual is entitled to enjoy. Rights of an individual can influence the ethical behaviors of an individual. There are negative and positive rights. The negative rights include right to freedom (Mike 2008). This is because the right can be restricted by the rights of other people. This influences the ethics in an individual because right to freedom may lead to use of performance enhancing drugs. But because of the rights of other people, the right to freedom maybe restricted because it may affect the rights of other people. The positive rights on the can impact the ethics of an individual. An individual can use drugs depending on the rights as practiced by the laws. On the other hand, there are also specific rights to doping. An individual is supposed to be informed on the risks associated with using a certain drug and in this case it is the performance enhancing drugs. After the information an individual can decide to use or not to use the drugs. In addition, an individual has the right to trust people with authority on the information as well as being safe (William 2006). These rights help an individual to make viable decisions which will help to regulate the use of performance enhancing drugs. These rights are perceived differently by different social groups. Some social backgrounds can help individuals to practice ethical principles like right to freedom and right to information which is helpful in making decisions. In this regard therefore, rights can enable an individual in sports to use performance enhancing drugs or not to use them. Conclusion Use of performance enhancing drugs has been a debate for sometime. There are various theories which can help to explain ethics in sports. These theories include utilitarianism which focuses on how to maximize utility, Kantian deontology theory which focus on actions rather than the results and Rawls’ theory of justice which combines the strengths of utilitarianism and Kantian deontology while eliminating the weaknesses. The above theories conclude that it is unethical to use performance enhancing drugs. In addition, there is ethical relativism which explains that the behavior of individuals is influenced by the society and finally Rights also provide what is right and what is wrong thus shaping the behavior of an individual in sports arena. In this regard, it is unethical to use performance enhancing drugs in sports and should be avoided at all costs. References Andrew H. M 2002, Philosophy of Sport: Critical Readings, Crucial Issues, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Drew A. H 2002, Philosophy of Sport Heather L. Reid, The Philosophical Athlete, Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press. Gill, M 2006, The British Moralists on Human Nature and the Birth of Secular Ethics, New York: Cambridge University Press. Kamm, F. M 2007, Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm. New York: Oxford University Press. Kelly, E 2006, The Basics of Western Philosophy. Greenwood Press. Mike, M 2008, Sports, Virtues and Vices, Routledge. Rosen, F 2003, “Reading Hume Backwards: Utility as the Foundation of Morals,” in Frederick Rosen (ed.), Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill, London: Routledge. Waller, B. N 2005, Consider Ethics: Theory, Readings, and Contemporary Issues. New York: Pearson Longman. William, J. M 2006, Why Sports Morally Matter, New York: Routledge. Read More