the

THE CASE FOR BASF BUILDING

A FACTORY IN BEAFORT
DEONTOLOGY





SCENARIO 1
INTRODUCTION
BASF is faced with a dilemma on which to build a factory in a new location they have to consider various
options as whether to go ahead with the project.
There are a variety of different strategies that the BASF manager might use to solve the dilemma that
they are currently facing. Firstly they might consider to continue to build built but with minimal pollution
controls, secondly they might build with maximum pollution control and lastly they might consider not
to build at all.
The first option might have high consequences but they can be tolerable for example water pollution,
fights with the Hilton head developers and satisfied shareholders because of high short term profits
they might make. The second option might have low pollution that is not easily recognizable and mostly
no complaints from the Hilton Head developers and low short term profits for the shareholders. Lastly
the third option will be acceptable to the Hilton head developers but will not be acceptable to the locals
and it might result in low short term profits as they are looking for a new location to build their plant
and it will also result in unsatisfied shareholders.
BASF in this scenario is faced with rights ,duties and obligations they have to fulfill. They have a duty to
keep their shareholders satisfied, they also have to consider the local peoples wishes and again their
right to an unpolluted environment and they have to consider the rights of the property owners in the
area, lastly there is a moral issue to deal with . From a moral and ethical perspective it is the duty of the
BASF manager to balance , to asses all the stakeholders rights, obligations, duties and come up with the
one that has priority.
All the three options BASF have are based on different perspectives for example the first choice has its
main focus on consequences, the second option has its focus on obligations, rights and the duties and
the third option has its focus on the human nature . These three approaches show the most three
important classical types of ethical theories when it comes to the history of philosophy, thus we can
categorize them into three headings according to their various options that they have that is
consequentialism , deontology and the human nature ethics. These different theories from a moral and
ethical perspective are discussed below
CONSEQUENTIALISM (teleological)
This theory of ethical reasoning as the name indicates is based on the consequences of human actions
with regard to a particular matter and all the actions would be analyzed in terms of the results in which
they achieve. According to this theory right, duty and wrong concepts must be subordinated to what
the actions purpose is. This theory is divided into two , ethical egoism which states that the right action
we take is the one that maximizes my good when compared with the other alternatives, in other words
the one that benefits the individual the most and hurts him the least is the best action. The second type
is called utilitarianism developed by John Stuart Mill which states that the right action produces the
highest balance of pleasure or happiness and unhappiness when compared with its alternatives. This
second option denies that the best action concerns only one person but it must maximize overall good
and minimize the bads of everyone involved. The main purpose of a moral action is to achieve the
highest overall happiness thus all actions are analyzed in terms of how they contribute to the desired
end. The other utilitarists argued that in maximizing good we must not only be concerned with
maximizing pleasure but we must also consider some other things like knowledge, friendship and moral
maturity. Thus when BASF are considering their happiness they must take into consideration not only
themselves and the present generation but also the future generation as well. In looking at the costs of
pollution they must also consider its effects on health, and things like genetics and how it might actually
affect the supply of natural resources for the future generations.

DEONTOLOGY
The word deontology it comes from the Greek word duty, the most important thing according to the
deontologists are the rules and the principles that guide different actions.
Kantian Deontology
His belief was that ethical reasoning concerns different activities that rationally motivated and that
they should utilize different concepts that apply to all human actions synonymously . According to Kant
ethical reasoning is based on different formulations, firstly he suggests that one should act such that his
action might become a universal law that will affect all human beings in a world that one hopes to live in
and again one has to treat other persons as having an intrinsic value to themselves not as a way to
achieve ones own objectives. What he literally meant was that every person must be respected as a
rational and free human being. Thus when BASF are considering which option to take they must adopt
an ethical reasoning approach where they have to adopt principles of action that not only benefit
themselves but benefits everyone , thus they must evaluate their own principles in the light of the
principles of everyone else.
Advantages of deontology and discourse ethics
Deontology handles some situations better than the others, for example it handles trolley and
transplant cases far much better than consequentism. The actions of all these situations mentioned
have the same consequences which means that if consequentism is true it means that they have to have
the same moral status but the truth is that they are not thus Deontology will give us the right result in
such a situation.
Deontology and Discourse ethics makes it easier to act rightly. For example it makes it easier for us to
know if a maxim is urnivesisable compared with us knowing the consequences that come with a certain
action.
The other advantage of deontology and discourse actions is that they allow for certain actions that are
praise worthy morally but not morally obligatory which are often referred to as supererogatory. For
example consequentialism always implies that you must always engage in actions with the best
consequences in order for the action to both be morally praise worthy and morally obligatory.
Deontology and discourse actions also allow us to have special duties to our society that we live in that
is both our family and friends and to save their lives at the cost of more lives.
Disadvantages of Deontological Ethics and Discourse ethics
Deontological moral systems and discourse ethics they do not provide a clear and straight forward way
of resolving conflicts between moral duties. Deontological systems are supposed to include both the
moral duty not to tell a lie and the other to keep others away from harm. In this situation it becomes
hard for a person to choose between the moral duties. The obvious response when faced with such a
situation would be simply choose the lesser of the two evils, and this means which of the two is better
therefore the moral choice in such a situation will be made on consequentialist instead on a
deontological basis.
The other disadvantage of these ethics is that it can be argued that they are consequentialist moral
systems in disguise which actually means that the duties and the obligations that set out deontological
systems include the actions which have been demonstrated in longer time periods to have the best
consequences and people assume that they are correct. Thus it can be argued that these ethics are
ethics where their reason for their particular duties have been forgotten even when things have
changed completely.
The other disadvantage is that these ethics do not allow for grey areas where the morality of a certain
action is questionable. They can be defined as systems which are based on absolutes that is absolute
principles and conclusions. This does not show a real life situation because real life situations the moral
questions do involve grey areas because we do have conflicting duties and interests which makes things
to be difficult.
The other disadvantage of the deontological theories is that how can we quantify which duties that
qualify as those that have to be followed irragardless of their consequences . for example certain duties
that would have been valid in the 16th century cannot be valid now, the question would be who will be
able to say which duties are supposed to be abandoned and which ones would still be valid today and if
they are abandoned how will be able to tell if they were really moral issues in the 16th century.
HUMAN NATURE ETHICS
This approach it has the assumption that all the human beings they have inherent capacities that usually
constitute the ultimate basis for all the ethical claims that they make on a day to day basis. These
actions will be analyzed as to whether they hinder or they promote or if they coincide or if they conflict
with those capacities. One of the proponents of this theory is Aristotle who came up with the idea that
human beings do have inherent potentialities which makes their development to be a constant struggle
for self-actualization. He believed that human beings are social by nature they exist alongside the
community in which they participate in. thus BASF according to the human nature ethics is considered
to be a good establishment , it does not exist in isolation thus the decision that they will make its
supposed to be morally justifiable to the community where they intend to build their factory.
CONCLUSION
All these approaches discussed above are based on different ethical reasoning which are based on their
different basic methodological elements. All of them have different moral standings as regard to their
practical implementation in real life. For example if BASF chose option three not to go ahead with
building the plant in Beaufort Country park we may never know if the manager considered any of the
methods we described in the discussion. Even if its we will not know it is paramount that all the three
theories can be used by the manager in coming up with a solution to the problem they are facing.
References
BASF Corporation Vs Hilton Head island developers, in Business Society , Robert D. Hay et al.,
page 100- 112
Immanuel Kant , Groundwork of Metaphysic of Morals 1956 p 61
Fischer, Lovell , and Valero Silva chapter 3