Midterm Business and Philosophy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Midterm Business and Philosophy - Essay Example s precept is considered to be the main basis of most business ethics in regards to the various interactions that may occur with the customers, stakeholders, members of the community, minority shareholders or the employees (Dani, 74). The label â€Å"golden† was first applied to the rule by the Chinese philosopher Confucius (551-479 B.C.). Various other similar formulations of this maxims are to be found at the centre of Taoism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism and some of the rest of the world’s major religions. As the American philosopher Marcus G. Singer, correctly deduced; the Golden Rule happens to be a principle of rather great antiquity. It is seen to have played a key role in establishing moral teachings in nearly all religions and cultures and presently continues to play a significant role in our moral education. More importantly is the point that has been put forth by Augustine and some of the other philosophers that the Golden Rule is not only key in the setting of limitations for our actions, but also it help in encouraging us to promote the interests of other people above those of ourselves (Dani, 74). Although it is considerably one of the oldest and best maxims to practice, the Golden Rule in some cases might not necessarily be the best standard in the management of people in business. It has been found that what one employee might find valuable and highly appreciate, another employee might absolutely despise. According to Zimbardo and Weber, This can be attributed to the fact that preferences in life are highly individualized and learned. These variances include how individuals prefer to be treated by their supervisors. The incorrect tendency for people to assume that other persons happen to share the same behaviour, feelings and opinions as they do is referred to by social psychologists as false consensus effect. This tendency is considered to be a fundamental bias that affects how people happen to think as concerning others (McLean

Expert Testimony Reliability Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Expert Testimony Reliability - Case Study Example Incompetent experts in criminal cases might be more newsworthy, but surveyors in civil courts face the same pressures. Last year, Geoffrey Wright, of EA Shaw, and I discussed the important role that expert witnesses have to play in dispute resolution (EG 23 July 2005, p90). The General Medical Council had just held that the evidence given by Professor Sir Roy Meadow at the criminal trial of Sally Clarke was "naà ¯ve, grossly misleading, incompetent and careless". He was found guilty of serious professional misconduct and stripped of his licence to practice. On 17 February, Collins J ruled that Professor Meadow had acted "honestly and in good faith": see Meadows v General Medical Council [2006] EWHC 146 (Admin); [2006] 09 EG 182 (CS). The appeal was allowed on the basis that his conduct should not have exposed him to such a sanction. In the same week, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, announced new measures designed to ensure that expert witnesses in criminal trials give their ob jective opinion only and do not act as advocates. Expert witnesses will have to reveal all of their evidence, and its source, to investigating police. They will also have to declare anything "that might adversely affect their credibility or competence as an expert witness "and must "not give expert opinion beyond their area of expertise". In contrast to a liberal admissibility view, Paul Milich maintains that "the jury's obvious limitations in evaluating complex scientific disputes cannot be overcome by the mythically powerful tools of cross-examination and closing argument." 2 He suggests that it may be over-hasty to assume that an adversarial proceeding will succeed in enabling a jury to understand scientific testimony satisfactorily. According to Mulch, when jurors are presented with complex scientific issues, they might choose to ignore these issues and make a decision based on other factors, such as an expert's physical appearance and his/her demeanor. Mulch's argument seems pl ausible because jurors might have to resort to this alternative if they really do not understand the proffered testimony. Since judges and juries do not share a common base of experience with an expert witness on the specialized matters being discussed in his/her testimony, they can have a difficult time probing into and evaluating the expert's reasoning and opinions. The accessibility of proffered claims can vary greatly depending on a number of factors, some of which were mentioned previously. The subject matter of some expert testimony can be inherently confusing, if not unintelligible, to laypersons. To return to a point made before, one