I’d like to discuss the case of the Ford Pinto that happened right here in Detro

Question

I’d like to discuss the case of the Ford Pinto that happened right here in Detroit. You’ve read two articles directly addressing the case, and two others whose material is relatable to the issue. (Please no copy paste answers)

5.Utilitarianism is one of the most prevalent and cited moral theories in our present age. If we’re ever in a moral situation and ask ourselves “What should I do?” utilitarianism will answer: “Maximize the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people.” In short, utilitarianism says that we should go with the option that yields the greatest benefit with the least cost. [If you want more information on Utilitarianism, see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvmz5E75ZIA] This kind of utilitarian cost/benefit analysis is commonplace in the business world, and the Ford Pinto case is a good example of a situation in which a business went with the option that yielded the greatest benefit for the least cost. That being said, I want you to first explain why utilitarianism can sometimes yield a morally problematic answer (HINT: think of means and ends here). Second, should a cost/benefit analysis be used in situations where a defect in design or manufacturing could lead to serious harm or death, as in the Pinto situation? If so, explain why this is the best option in these kinds of situations over and above the other options. If not, explain what other kind of analysis could be used instead in these kinds of situations.

Explanation / Answer

Utilitarianism can sometimes yield a morally problematic answer .

Reaping the maximum profits at the least cost resultes in deaths of severals because a company, Ford Motor Co. decided to go with a design knowing the defects of it getting exxploded and endangering the life of many. Yet company did the cost benefit analysis and did not understand the importance of human life.

Second, should a cost/benefit analysis be used in situations where a defect in design or manufacturing could lead to serious harm or death, as in the Pinto situation?

My answer to this question is "NO". No model or analysis system can anlysis the cost of a Human being.

Compny should think of their moral duty as well rather than thinking of just maximizing profits. Because this case brough negative publicity upon Ford Motor Company which would have cost Ford much more than changing the fuel system design and putting life of people on risk.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.