SPJ Code of Ethics - Society of Professional Journalists
Home | Rutgers Business School-Newark and New …
This first response to “moral catastrophes,” which is toignore them, might be further justified by denying that moralcatastrophes, such as a million deaths, are really a million timesmore catastrophic than one death. This is the so-called“aggregation” problem, which we alluded to in in discussing the paradox of deontological constraints. John Taurekfamously argued that it is a mistake to assume harms to two personsare twice as bad as a comparable harm to one person. For each of thetwo suffers only his own harm and not the harm of the other (Taurek1977). Taurek's argument can be employed to deny the existence ofmoral catastrophes and thus the worry about them that deontologistswould otherwise have. Robert Nozick also stresses the separateness ofpersons and therefore urges that there is no entity that suffersdouble the harm when each of two persons is harmed (Nozick 1974). (Ofcourse, Nozick, perhaps inconsistently, also acknowledges theexistence of moral catastrophes.) Most deontologists reject Taurek'sradical conclusion that we need not be morally more obligated to avertharm to the many than to avert harm to the few; but they do accept thenotion that harms should not be aggregated. Deontologists' approachesto the nonaggregation problem when the choice is between saving themany and saving the few are: (1) save the many so as to acknowledgethe importance of each of the extra persons; (2) conduct a weightedcoin flip; (3) flip a coin; or (4) save anyone you want (a denial ofmoral catastrophes) (Broome 1998; Doggett 2013; Doucet 2013; Dougherty2013; Halstead 2016: Henning 2015; Hirose 2007, 2015; Hsieh et al.2006; Huseby 2011; Kamm 1993; Rasmussen 2012; Saunders 2009; Scanlon2003; Suikkanen 2004; Timmerman 2004; Wasserman and Strudler2003).
Inclusion, Diversity & Compliance - England Hockey
The PRSA Code of Ethics sets out principles and guidelines that uphold the core values of the ethical practice of public relations, including advocacy, honesty, loyalty, professional development and objectivity.