Answer:
d. shows that he was following the categorical imperative.
Explanation:
Kant advocated that people should do their duty from a sense of duty or what is morally correct . But sometimes it is difficult to judge what is morally correct . In case of uncertainty , we should be guided by the principle
of " categorical imperative". Its meaning basically is that , we should judge by thinking , what if everybody acts the way , I am thinking to do. If I think , taking bribe is right , what if everybody takes bribe . The outcome will be disastrous . So bribe taking can not be morally correct. This is how
" categorical imperative" works
Daoists take the center way, with adjusting and no extremes. This is like Aristotle, who felt that ethics were the center way between two extremes.
Daoism has the Ying and the Yang, dull and light, male and female as the focal point of all things. Daoism does not have the god or divine beings. It is a logic. The reason they all have symbols that they venerate is that Daoism got blended with animism and neighborhood people religion. The author of Daoism was a monotheist, however, a divine being was never the principal thought in Daoism.
Answer:
Social responsibility means that individuals and companies have a duty to act in the best interests of their environment and society as a whole. ... The crux of this theory is to enact policies that promote an ethical balance between the dual mandates of striving for profitability and benefiting society as a whole.
Explanation:
Answer:
non compensatory decision rule
Explanation:
Is the consumer decision rule whereby a positive evaluation of a brand attribute does not compensate for a negative evaluation of the same brand on some other attribute. ... Brands that fall below the cutoff point on any one attribute are eliminated from further consideration.
Saving electricity is one of the most important aspects when it comes to saving money.the use of energy efficient light bulbs reduces the cost of electricity and puts relief in the production of power plants.
Bobs looked at saving electricity as the main priority but was let down by light emitted to be too faint which then caused him to continue using the less energy sufficient bulbs.
Bolivar stood apart from his class in ideas, values and vision. Who else would be found in the midst of a campaign swinging in a hammock, reading the French philosophers? His liberal education, wide reading, and travels in Europe had broadened his horizons and opened his mind to the political thinkers of France and Britain. He read deeply in the works of Hobbes and Spinoza, Holbach and Hume; and the thought of Montesquieu and Rousseau left its imprint firmly on him and gave him a life-long devotion to reason, freedom and progress. But he was not a slave of the Enlightenment. British political virtues also attracted him. In his Angostura Address (1819) he recommended the British constitution as 'the most worthy to serve as a model for those who desire to enjoy the rights of man and all political happiness compatible with our fragile nature'. But he also affirmed his conviction that American constitutions must conform to American traditions, beliefs and conditions.
His basic aim was liberty, which he described as "the only object worth the sacrifice of man's life'. For Bolivar liberty did not simply mean freedom from the absolutist state of the eighteenth century, as it did for the Enlightenment, but freedom from a colonial power, to be followed by true independence under a liberal constitution. And with liberty he wanted equality – that is, legal equality – for all men, whatever their class, creed or colour. In principle he was a democrat and he believed that governments should be responsible to the people. 'Only the majority is sovereign', he wrote; 'he who takes the place of the people is a tyrant and his power is usurpation'. But Bolivar was not so idealistic as to imagine that South America was ready for pure democracy, or that the law could annul the inequalities imposed by nature and society. He spent his whole political life developing and modifying his principles, seeking the elusive mean between democracy and authority. In Bolivar the realist and idealist dwelt in uneasy rivalry.
