Ethics

Utilitarianism is A moral theory according to which an action is right if and only if it conforms to the principle of utility(Mautner). Utilitarian principle was conceptualized by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill to promote fairness in British legislation. It argues that the rightness or wrongness of a decision is based on its consequences. If the consequences result in greater good for the greater number, then the decision is considered right. John Stuart Mill states in his greatest happiness principle that a decision should be judged based upon the magnitude of happiness and unhappiness it produces.

Contrarily, the golden rule or the ethic of reciprocity believes that everyone has the right to be treated justly. Golden rule promotes morally strong conduct in every occasion. It is essentially related to human rights.

Both concepts have their strength and shortcomings. Utilitarianism can be compared to a democratic system where the majority is taken into consideration. But majority consensus does not prove the authenticity of decision. It might happen that majority is mislead or unable or incapable to see details. Also, happiness and importance of a decision cannot be measured.

On the other side, how one would prove the legitimacy of the golden rule as every person has different opinions and choices. The golden rule is best seen as a consistency principle. It doesnt replace regular moral norms. It isnt an infallible guide on which actions are right or wrong it doesnt give all the answers. It only prescribes consistency(Gensler).Rights and wrongs also differ with cultures and conditions. There are no concrete standards available. For example Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism promote non violence or non killing of animals but in Muslims and many other cultures eating meat is a sacred ritual.

If Pat should follow the Golden rule that says that one should not discriminate between people or groups, she should disclose the real picture. The person asking for help had been her old friend and needs a genuine advice. The right response from Pat can save lot of trouble for her friend. On the other hand, considering her job profile and relationship with the employer, it would be insensible on her part to disclose confidential information. Her Boss had trusted her by sharing important information. If she releases it, she will be harming that trust. She is also under normative commitment with the organization.

But, if she should see the organization as a whole considering benefits of every other member, including management and staff, she should be more rational in her approach. Also, it has not been given if her boss is the final authority to make that decision or the decision is to be applied in any case. It might be possible that company comes up with some alternate strategy to deal with the situation. Moreover, Pats revelation can further add to rumor and restlessness amongst employees. She herself is a part of management team and, management is obliged to think of organization as a whole.

The applicability of both rules depends largely on the situation, seriousness and effects. Utilitarianism can be applied moderately in decisions that demands rational approach. And golden rule fits perfectly well when individuals are concerned. As the situation requires more of a rational approach at present, Pat can use utilitarianism and simultaneously consider some form of justice to her friend as an individual. Pat should not disclose the word now. She should tell her friend that she is not aware of any such decision. And, if the decision is applied, she should try to help her friend on a personal level. In conclusion, Pat should use a just and beneficial combination of both.