Answer

Administrative Leadership and Ethics

Ethical Reasoning Components Identified in the Unified Ethic

                Ethical reasoning can be defined as the ability to spot, evaluate, and develop arguments ethically inclined from a range of moral positions. According to Geuras and Garofalo, professional and personal ethics are relatively similar. They further argue that universal principles and values dictate the relevant ethics in all areas where ethics are involved. For that reason, Geuras and Garofalo have described five distinct ethical theories. These theories include; the relativism theory, the teleology theory, the deontology theory, the virtue theory, and the intuitionism theory.

                According to the relativism theory, moral ethics is relative to the practice of a particular culture. By extension, this theory argues that for an action to be categorized as either wrong or right is dependent on the acceptable practices of a society where the action is practiced. One act can be morally unacceptable in one society, while the same action is embraced and acceptable in another society. To that effect, ethical relativists have concluded that there are no moral standards that are accepted universally. Furthermore, an organization can only be judged relative to its existing moral standards. This directly implies that common frameworks for resolving moral disputes are non-existent among members of different communities.  ( Gueras & Garofalo, 2010)

                The theory of ethical relativism is somewhat rejected by most ethicists claiming that in as much as the moral principles and values of societies may differ, the primary moral principles constituting these principles and values are the same all through. A notable example of this description relates to some early civilizations in which parents were to be killed after hitting a certain set age was ubiquitous among communities, citing reasons that old age was limiting and curtailed with health problems. The current societies would deem such a practice as inhuman; the underlying fundamental principle behind the approach is considered reasonable by the present society as an act of euthanasia. ( Gueras & Garofalo, 2010)

                The teleology theory rather relates actions to consequences. In other words, the standard classification of actions as either wrong or right is dependent on the good or evil outcome of an act.  The teleological theory can be broadly discussed under three categories: ethical egoism, utilitarianism, and eudaimonism.

                Ethical egoism classifies that an act is considered good given that the outcome of the action promotes the person’s self-interest as defined by him. This is considered so regardless of the direct impact this action has on others. This theory promotes the belief that promoting one’s personal interests is moral.

Utilitarianism, on the other hand, holds that for an act to be deemed as good, the results of this act should be satisfactory to the large majority of people who are likely to be directly or indirectly affected by this act. For instance, suppose an instructor creates an annual student vacation after soliciting the vacation time preferences from all the students and honor their preferences. The instructor would be acting in a way that shall maximize the pleasure of all the students.

Eudaimonism theory, on the other hand, argues that an act is considered good if and only if the outcome fulfills its intended goals and simultaneously promotes the welfare of human beings. Further explanation translates to the actions being classified as fruitful if they promote the realization of goals making up human nature and the associated joy got from the action. Collectively, the teleological theory takes a standpoint that the morality of an action majorly depends on the consequence of a specific action.

The deontology theory of ethics majorly stresses the relationship between the morality and duty of human actions. Here, an act is classified as morally acceptable if it relates to some characteristic of the action and not due to the action’s excellent result. Deontological ethics argue that, at minimum, some actions are morally upright regardless of their consequences for human welfare.

The virtue theory of ethics, on the other hand, emphasizes the role played by virtues and character when moral philosophy is involved as opposed to performing one’s duty and expecting positive consequences. Most of the theories under this classification are inspired by the great Aristotle who stated that a person of virtue is one with ideal character traits.

The intuitionism theory states that a form of cognition in ethics that argues that moral statements can be identified as false or true instantly by relying on some form of rational intuition.  Intuitionists have conflicted over the existing kinds of moral truths that can be amenable and directly apprehended.

How Administrative Evil Happens

                Adams and Balfour (2015) built the idea of administrative Evil while directly linking the concept to the mass genocide planned and executed by the Nazis during the period of the Second World War against anti-Semitism.  In the modern world, administrative evils manifest in a different form. According to the Oxford English dictionary, Evil can be described as the antithesis of good in all principles. In the current modern age, administrative Evil can be related to technical rationality, a way of life in which emphasis is laid on the scientific-analytic mindset. ( Balfour & Adams,2014)

                Characteristic to administrative Evil is that the people who engage in this act usually are not aware of the wrong they are committing in. an ordinary person may be going about their usual business doing what they consider acceptable. Simultaneously, a critical and analytical observer would see pure Evil from the start to end of all those actions. Worse is that evil acts have been redefined in society in an act referred to as moral inversion to make it appear convincingly moral.

                The primary difference between forms of Evil appearing throughout the course of human history and modern administrative Evil is that administrative Evil is difficult to recognize under normal circumstances. Culprits to this practice often overlook the evil nature of their actions and delude that these acts are not so evil as presumed by others. However, there exist notable differences between these classes of Evil. Notably, the scientific-analytical mindset does not align with the current concept of Evil in society.

Combating Administrative Evil

                Several ways exist that can be applied to combat the rot in society generally known as administrative Evil and eradicate it from amongst society’s ranks. Administrative Evil is a scourge ravaging our society. All effort needs to be focused on eradicating it. To that effect, it is necessary to promote the legacy of the rational technical approach to administrative ethics in society.

 Society can mitigate the moral vacuity of administration ethics while focusing efforts at the reconstruction of the existing public ethics into practical measures that combat the administrative evils in society. Public ethics should also be clearly outlined and the society sensitized about the existence of such. ( O’Leary, 2017).