Jonathan Shao

09/28/2015
Assignment 3
TF: Erik Woodward

CASE 2: I. Kant On a Supposed Right to Lie because of Philanthropic Concerns (course

packet pp. 40-43)

1. Yes, Constant is correct in saying that telling the truth singly and unconditionally would
make society crumble. If telling the truth harms or affects others negatively, the ends
dont justify the means. Honesty is the best policy, but should be tempered with
compassion.

2. Kants categorical imperatives first formulation states act only on that maxim through
which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law of nature, and
his second being treat others and yourself always as ends, never simply means to ends.

3. Constant asserts that telling the truth is a duty with regard to one who has a right to the
truth, but with a caveat where no one has a right to a truth that harms others. On the other
hand, Kant affirms that truthfulness is an imperative and must be followed however great
it harms others.

4. According to Kant, truthfulness is important for contract law because truthfulness is a

duty that must be regarded as the basis of all duties founded on contract, and the laws of
such duties would be rendered uncertain and useless if even the slightest exception to
them were admitted.
5. Yes, when Kant states that whoever tells a lie, regardless of how good his intentions may
be, must answer for the consequences resulting therefrom even before a civil tribunal and
must pay the penalty for them. Consequently, when adhering strictly to the truth, the
public justice cannot lay a hand on you, whatever the unforeseen consequence might be,
which portrays Kants categorical imperative of the unconditional moral obligation that is
binding in all circumstances and not dependent on a persons inclination or purpose.

CASE 3: Firm beliefs, The Economist, March 28th, 2015 (course packet pp. 44-48)

1. There seems to be a large divide between Asia and the West in terms of corporate culture:
about 70% of Asias stockmarket value is represented by state-run firms or business
houses, they pay out just a third of their profits in dividends and buy-backs compared to
up to 90% for American ones, and the top 500 firms spent less on repurchasing stock than
just Apple alone in 2014.

2. Asia has spurned its ideals as the subprime crash and other scandals have tarnished
Anglo-Saxon capitalisms image.
3. Scholars explain that weak legal systems and capital markets lead Asian firms to diversity
and rely on political and familial networks.

4. Proponents to the Asian style of doing business argue that it allows long-term decision-
making, but detractors counter that it breeds cronyism.

5. The three forces that lead firms to reform are mortality, the need to please shareholders,
and the drive to achieve global scale.

6. Hong Kongs five richest moguls have an average age of 82.

7. Asian firms that operate in the global market will eventually become focused
multinationals, concentrating their firepower to gain economies of scale rather than
following the old way of sprawling diversification.

8. Future management of Asian corporates will still include families or the state exerting
some control, but with accountability to other investors and an emphasis on global scale,
converging more with an Anglo-Saxon ideal.