Communicative ethics in the workplace Term Paper

Communicative ethics in the workplace - Term Paper Example Differing environments and diverse job classes cater to a wide variety of mental wavelengths as well as sociological and psychological characteristics each pertaining to an individual area of expertise. When postulating the idea of communicative efforts to breed desired results in any given situation, a careful analysis of the environment is key to success. Discussing the idea of communicative ethics in a precise manner is going to help us understand the underlying factors that make up human interaction in each scenario. Sticking to a very general and concise approach, each branch of communication involving diplomacy, creating credibility, and building trust will be elaborated on by examining ethical relations in varying contexts. Ethics is defined by two categories of thought relating on how to examine human actions within a specific paradigm. The first of these is called categorical ethics, whose main idea is defined primarily by Immanuel Kant as the â€Å"categorical imperativeâ € . The categorical imperative states specifically that actions can be either right or wrong, that they must be categorized in some way or fashion and thrown into a labeled dichotomy. The basis of his idea stems from the humanistic quality of desire. If a human being needs or wants something then inherently the human will seek out a path of attaining what he or she so desires. Determining factors as to the actual motivations behind the desire are what Kant zeroes in on and labels as good or bad. The deeper aspects of the categorical imperative are a syllogism to measure out the morality of the action. By developing the ability to analyze given situations in varying circumstances we gain the ability to determine what action to take will have the most beneficial outcome for us as an individual. The desire for a specific outcome will change the shape of the methodology used to acquire it (Cheney, 2004). Discursive ethics are then bound by whether or not individuals are engaged in di scourse for the basis of self motivation or a common understanding of the ethical dilemma of the other individual. This brings about the idea of subjective ethics, or whether or not when two humans engage in communicative discourse do they in fact consider or perceive each other’s subjectivity. This idea really stems away from the right and wrong dichotomy of Kantian ethics and displays the characteristics of meshing into the gray area. Subjective ethics takes the approach of rationally analyzing different situations and determining a basis of value for an action that may or may not be all good or all bad, sometimes completely being in between. In terms of corporate or social responsibility even imagine the topic of CEO compensation. How much compensation is really able to be classified as good or bad, more or less, enough or too much? Being virtuous and steadfast with decisions in the social world tends to breed positive results, overzealous attitudes and lax performance do not. Edmund Burke stated that each human in themselves carries a â€Å"lamp of experience† (Sherman, 2009). This lamp is a guiding light which illuminates all experiences which shape the subjective reality of an individual, therefore making each human interaction a subjective experience in which no one human can truly understand the subjectivity of another due to the lamps having taken each one on a different path in life. However, the closer two individuals come to understanding the subjective nature in the interactions taking place, the more value that can be placed on the discourse therein (Sherman, 2009). The idea of communication being utilized by any individual for the purpose of developing complex social relationships in the workplace will be analyzed thoroughly by examining what it is to use communicative ethics, understanding the diverse differences between workplace environments and their impact on communicative structure, and finally by grasping the total net profi ts and