Making the Right Decision: Objectivism, Subjectivism, and Skepticism

• Making the Right Decision: Objectivism, Subjectivism, and Skepticism
• Introduction
• SECTION I: The Dilemma
• SECTION II: The Theories
• SECTION III: The Connection
• Positions of Grading for Moral Principles (MP)
• Works Cited

Introduction

Our decisions in life are guided by three common principles: objectivism, subjectivism, and skepticism. Although there are plenty of ways to break down the ideology of decision-making, the best way to analyze a decision is to categorize the grading behind the decision. The questions to answer are related to the type of decision that needs to be made and is generally based on six total questions. In this essay, the focus will be on the three key positions of decision-making. The positions will analyze a specific ethical dilemma, which will be found in section one. After the dilemma is stated, we will present our argument by explaining each theory. These arguments will be presented in section two. In the third section, we will bridge the dilemma to the three common theories, followed by an analysis and reaction for each theory. Lastly, the conclusion will summarize the key points of the three sections.

SECTION I: The Dilemma

In life, decisions are needed to decide an outcome of an event. Sometimes, these decisions have long-term effects, while others have short-term effects. As humans, decisions can be made in more than one way. In fact, there are seven different positions that can be used to decide an outcome; however, for the purpose of this essay, we are examining three different principles: objectivism, subjectivism, and skepticism.

The ethical dilemma in the spotlight is the grading of a human being. In other words, the grading would refer to the judgement of action, and a human being would be anyone that is performing the action that is being graded. To be more specific, the dilemma has to do with the overall grading of human ethics. The dilemma is as follows:

There are ten salespeople for a corporate-automotive dealership. Above the ten salespeople is the head manager of sales. The responsibility of the sales manager is to evaluate the performance of the ten salesmen. Each salesman is being graded by their commitment to the company on a basis of ethics. The grading system for the judgement will consist of three characteristics: input, reputation, and drive. Input is referring to the amount of work that put into the company. For the basis of the input argument, sales records will be the focal point. Sub points would have to do with the revenue generated and the profits earned. Reputation is referring to the feedback that is given from past customers and fellow co-workers. The reputation grade is broken down into a survey format, consisting of two parts: the satisfaction of the customer and the satisfaction of the company. Drive is referring to the overall desire and intent of each salesman. The dilemma comes into the picture when the manager is supposed to pick two salesmen to represent the new job opening for the dealership- the middle-level management.

This is a dilemma that is an example of what managers face on a normal basis- making the right decision. The process of making a decision is already difficult; however, without the right decision-making principles, it becomes exponentially harder.

This is a fictitious example that could be relative to any management position. The idea came to fruition after my experience with simulating a new-founded dealership. Being that I am looking to start my own dealership in the next couple of years, dilemmas like this one will exist more often than usual. The key is to use a combination of grading techniques to come to the best possible decision.

This is an ethical dilemma strictly because of the nature of the decision that needs to be made. The main idea is that we need to choose the best candidates for the job. The dilemma regarding the “best candidates” is how the candidates would be graded.

SECTION II: The Theories

The theories at hand deal with the process of making a decision. More specifically, they deal with the ethical judgment of each salesman that is a potential candidate. In order to make an ethical judgement, it is important to understand the three principles being used.

First, the objective principle (commonly known as moral objectivism) is the idea that “moral principles have universal, objective validity” (Pojman 18). The objective principle also admits that “many (or all) principles may be overridden by other principles at different times and occasions”. The keywords to get behind are “universal” and “validity”. With an idea being universal, the idea stresses that the judgment is solely uniform across all grading platforms. An example of a universal idea is the language of mathematics. Math is simply a numerical language that cannot be interpreted in a different sense- all conclusions produce the same answers. With that being said, validity is the confirmation of right versus wrong. Every decision being made is based upon having valid results. Valid results are judged by two (and only two) answers: yes and no. The whole idea of objectivism is to confirm a universal idea as valid or invalid; which makes for only two possible outcomes.

Second, the subjective principle (also known as subjective universalism) is the complete opposite of objectivism. In turn, subjectivism “denies that moral principles are objectively valid” (Pojman 18). The quote continues to state that “they (the principle at hand) must be chosen by rational agents to have any validity”. Denying objectivity could lead to a lack of accuracy when breaking down a judgement; however, the key phrase to focus on is the “rational agents”. An example of a rational agent is the one that is performing the grading. When a subjective grade is put into place, the validity comes into play when there is a fair argument of correctness when there’s no possibility of quantifying a quality. Basically speaking, objectivism pertains to quantitative analysis, while subjectivism deals with qualitative analysis. It is easy to grade a quantity because of the nature of the argument- it pertains to numbers and factual evidence. It is more difficult (but not impossible) to grade quality; strictly because there is not a universal technique to judge said quality.

Third, the skepticism principle deals with grading unknowns. According to the book, the argument is that “the view cannot show whether there is any truth to an analysis” (Pojman 18). This is saying that there is not always a method for getting a guaranteed answer; which reveals that a skepticist principle is simply unknown. Unlike the grading scale for objectivism and subjectivism, skepticism cannot complete an evaluation because most of the six questions remain without a guaranteed answer. The questions to ask are all about moral principle- overriding moral principle, validating moral principle, universalizing moral principle, interpersonalizing moral principle, and applying any principles to yourself. Basically, moral principle is absent in skepticism because skepticism does not produce any answers; it only asks questions. To get a clearer image of the three moral principles at play, refer to the chart on page 7.

SECTION III: The Connection

The connections drawn on the basis of the dilemma are that the grading system needs to incorporate the three types of principles. Although I’ve adapted an objective mindset throughout the years, the idea that objectivism is the only correct methodology is just incorrect. Sure, objectivism is a great basis for grading; however, there are cases where it would not be effective. Going back to the dilemma, the manager has to implement all three principles in order to come to the best conclusion.

First, each salesman’s input will be graded upon the basis of objectivity. This is an excellent way to reveal each candidate’s performance metrics. By implementing objective techniques, the numbers will set the stage. These numbers will point out the best in the quantitative department- accurately depicting each candidate’s performance while having a solid basis of discovery. Second, each salesman’s reputation will be graded by subjective milestones. Again, these milestones will be interpreted by two subcategories- customer satisfaction and company satisfaction. The grades are based on qualified grader’s inputs; however, there are no right or wrong answers. The subjective nature merely wants to see how each candidate stands compared to the rest of the competition by implementing a controversial (yet second-dimensional) type of grading. After the objective and subjective information are concluded, the third piece of information is to draw the skepticism conclusions. Although measuring an employee’s drive could be determined by subjectivism, the idea that the candidates are graded on their desire and passion by other people is just not possible. It is not possible because the only people that know the drive of each individual employee is the specific individual employee.

After analyzing each employee using these three critical principles, it is fair to say that a conclusion is easier to make. Without the theories, it would be merely impossible to feel confident about making a major decision. I would state this because the employees are all humans; humans are subject to emotion. This includes the candidates and the manager making the decisions.

Positions of Grading for Moral Principles (MP)

Works Cited

1. Fishkin, James S. Beyond Subjective Morality. Yale U Press, 1984.
2. Hemingway, Ernest. Death in the Afternoon: With a Frontispiece from a Painting. J. Cape, 1932.
3. Pojman, Louis P., and James Fieser. Ethical Theory: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Wadsworth, 2011.