SUS1501-24-S1-178T 5. DO THE RIGHT THING - DEONTOLOGY Assessment 2 - 602790
FORUM
Assessment 2 - 602790
Done
Due: Monday, 18 March 2024, 8:00 AM
View grades
Display replies in nested form Settings
This discussion has been locked so you can no longer reply to it.
Assessment 2 - 602790
Tuesday, 9 January 2024, 11:39 AM
Assessment 2:
Bob van Dijk and his billions
Time for you to think a little again. In the crossroads assessment, one of the multiple choice questions was the following:
“ In the 2018/2019 financial year, Bob van Dijk, the former CEO of Naspers (NOT THE SOCCER PLAYER) earned a
total remuneration (salary, incentives and options) of R 1.9 billion.” My personal opinion on this statement is
most closely described by:
A. Good for him – he worked hard to earn this
B. The only problem I have with this is that this money is in van Dijk’s bank account and not in mine
C. No problem with this. I'm sure van Dijk donates huge amounts to charities
D. I think that it is morally wrong for anyone to earn that much money
E. I think that active steps should be taken to correct such immoral executive remuneration practices
Do you remember which option you chose? (If you haven't done the crossroads assessment you need to go and do it now.)
Anyway, in this assignment we are going to zoom in on option A specifically: “Good for him – he worked hard to earn this”. What this
option is basically saying is, that you think that van Dijk's earnings are completely reasonable and justifiable?
What we want you to do in this assessment is to examine this act (i.e. someone, perhaps even you, taking ZAR 1.9 billion for a year’s
work) from the perspective of Kant’s formula of universal law version of the categorical imperative.
,INSTRUCTIONS:
Step 0: Do Assessment 1
If you haven't already done it, please go to the "AT A CROSSROAD" section and do Assessment 1 now.
YOU MAY GET 0 (ZERO) FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT IF YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED YOUR ASSESSMENT 1.
Step 1: Evaluate the act using Kant's categorical imperative (We've done the first two stages for you)
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law:
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really, really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
You need to fill in this stuff......
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
And this stuff.....
Step 2: Form an opinion
On the basis of your analysis above, answer the following questions:
1. What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion? (You might want to do a bit of research into the
nature of van Dijk's 2018/2019 earnings).
2. Why do you think this? You MUST state your premises (reasons) explicitly as we taught you in the section on arguments
(A DARN GOOD ARGUMENT - INFORMAL LOGIC) If you do not do this you will not pass this assignment.
3. What do you think about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
4. Why do you think this? You MUST state your premises explicitly as we taught you in the section on arguments (A DARN GOOD
ARGUMENT - INFORMAL LOGIC)
Step 3: Write your answer ...
Although it is technically possible to write your answer directly into the discussion forum below, we would strongly advise
against this. Rather write it in a Word document that you can save somewhere just in case something goes wrong with the
submission process.
Your answer should be an absolute minimum of 400 words.
Step 4: Submit your answers from steps 1 and 2 for marking
You do this in the discussion below.
DO NOT COPY FROM ANYWHERE (including ChatGPT) - PLAGIARIZED WORK WILL GET 2%
DO NOT SUBMIT LATE - LATE ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT BE MARKED
Step 5: Have a look at what everyone else has written and discuss
Once you have submitted your assessment, you will be able to see the submissions of all your fellow students. We strongly
encourage you to look at whatever your fellow students have written on this issue. And better still, to comment on what they have
written!
, This is a controversial issue after all. Some will think there is no problem with this sort of remuneration; some will think that there is
a big problem with it.
So let's get some discussion going!
740 words
Permalink
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Friday, 1 March 2024, 4:51 PM
Assessment 2 : 602790
Student number : 42257042
Step 1
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law;
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really,
really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
No, it is not conceivable in the world ruled by the universal law, this will make the economy to downfall, and there will
be shortage of goods as people would want to buy everything that money can buy. There will be a decline in the
production of farming, food and clothing because each and everyone in the end will be earning same amount of
money.
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
I would not act on such a maxim because they won’t be any need for people to study for better jobs or qualification,
because at the end of the year all people will be getting 1.9 billion zar each, regardless of job title.
Step 2: form an opinion
1 .What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
According to Kant i think he would have said that van Dijk earned that money in an honest way, he worked hard for
and well deserving. I think it is a motivational for other people to know that when you work hard and strive for results
then you can get great rewards, through my research about him, I read that he had so many challenges along his
journey and he did not give up he deserves it.
2. Why do you think this?
Van Dijk it shows that he is a hard worker and he also proves that it is not only criminal activities that pays, you can
still work for company and become rich through remuneration and reward of hard work. Naspers has been involved
in a lot of community investment programme where they give back to communities, this is indicative of the fact that
they do have the financial muscles and are not at all affected by Van Dijk. I think he has the relevant qualifications to
be in such a role coupled with experience and acquired the necessary experience to be in position to occupy such a
role.
3. What do you think about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
I think this because I a firm believer that one needs to work hard to be successful in life, nothing comes easy in life
so there is a need for individual to punch above their weight to achieve the impossible. Great things can only come
out of great determination and focus. I believe that people should be rewarded accordingly for the work that they do.
4. Why do you think this?
I think it is not wrong at all to earn so much money. He deserves his earning as his made them a lot of profits without
doing anything wrong. So, I don’t I don’t think it is wrong.
543 words
Permalink Show parent
, Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by MERRIAM MALEBO HLUNGWANI - Wednesday, 6 March 2024, 10:30 PM
I also am in agreement with the fact that there is nothing wrong with people earning that much, as long as you
work hard for it.
26 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Saturday, 16 March 2024, 2:35 PM
merriam malebo hlungwani
van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion is morally acceptable depends on how he acquired that wealth.
19 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by Humbulani Victoria TSHIGUVHO - Thursday, 7 March 2024, 1:45 AM
Hi Thabo
1. Are you sure you understand Kant's Categorical Imperative theory? Don't you think you should re-read the
theory? When you answer questions related to Kant they should be based on his theories. His theories are what
he thinks.
Humbu (Teaching Assistant)
43 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Saturday, 16 March 2024, 2:22 PM
Assessment 2 (602790)
Student number: 42257042
Step 1
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law;
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really,
really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
No, it is not conceivable in the world ruled by the universal law, this will make the economy to downfall, and
there will be shortage of goods as people would want to buy everything that money can buy. There will be a
decline in the production of farming, food and clothing because each and everyone in the end will be earning
same amount of money.
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
I would not act on such a maxim because they won’t be any need for people to study for better jobs or
qualification, because at the end of the year all people will be getting 1.9 billion ZAR each, regardless of job
title.
Step 2: form an opinion
1 .What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk’s earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
FORUM
Assessment 2 - 602790
Done
Due: Monday, 18 March 2024, 8:00 AM
View grades
Display replies in nested form Settings
This discussion has been locked so you can no longer reply to it.
Assessment 2 - 602790
Tuesday, 9 January 2024, 11:39 AM
Assessment 2:
Bob van Dijk and his billions
Time for you to think a little again. In the crossroads assessment, one of the multiple choice questions was the following:
“ In the 2018/2019 financial year, Bob van Dijk, the former CEO of Naspers (NOT THE SOCCER PLAYER) earned a
total remuneration (salary, incentives and options) of R 1.9 billion.” My personal opinion on this statement is
most closely described by:
A. Good for him – he worked hard to earn this
B. The only problem I have with this is that this money is in van Dijk’s bank account and not in mine
C. No problem with this. I'm sure van Dijk donates huge amounts to charities
D. I think that it is morally wrong for anyone to earn that much money
E. I think that active steps should be taken to correct such immoral executive remuneration practices
Do you remember which option you chose? (If you haven't done the crossroads assessment you need to go and do it now.)
Anyway, in this assignment we are going to zoom in on option A specifically: “Good for him – he worked hard to earn this”. What this
option is basically saying is, that you think that van Dijk's earnings are completely reasonable and justifiable?
What we want you to do in this assessment is to examine this act (i.e. someone, perhaps even you, taking ZAR 1.9 billion for a year’s
work) from the perspective of Kant’s formula of universal law version of the categorical imperative.
,INSTRUCTIONS:
Step 0: Do Assessment 1
If you haven't already done it, please go to the "AT A CROSSROAD" section and do Assessment 1 now.
YOU MAY GET 0 (ZERO) FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT IF YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED YOUR ASSESSMENT 1.
Step 1: Evaluate the act using Kant's categorical imperative (We've done the first two stages for you)
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law:
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really, really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
You need to fill in this stuff......
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
And this stuff.....
Step 2: Form an opinion
On the basis of your analysis above, answer the following questions:
1. What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion? (You might want to do a bit of research into the
nature of van Dijk's 2018/2019 earnings).
2. Why do you think this? You MUST state your premises (reasons) explicitly as we taught you in the section on arguments
(A DARN GOOD ARGUMENT - INFORMAL LOGIC) If you do not do this you will not pass this assignment.
3. What do you think about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
4. Why do you think this? You MUST state your premises explicitly as we taught you in the section on arguments (A DARN GOOD
ARGUMENT - INFORMAL LOGIC)
Step 3: Write your answer ...
Although it is technically possible to write your answer directly into the discussion forum below, we would strongly advise
against this. Rather write it in a Word document that you can save somewhere just in case something goes wrong with the
submission process.
Your answer should be an absolute minimum of 400 words.
Step 4: Submit your answers from steps 1 and 2 for marking
You do this in the discussion below.
DO NOT COPY FROM ANYWHERE (including ChatGPT) - PLAGIARIZED WORK WILL GET 2%
DO NOT SUBMIT LATE - LATE ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT BE MARKED
Step 5: Have a look at what everyone else has written and discuss
Once you have submitted your assessment, you will be able to see the submissions of all your fellow students. We strongly
encourage you to look at whatever your fellow students have written on this issue. And better still, to comment on what they have
written!
, This is a controversial issue after all. Some will think there is no problem with this sort of remuneration; some will think that there is
a big problem with it.
So let's get some discussion going!
740 words
Permalink
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Friday, 1 March 2024, 4:51 PM
Assessment 2 : 602790
Student number : 42257042
Step 1
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law;
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really,
really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
No, it is not conceivable in the world ruled by the universal law, this will make the economy to downfall, and there will
be shortage of goods as people would want to buy everything that money can buy. There will be a decline in the
production of farming, food and clothing because each and everyone in the end will be earning same amount of
money.
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
I would not act on such a maxim because they won’t be any need for people to study for better jobs or qualification,
because at the end of the year all people will be getting 1.9 billion zar each, regardless of job title.
Step 2: form an opinion
1 .What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
According to Kant i think he would have said that van Dijk earned that money in an honest way, he worked hard for
and well deserving. I think it is a motivational for other people to know that when you work hard and strive for results
then you can get great rewards, through my research about him, I read that he had so many challenges along his
journey and he did not give up he deserves it.
2. Why do you think this?
Van Dijk it shows that he is a hard worker and he also proves that it is not only criminal activities that pays, you can
still work for company and become rich through remuneration and reward of hard work. Naspers has been involved
in a lot of community investment programme where they give back to communities, this is indicative of the fact that
they do have the financial muscles and are not at all affected by Van Dijk. I think he has the relevant qualifications to
be in such a role coupled with experience and acquired the necessary experience to be in position to occupy such a
role.
3. What do you think about van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
I think this because I a firm believer that one needs to work hard to be successful in life, nothing comes easy in life
so there is a need for individual to punch above their weight to achieve the impossible. Great things can only come
out of great determination and focus. I believe that people should be rewarded accordingly for the work that they do.
4. Why do you think this?
I think it is not wrong at all to earn so much money. He deserves his earning as his made them a lot of profits without
doing anything wrong. So, I don’t I don’t think it is wrong.
543 words
Permalink Show parent
, Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by MERRIAM MALEBO HLUNGWANI - Wednesday, 6 March 2024, 10:30 PM
I also am in agreement with the fact that there is nothing wrong with people earning that much, as long as you
work hard for it.
26 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Saturday, 16 March 2024, 2:35 PM
merriam malebo hlungwani
van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion is morally acceptable depends on how he acquired that wealth.
19 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by Humbulani Victoria TSHIGUVHO - Thursday, 7 March 2024, 1:45 AM
Hi Thabo
1. Are you sure you understand Kant's Categorical Imperative theory? Don't you think you should re-read the
theory? When you answer questions related to Kant they should be based on his theories. His theories are what
he thinks.
Humbu (Teaching Assistant)
43 words
Permalink Show parent
Re: Assessment 2 - 602790
by THABO ERIC MALLELA - Saturday, 16 March 2024, 2:22 PM
Assessment 2 (602790)
Student number: 42257042
Step 1
1. State your proposed act as a maxim:
"van Dijk will take ZAR 1.9 billion (A) when he's done a year's work (C) in order to get really, really rich (E)."
2. Restate this maxim as a universal law;
"All people (7.6 billion of them) will take ZAR 1.9 billion when they've done a year's work in order to get really,
really rich."
3. Ask whether your maxim is conceivable in a world ruled by the universal law; and finally
No, it is not conceivable in the world ruled by the universal law, this will make the economy to downfall, and
there will be shortage of goods as people would want to buy everything that money can buy. There will be a
decline in the production of farming, food and clothing because each and everyone in the end will be earning
same amount of money.
4. Ask whether you would rationally act on your maxim in such a world.
I would not act on such a maxim because they won’t be any need for people to study for better jobs or
qualification, because at the end of the year all people will be getting 1.9 billion ZAR each, regardless of job
title.
Step 2: form an opinion
1 .What would Kant probably have said about van Dijk’s earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
