Assignment 08
SUS1501 – Sustainability and Greed
Student Number: 65825012
Date: 01 July 9, 2021
Teaching Assistant Name: N, Encless
Declaration:
By submitting this assignment, I implicitly declare that this is my own work.
I am aware that if ANY unacknowledged copying is detected in ANY part of this assignment, I
will get 0 (zero) for the entire assignment.
INSTRUCTIONS:
Read the “1. Introduction” section below;
Fill in your assignment contributions under the relevant headings 2-5 below;
Save the file as a Word document with a short name (myUnisa will reject files with long names);
Submit this file into the Assignments tool on myUnisa;
Take a screen grab of the final submission acknowledgement on myUnisa and save this
somewhere safe in case of any disputes:
Check under the Assignments tool that there is a date in the “Processed” cell for the SUS1501
Assignment 8.
3Px4620201KHP6Xr#000Twc9q
,1. INTRODUCTION (Written for you by Prof Eccles)
In assignment 2 we debated the fact that Bob van Dijk earned R 1.9 billion in 2010. In the final analysis
we were asked two questions:
“2. What do you think about Bob van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?”
“3. Why do you think this?”
In effect we were asked to present an argument (the answer to question 3) supporting a conclusion (the
answer to question 2).
Students opinions on this could be divided into two groups:
Those who had no problem with someone earning that amount of money; OR
Those who had a real problem with someone earning that sort of money.
In this assignment, I’m going to:
Analyze the argument of a fellow student whose conclusion I disagree with;
Tell you what was wrong with the premises;
Tell you how their argument might not be valid; and finally
Present you with a much better argument supporting my own option on this matter
2. A BAD ARGUMENT
<
What you need to do in this section is go back to the Assignment 2 discussion forum and find a
submission from one of your fellow students who presented the opposite opinion to what you think.
In other words, if you think there is no problem with someone earning R 1.9 billion in a year then choose
an assignment where the student argues that there is a problem. Or if you think there is a problem,
choose an assignment where the student argues that there is no problem.
We want you to copy the section of this assignment where the student answered the questions: “2.
What do you think about Bob van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?”and “3. Why do you think this?” and
paste it here.
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU PUT THIS IN INVERTED COMMAS (“) AND THAT YOU PUT THE NAME OF THE
STUDENT WHO SUBMITTED IT
T. MZOBE
“2. What do you think about Van Dijk's earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
I strongly feel its immoral especially when it comes to other employees and shareholders that were
earning aa low income. It seems very insensitive to those who earl less than him but still have to
suffer to maintain their living costs, like food , transportation and living. People at the top level of the
company should not be over compensated. The company should practice a more ethical and fare
leadership, such bonused who have been very beneficial if it was stretched across all employees as
well as underprivileged retrenched workers who are economically strained.
3. Why do you think this?
, I personally think over compensating certain employees because of their level of importance in a
company is morally unacceptable. It can lead into a lot of conflicts within the workplace. All
employees should be regarded equal and be treated as such. High bonuses for people who are
already high earners will only continue making the rich even richer and the poor even more poor .a
company should be transparent with all their bonuses. Integrity should be highly practiced. This huge
bonus would of helped to elevate employee skills and advance to the next level in the company,
which would have made the company more effective , and all employees happy. Happy employees
provide positive results, with loads of growth and high profits.”
3. THE PREMISES AND THE CONCLUSION
1. List the premises (explicit and implicit) that your fellow student used in drawing their
conclusion.
Premises 1
The student’s first argument is an explicit by stating that its “immoral especially when it
comes to other employees and shareholders that are earning low income”.
Premises 2
The student further argues that it is ‘insensitive to those who earn less than him but still
have to maintain living costs like food, transportation and living” Stating an implicit
Premises 3
The student further argues implicit premises that “overcompensating employees on their
level of importance is unacceptable and will lead to conflict”. Implicit premises
Premises 4
The student further elaborates on the matter that ‘’The company should practice a more
ethical and fair leadership. Stating an implicit, not so obvious
Premises 5
The students further argues that it ‘’It would have been very beneficial if it was stretched
across all employees as well as underprivileged retrenched workers who are economically
drained.
2. Restate the conclusion.
In Conclusion, the student’s argument is based on the fact that the amount of remuneration
received by one person is unfair is and immoral. The argument states that the money should
be shared amongst those who help the business grow and make it profitable the student
believes that the money would have helped to improve employee skills and advance the
company to the next level. This student insists that this money would’ve made employees
happy and happy employees produce positive results.
>
4. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE PREMISES
1. Evaluate the acceptability of the premises.
SUS1501 – Sustainability and Greed
Student Number: 65825012
Date: 01 July 9, 2021
Teaching Assistant Name: N, Encless
Declaration:
By submitting this assignment, I implicitly declare that this is my own work.
I am aware that if ANY unacknowledged copying is detected in ANY part of this assignment, I
will get 0 (zero) for the entire assignment.
INSTRUCTIONS:
Read the “1. Introduction” section below;
Fill in your assignment contributions under the relevant headings 2-5 below;
Save the file as a Word document with a short name (myUnisa will reject files with long names);
Submit this file into the Assignments tool on myUnisa;
Take a screen grab of the final submission acknowledgement on myUnisa and save this
somewhere safe in case of any disputes:
Check under the Assignments tool that there is a date in the “Processed” cell for the SUS1501
Assignment 8.
3Px4620201KHP6Xr#000Twc9q
,1. INTRODUCTION (Written for you by Prof Eccles)
In assignment 2 we debated the fact that Bob van Dijk earned R 1.9 billion in 2010. In the final analysis
we were asked two questions:
“2. What do you think about Bob van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?”
“3. Why do you think this?”
In effect we were asked to present an argument (the answer to question 3) supporting a conclusion (the
answer to question 2).
Students opinions on this could be divided into two groups:
Those who had no problem with someone earning that amount of money; OR
Those who had a real problem with someone earning that sort of money.
In this assignment, I’m going to:
Analyze the argument of a fellow student whose conclusion I disagree with;
Tell you what was wrong with the premises;
Tell you how their argument might not be valid; and finally
Present you with a much better argument supporting my own option on this matter
2. A BAD ARGUMENT
<
What you need to do in this section is go back to the Assignment 2 discussion forum and find a
submission from one of your fellow students who presented the opposite opinion to what you think.
In other words, if you think there is no problem with someone earning R 1.9 billion in a year then choose
an assignment where the student argues that there is a problem. Or if you think there is a problem,
choose an assignment where the student argues that there is no problem.
We want you to copy the section of this assignment where the student answered the questions: “2.
What do you think about Bob van Dijk earning ZAR 1.9 billion?”and “3. Why do you think this?” and
paste it here.
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU PUT THIS IN INVERTED COMMAS (“) AND THAT YOU PUT THE NAME OF THE
STUDENT WHO SUBMITTED IT
T. MZOBE
“2. What do you think about Van Dijk's earning ZAR 1.9 billion?
I strongly feel its immoral especially when it comes to other employees and shareholders that were
earning aa low income. It seems very insensitive to those who earl less than him but still have to
suffer to maintain their living costs, like food , transportation and living. People at the top level of the
company should not be over compensated. The company should practice a more ethical and fare
leadership, such bonused who have been very beneficial if it was stretched across all employees as
well as underprivileged retrenched workers who are economically strained.
3. Why do you think this?
, I personally think over compensating certain employees because of their level of importance in a
company is morally unacceptable. It can lead into a lot of conflicts within the workplace. All
employees should be regarded equal and be treated as such. High bonuses for people who are
already high earners will only continue making the rich even richer and the poor even more poor .a
company should be transparent with all their bonuses. Integrity should be highly practiced. This huge
bonus would of helped to elevate employee skills and advance to the next level in the company,
which would have made the company more effective , and all employees happy. Happy employees
provide positive results, with loads of growth and high profits.”
3. THE PREMISES AND THE CONCLUSION
1. List the premises (explicit and implicit) that your fellow student used in drawing their
conclusion.
Premises 1
The student’s first argument is an explicit by stating that its “immoral especially when it
comes to other employees and shareholders that are earning low income”.
Premises 2
The student further argues that it is ‘insensitive to those who earn less than him but still
have to maintain living costs like food, transportation and living” Stating an implicit
Premises 3
The student further argues implicit premises that “overcompensating employees on their
level of importance is unacceptable and will lead to conflict”. Implicit premises
Premises 4
The student further elaborates on the matter that ‘’The company should practice a more
ethical and fair leadership. Stating an implicit, not so obvious
Premises 5
The students further argues that it ‘’It would have been very beneficial if it was stretched
across all employees as well as underprivileged retrenched workers who are economically
drained.
2. Restate the conclusion.
In Conclusion, the student’s argument is based on the fact that the amount of remuneration
received by one person is unfair is and immoral. The argument states that the money should
be shared amongst those who help the business grow and make it profitable the student
believes that the money would have helped to improve employee skills and advance the
company to the next level. This student insists that this money would’ve made employees
happy and happy employees produce positive results.
>
4. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE PREMISES
1. Evaluate the acceptability of the premises.
