This is an ETH 501 course I need a 4 page paper incl. the content given in the attachment. APA style with 1-2 references listed in reference section, and headings. Emphasis is on the deontological...

Implications of Deontological ethics
PAGE
6
Deontological Analysis
Running Head: DEONTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Deontological Analysis
Name
Institution
Introduction
Deontology is a word that has been derived from the Greek words Deon (duty) and logos (the science). It is simply the science governing our duty or obligations. These deontological theories as proposed by Immanuel Kant, state that people are obliged to perform duties without considerations of their outcome. They should however be judged according to the outcome of their actions rather than the actions themselves. This is regardless of whether they followed the rules or not. This is the opposite of virtual moral ethic, which is what is expected of people. Thus, questions like what is good or bad, right or wrong, how to behave, why people should behave so and how they can duly fulfil the needs others and their own. This is therefore, very important because people are judged by what they do which must be morally co
ect but not by the outcome of their actions.
Employees of an organization are supposed to follow the rules stipulated i
espective of the consequences of their actions. Most of these duties are governed by universally independent principles and therefore following these principles to the letter in one’s line of duty will be ethical, hence the consequences will be ethical according to deontological theories (Parsons & Preece, 2010, p.23).
Problem Statement
This is a case against the defendant, Mr. Gordon E., who works under the Department of defence and under two contracting departments. One of the departments supports the classified military missions under total American purview while the other one supports the soldiers or other military officers, the resident workforce in unstipulated su
oundings and their families. The latter, which operates within the Morale Welfare and Recreation Organization (MWR), is a case on ethical principles. Under the Morale Welfare and Recreation Organization, the Joint Ethics Regulation (JER), DOD Dir. 5500.7, governs the contracting of military officers and other federal employees. This law prohibits employees from accepting any gifts or other items of monetary value above the stipulated minimum value either from individuals, organisations or from an entity. These entities could be seeking official actions and favours. They could also be intending to do business with the employee, the agency or state that may be affected by the non-performance or performance of the employee’s duties (“NAFIS, MWR AND THE JER,” n.d., p.11).
According to this case,...