The study investigated the difference of attitudes towards business ethics between students who have studied a business ethics course and those who have not at the University of Malawi in Malawi. It was hypothesised that students who had undergone the course would have more positive attitudes towards business ethics than those who had not. We employed the Attitudes towards Business Ethics Questionnaire and used t-test to measure the difference. The results were surprising as most items showed no significant difference in (...) attitudes towards business ethics by students who had undergone the course from those who had not. Out of the seven that showed significant difference, five of the items showed more positive attitude towards business ethics by those students who had undergone the course than those students who had not. This shows that there is something positive as regards the methods of teaching business ethics at the University, but requires leveraging. The paper concludes by recommending three leveraging points that the University of Malawi can adopt in teaching a business ethics course. (shrink)

This paper reflects on the question, Is there a sound justification for the existential view that humans have a higher moral status than other animals? It argues that the existential view that humans have a higher moral status than animals is founded on a weak and inconclusive foundation. While acknowledging various arguments raised for a common foundation between human and non-human animals, the paper attempts to establish a common ground for moral considerability of human and non-human animals. The first common (...) foundation is based on the existential notion of being in the world, which is common for both human and non-human animals. The second idea is based on the common desire to actualize different needs. The paper demonstrates these common foundations by referring to Heidegger and Abraham Maslows hierarchy of needs. (shrink)

This paper reflects on the question, “Is there a sound justification for the existential view that humans have a higher moral status than other animals?” It argues that the existential view that humans have a higher moral status than animals is founded on a weak and inconclusive foundation. While acknowledging various arguments raised for a common foundation between human and non-human animals, the paper attempts to establish a common ground for moral considerability of human and non-human animals. The first common (...) foundation is based on the existential notion of being in the world, which is common for both human and non-human animals. The second idea is based on the common desire to actualize different needs. The paper demonstrates these common foundations by referring to Heidegger and Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. (shrink)