Zeus, Inc., a supplier of athletic shoes, operates its central manufacturing plant in a remote village in the developing world. The bulk of its workforce is under age twelve. Workers receive the prevailing wage for that area ($1.50 for a ten-hour day). These wages often supply the sole source of income for local families. Laws regulating workplace conditions and environmental impact are non-existent in that part of the world. Zeus is the largest vendor of athletic shoes in the U.S., in part because the company is able to sell its product at a far cheaper price than goods produced domestically.
Consider these questions: Is the company engaged in morally permissible behavior? Or is Zeus guilty of certain wrongs it should correct? Does the American consumer have an obligation to refrain from buying Zeus’ shoes, or may the consumer purchase the shoes in good conscience?
Explain Mill’s greatest happiness principle and talk about how Mill would answer these questions. Be sure to cite instances of both positive and negative utility. Next, fully explain the categorical imperative in detail and talk about how Kant would answer these questions. Finally, who makes the better case here? Why? How would you answer these questions? Elaborate fully.

Order Now