Franklyn A Plus Pass
SOLUTION MANUAL for Business Law with UCC
Applications 16th Edition by Paul A. Sukys
All Chapters Fully Covered 1-34| Verified Case Questions & 100%
Accurate Solutions for Exam Preparations| A+ PASS ASSURED
Fr
an
kl
yn
e
A
pl
us
Pa
1|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
Chapter 1
Answers to Text Problems
PART 1 ETHICS, LAW, AND THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Chapter 1 Ethics, Social Responsibility, and the Law
Case in Point Questions
(Note: The answers to these questions can be found in the Case in Point features at the opening of each
chapter in BLUCCA 16 or in the text of each chapter. Consequently, to ensure accuracy, the answers are
taken directly from the Cases in Point feature and/or the text. Student answers should reflect this, but
should either be written in the student‗s own words or, when quoted, cited appropriately.)
1. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
2. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
3. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
4. Yes. Max Weber argues that two-levels of morality exist, represented by the ethic of ultimate
ends for individuals and an ethic of responsibility for national leaders. The ethic of ultimate ends must be
practiced by individuals because individuals can never completely foresee ―the ultimate ends of their
actions. Therefore, individuals must obey absolute moral precepts, such as ―always help the poor and
less fortunate, or "turn the other cheek," or "always tell the truth, despite the fact that the ultimate
consequences of those actions are unclear or uncomfortable.
Fr
On the other hand, the ethic of responsibility demands that moral actors—in this case, national leaders—
must consider their responsibilities to those people who depend on those leaders for safety and security.
an
So, for example, if a neighboring nation is belligerent, aggressive, or determined to fight ancient cultural,
religious, and ethnic wars, the leaders of the first nation cannot ignore that threat, as much as they might
kl
want to. In short, they are not permitted to ―turn the other cheek because to do so would endanger the
yn
innocent people they have the duty to protect. Unfortunately, many national leaders fail to see this
distinction. The leaders of the United States have been especially guilty of this shortsightedness.
e
5. The existence of the social contract permits people to live together in peace and harmony, but it
does not permit anyone, not even the leader, to violate the core rights of life and security. Should a leader
A
consistently violate core rights, then the people have a duty to demand that such oppressive and
pl
dangerous behavior end.
us
Pa
2|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
Questions for Review and Discussion
1. The law is a set of rules made by the government to promote stability, harmony, and justice.
Morality involves the values that are the foundation for moral decision making. Ethics is a way to figure
out what those values might be.
2. Traditional natural law sees law as originating from an objective, superior force that stands
outside the everyday experience of most people. Historically, natural law had its origin in the classical
Judeo-Christian belief in a Divinity that created, controls, and rules the physical universe according to a
set of universal laws that came from the will of the Divinity. Similarly, modern natural law also sees law
as originating from an objective origin point; however, that origin point is neither transcendent nor
supernatural but is, instead, conceived of by the human mind. Thus, the source of natural law comes from
within the mind of social philosophers, such as Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant,
and Jean Paul Sartre, each of whom claimed to have found the correct objective standard of human
morality.
3. Non-judgmentalism is the tendency to be tolerant of every type of behavior even the most
reprehensible acts imaginable, so that, in turn, your own most reprehensible actions will not be judged by
others. In contrast, hyper-intolerance can be defined as open hostility to the views, ideas, traditions, and
principles of belief held and practiced by others.
4. The social contract option holds that right and wrong are measured by the obligations imposed on
everyone by an implied agreement or contract among all the people within a particular social system.
5. The steps in applying utilitarianism are as follows:
a. The action to be evaluated should be stated in unemotional, general terms. For example,
―stealing another person‗s property is emotional language;
Fr
―confiscating property for one‗s own use is somewhat less emotional.
an
b. Every person or class of people that will be affected by the action must be identified.
c. Good and bad consequences in relation to those people affected must be considered.
kl
d. All alternatives to the action stated in step 1 must be considered.
yn
e. Once step 4 has been carried out, a conclusion must be reached. Whichever alternative creates the
e
greatest good for the greatest number of people affected by the action is the one that ought to be taken.
A
6. The rational option is a philosophical theory that asserts unequivocally that human beings,
because of their innate capacity for rational thought, can determine the nature and application of ethical
pl
values. The theory assumes that because all human beings are rational, all human beings ought to have the
same ethical values. Therefore, rational ethics can establish universal rules of behavior that always apply
us
to all people. For this reason, the rational option is often referred to as objective ethics or normative
ethics. Since the rational option also focuses on duties rather than rights, it is also called deontological
Pa
3|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
ethics. In its pure form, the word deontological means "words of duty" coming from the Greek words
deon, duty, and logos, word or utterance.
7. Many of the misunderstandings about moral decisions within the world today exist because
people do not understand the dual nature of international morality. The twentieth century philosopher,
Max Weber explains the problem in his essay, "Politics as a Vocation." In that essay, Weber argues that,
often people make the error of assuming that political morality and personal morality are identical.
Instead, Weber proposes a dual system of morality represented by the "ethic of ultimate ends" and the
"ethic of responsibility." The "ethic of ultimate ends" must be practiced by individuals while the "ethic of
responsibility" must be practiced by national leaders.
8. Corporations owe society a level of responsibility because the government has granted them
certain legal advantages.
9. Our society needs law and the legal system to give it structure, harmony, predictability, and
justice.
10. The law and ethics can sometimes benefit from anarchy, but only when what emerges from that
period of anarchy is a system supported by legal and ethical harmony. When the forces of human energy
and justice are harnessed properly such harmony may result. Energy is found in a society that manages to
redirect the collective human will toward the welfare of the entire species, instead of toward individual or
corporate survival measured only by monetary gain. Justice is present when all people are treated equally
based on an intangible quality, like fairness, that has nothing to do with money.
Cases for Analysis
Special Directions to the Instructor: It is virtually impossible to predict the wide variety of answers that
Fr
students will provide for the ethical cases outlined at the end of Chapter 1. Therefore, the instructor
should not be looking for ―right and ―wrong answers in the conventional sense. Instead, the instructor
an
should look to see that the ethical theories are applied correctly and consistently.
kl
1. Using rational ethics, the governor‗s actions must follow all three elements of the categorical
Imperative. First, since rational beings recognize that they do not want to be harmed, everyone has a duty
yn
to refrain from hurting all other rational beings. This is nothing more than a rational reformulation of the
Golden Rule, which states, that no one should do anything that they would not want done to themselves.
e
Second, to ensure that other rational beings will not be harmed, individuals understand that they must not
perform any act that they would not want to become universally acceptable conduct. Third, rational
A
beings would also object to any action that would treat autonomous beings as a means to an end. In this
case, the governor‗s decision to rescind the mask wearing mandates follows all three elements.
pl
In contrast, using rational ethics, the parents‗ actions appear to violate the second element of the
us
Categorical Imperative because we would not want their actions against the authority of the governor‗s
Pa
4|Page
ss
SOLUTION MANUAL for Business Law with UCC
Applications 16th Edition by Paul A. Sukys
All Chapters Fully Covered 1-34| Verified Case Questions & 100%
Accurate Solutions for Exam Preparations| A+ PASS ASSURED
Fr
an
kl
yn
e
A
pl
us
Pa
1|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
Chapter 1
Answers to Text Problems
PART 1 ETHICS, LAW, AND THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Chapter 1 Ethics, Social Responsibility, and the Law
Case in Point Questions
(Note: The answers to these questions can be found in the Case in Point features at the opening of each
chapter in BLUCCA 16 or in the text of each chapter. Consequently, to ensure accuracy, the answers are
taken directly from the Cases in Point feature and/or the text. Student answers should reflect this, but
should either be written in the student‗s own words or, when quoted, cited appropriately.)
1. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
2. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
3. Answers will vary. Accept all well-reasoned answers based on one of the ethical options covered
in Chapter 1.
4. Yes. Max Weber argues that two-levels of morality exist, represented by the ethic of ultimate
ends for individuals and an ethic of responsibility for national leaders. The ethic of ultimate ends must be
practiced by individuals because individuals can never completely foresee ―the ultimate ends of their
actions. Therefore, individuals must obey absolute moral precepts, such as ―always help the poor and
less fortunate, or "turn the other cheek," or "always tell the truth, despite the fact that the ultimate
consequences of those actions are unclear or uncomfortable.
Fr
On the other hand, the ethic of responsibility demands that moral actors—in this case, national leaders—
must consider their responsibilities to those people who depend on those leaders for safety and security.
an
So, for example, if a neighboring nation is belligerent, aggressive, or determined to fight ancient cultural,
religious, and ethnic wars, the leaders of the first nation cannot ignore that threat, as much as they might
kl
want to. In short, they are not permitted to ―turn the other cheek because to do so would endanger the
yn
innocent people they have the duty to protect. Unfortunately, many national leaders fail to see this
distinction. The leaders of the United States have been especially guilty of this shortsightedness.
e
5. The existence of the social contract permits people to live together in peace and harmony, but it
does not permit anyone, not even the leader, to violate the core rights of life and security. Should a leader
A
consistently violate core rights, then the people have a duty to demand that such oppressive and
pl
dangerous behavior end.
us
Pa
2|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
Questions for Review and Discussion
1. The law is a set of rules made by the government to promote stability, harmony, and justice.
Morality involves the values that are the foundation for moral decision making. Ethics is a way to figure
out what those values might be.
2. Traditional natural law sees law as originating from an objective, superior force that stands
outside the everyday experience of most people. Historically, natural law had its origin in the classical
Judeo-Christian belief in a Divinity that created, controls, and rules the physical universe according to a
set of universal laws that came from the will of the Divinity. Similarly, modern natural law also sees law
as originating from an objective origin point; however, that origin point is neither transcendent nor
supernatural but is, instead, conceived of by the human mind. Thus, the source of natural law comes from
within the mind of social philosophers, such as Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant,
and Jean Paul Sartre, each of whom claimed to have found the correct objective standard of human
morality.
3. Non-judgmentalism is the tendency to be tolerant of every type of behavior even the most
reprehensible acts imaginable, so that, in turn, your own most reprehensible actions will not be judged by
others. In contrast, hyper-intolerance can be defined as open hostility to the views, ideas, traditions, and
principles of belief held and practiced by others.
4. The social contract option holds that right and wrong are measured by the obligations imposed on
everyone by an implied agreement or contract among all the people within a particular social system.
5. The steps in applying utilitarianism are as follows:
a. The action to be evaluated should be stated in unemotional, general terms. For example,
―stealing another person‗s property is emotional language;
Fr
―confiscating property for one‗s own use is somewhat less emotional.
an
b. Every person or class of people that will be affected by the action must be identified.
c. Good and bad consequences in relation to those people affected must be considered.
kl
d. All alternatives to the action stated in step 1 must be considered.
yn
e. Once step 4 has been carried out, a conclusion must be reached. Whichever alternative creates the
e
greatest good for the greatest number of people affected by the action is the one that ought to be taken.
A
6. The rational option is a philosophical theory that asserts unequivocally that human beings,
because of their innate capacity for rational thought, can determine the nature and application of ethical
pl
values. The theory assumes that because all human beings are rational, all human beings ought to have the
same ethical values. Therefore, rational ethics can establish universal rules of behavior that always apply
us
to all people. For this reason, the rational option is often referred to as objective ethics or normative
ethics. Since the rational option also focuses on duties rather than rights, it is also called deontological
Pa
3|Page
ss
, Franklyn A Plus Pass
ethics. In its pure form, the word deontological means "words of duty" coming from the Greek words
deon, duty, and logos, word or utterance.
7. Many of the misunderstandings about moral decisions within the world today exist because
people do not understand the dual nature of international morality. The twentieth century philosopher,
Max Weber explains the problem in his essay, "Politics as a Vocation." In that essay, Weber argues that,
often people make the error of assuming that political morality and personal morality are identical.
Instead, Weber proposes a dual system of morality represented by the "ethic of ultimate ends" and the
"ethic of responsibility." The "ethic of ultimate ends" must be practiced by individuals while the "ethic of
responsibility" must be practiced by national leaders.
8. Corporations owe society a level of responsibility because the government has granted them
certain legal advantages.
9. Our society needs law and the legal system to give it structure, harmony, predictability, and
justice.
10. The law and ethics can sometimes benefit from anarchy, but only when what emerges from that
period of anarchy is a system supported by legal and ethical harmony. When the forces of human energy
and justice are harnessed properly such harmony may result. Energy is found in a society that manages to
redirect the collective human will toward the welfare of the entire species, instead of toward individual or
corporate survival measured only by monetary gain. Justice is present when all people are treated equally
based on an intangible quality, like fairness, that has nothing to do with money.
Cases for Analysis
Special Directions to the Instructor: It is virtually impossible to predict the wide variety of answers that
Fr
students will provide for the ethical cases outlined at the end of Chapter 1. Therefore, the instructor
should not be looking for ―right and ―wrong answers in the conventional sense. Instead, the instructor
an
should look to see that the ethical theories are applied correctly and consistently.
kl
1. Using rational ethics, the governor‗s actions must follow all three elements of the categorical
Imperative. First, since rational beings recognize that they do not want to be harmed, everyone has a duty
yn
to refrain from hurting all other rational beings. This is nothing more than a rational reformulation of the
Golden Rule, which states, that no one should do anything that they would not want done to themselves.
e
Second, to ensure that other rational beings will not be harmed, individuals understand that they must not
perform any act that they would not want to become universally acceptable conduct. Third, rational
A
beings would also object to any action that would treat autonomous beings as a means to an end. In this
case, the governor‗s decision to rescind the mask wearing mandates follows all three elements.
pl
In contrast, using rational ethics, the parents‗ actions appear to violate the second element of the
us
Categorical Imperative because we would not want their actions against the authority of the governor‗s
Pa
4|Page
ss
