ETHICAL CASE STUDY

CONTEXT

I created this ethical case study analysis in the first term of my second year at the University of British Columbia for my Greek philosophy class. I would like to think that this piece of work illustrates my ability to think critically about the ethics of real-world problems, as well as my written communication skills. I take pride in the fact that I was able to apply the ancient Greek philosophical concepts that I learned throughout the course to a modern day scenario, making these concepts more relevant to my own everyday life. I believe that I can translate the skills that I gained through working on and dissecting this case study into future academic projects that require critical thinking and analysis of situations that may not be black-and-white.

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

This case study is discussing a conflict between a character called Darion, who has poured in years of hard work towards achieving his dream of opening a microbrewery business, and a borderline impoverished community, that is vulnerable to the effects of alcoholism, that opposes Darion’s business venture.

I will argue that due to the self-interested primary values held by Darion (autonomy, ambition, and success) and the communal-based primary values held by the community (autonomy and security) are fundamentally incompatible. The decisions made by Darion to pursue his business venture and the community’s adamant opposition to the business are a result of both parties being driven by their dedication to uphold their respective values. Therefore, I do not believe that there exists a realistic solution that could satisfy the clashing interests of both parties.

The primary values that motivate and drive Darion’s actions can be mainly classified as autonomy, ambition, and success. It is clear that Darion prizes autonomy because he has no desire to work for the “big beer brands” and disagrees with their business models. He wants to be his own boss and to create a business that operates on his own autonomous values and practices, rather than following those of someone else’s. Darion’s appetite for autonomy is further fueled by his ambitious nature in pursuing success. He has a clear goal in mind, which is to establish his own microbrewery business. His ambition is illustrated by how he tirelessly worked towards achieving this goal by clocking in extra hours at the pub, as well as his willingness to make personal sacrifices, such as downsizing to a smaller apartment, in his efforts to pool together enough savings in the hopes of successfully realizing his business vision. To a lesser extent, Darion also values his contributions to his community, as demonstrated by his desire to improve the quality of life of the locals in the community by hiring them and teaching them legitimate job skills.

The community members share some of the same primary values as Darion, namely, their desire for autonomy and improvement or preservation of their community. One of the reasons why they oppose Darion’s artisanal microbrewery is that they see the potential gentrification of their neighborhood. Their fear of gentrification stems from their desire to maintain their autonomy and sense of identity. Like Darion, the community also possesses qualities of hard work and dedication, which is proven through the great efforts that they have poured into upholding support programs at their community center. They take pride in sustaining their identity of a hard-working community capable of withstanding the threats and problems posed by their close proximity to a poor and unsafe region of Vancouver. They do not want their identity to simply melt into another middle-class, suburban neighbourhood. Above all, the community values security. They act in repulsion towards the idea of Darion’s microbrewery because they are concerned with alcohol being readily accessible by their youth, fearing for both the consequences of alcohol on their safety as well as their risk of falling into the cycle of poverty.

Despite the fervent protests of the community towards Darion’s microbrewery proposal, Darion is steered by his primary values, which are what holds him firm in his decision to proceed with the opening of his business. His values of ambition, achieving autonomy in his work, and fulfilling his vision of being able to call himself the owner of a successful business are ultimately rooted in self-interest. Blinded by his own desire to succeed, he disregards the concerns of the community and does not take into serious consideration any of the dangers posed by the nature of his business to their youth.

The conflict between Darion and the community is comparable to the war between the Athenians and Milesians described by the Athenian historian, Thucydides, in books called “The Melian Dialogues”. Thucydides tells the story of how the powerful Athenian generals visited the people of the small Melos islands and told the relatively militarily-weak Milesian people that they should just accept being conquered by the Athenians. In a way in, Darion’s actions echo that of the Athenians. Although the Athenians and Darion initially consult the opinions of the people they are about to “conquer”, both the Athenians and Darion ultimately proceed to carry out their original intentions in spite of the common people’s displeasure. The Athenians had argued that they have a right to the island of Melos because they had battled hard in order to defeat the Persians, similar to how Darion believes that he is entitled to his microbrewery location due to his previous years of hard work. Darion also appears to follow the Athenians’ principle that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must” (Thucydides. and Crawley, 2008). In comparison to the rest of the community, Darion enjoys a position of socioeconomic strength and is able to use his relative wealth to gain access to resources, such as lawyers, in order to fulfill his own dream. Despite their opposition, the community (as the weaker party) cannot offer any substantial resistance and is forced to accept Darion’s occupation of their land for his business purposes. The community members reject Darion’s business because they strive for the protection of all their members, which echo the Milesians’ view that “[the Athenians] should not destroy a principle that is to the general good of all people” (Thucydides. and Crawley, 2008).

Some may argue that Darion cannot be criticized for solely acting in his own self-interested ambitions because of he did express a desire to contribute to the community by employing local people and teaching them valuable career skills. However, I argue that Darion could be offering these jobs simply because he is putting up a facade of caring about the state of the community or perhaps to also justify to himself that he is a good person who is trying to improve the community. However, these efforts still do not make him a just person, according to a Socratic view that argues a genuinely just person does not seek the reputation of being just, whereas an unjust man tries to present himself like a just person to cover his corrupt affairs.

I argue that once Darion had decided to fully commit to the opening of his microbrewery, there is no realistic solution that could resolve the dispute between the two parties. The very basis of the Darion’s business is alcohol. Alcohol threatens to snare vulnerable community members, such as their youth and recovering alcoholics, back into the cycle of poverty and disturb the delicate ecosystem established by the community. Unless Darion is willing to change his product to anything other than alcohol, I see no plausible fix to the community’s plight. The future state of the community is precarious because the community views Darion’s actions as unjust. According to Socrates, when injustice “occurs in a state or family or army or in anything else, it renders it incapable of any common action because of factions and quarrels, and sets it at variance with itself and with its opponents” (Republic, p. 38), which makes this case study a very difficult situation to untangle.

Works Cited

Thucydides. and Crawley, R. The history of the Peloponnesian War. Floating Press, 2008.

Plato. and Grube, G. M. A., & Reeve, C. D. C. Republic. Hackett Pub. Co, 1992.