<p>“That’s a personal choice, not a matter of validity.”
- Well, that’s sort of a cop out, isn’t it? All decisions are a matter of personal choice. That doesn’t necessarily mean that all decisions are just as good as any others from an ethical, societal, etc. point of view. I’m a big fan of moral relativism as a system but I don’t think that society at large would be willing to accept that, and there’s nothing worse than inconsistency and hypocrisy… at least that’s how I choose to see it.</p>
<p>“That’s a large assumption and far from a fact. While I don’t want to get into much larger issues than the one at hand, nearly every large company in the country has impacted you either directly or indirectly through their actions.”
- Fair enough, but I think we can agree that this is sort of a smokescreen. Sure, McDonald’s has had a huge impact on my life, although I’ve never worked there or known anybody who did. It has helped define American society in ways good and bad. Still, if I were in the OP’s situation wrt McDonald’s, I’m not sure I could really make a compelling argument that since fast food contributes to obesity that I have a moral objection to working there. This sounds like making excuses… perhaps I’m misunderstanding your point. I don’t see a compelling reason to take anything into account for this decision except for the terms of the offer and agreement. Please tell me if I’m misunderstanding something.</p>
<p>“Once again, the right thing here is an opinion.”
- This is true to an extent, at least, but I suppose what I’m getting at is that while it is a matter of opinion it is not - or should not, anyway - be arbitrary. Clearly, we could just make all of our decisions by rolling a die… it’s just an opinion, right? Well, I don’t think any reasonable person would do that, and I don’t think any reasonable person makes ethical decisions without at least some rudiments of an ethical system in mind. Deontological and utilitarian theories disagree in several instances, but for many common ethical situations most philosophers agree on what is ethically acceptable, obligatory, and prohibited. Differences are the exception rather than the rule… in any event, I would like to stress my opinion - and I understand it is a fairly widely-held opinion in philosophical circles - that while there is not necessarily one right way to do ethics, you should at least think about it and use some way of doing ethics… a method to the madness, so to speak.</p>