By use of interview data, this thesis investigates how two moral points of view, the Conventional and Radical, held by study participants relate to: 1) factors that influence ethics; 2) role models of a self-defined well-lived life; 3) factors that help and hinder participants from living their well-lived life; and, 4) experience of pressures to compromise and freedom to live out their ideals within organizations. A longitudinal analysis is applied comparing participant moral point of view as students, to participant perceptions since entering the workforce as university graduates. The results show differences and similarities within the four areas of interest based on moral point of view. The implications of finding differences in participant perceptions based on moral point of view are discussed, and areas for future research are offered. / October 2006

By use of interview data, this thesis investigates how two moral points of view, the Conventional and Radical, held by study participants relate to: 1) factors that influence ethics; 2) role models of a self-defined well-lived life; 3) factors that help and hinder participants from living their well-lived life; and, 4) experience of pressures to compromise and freedom to live out their ideals within organizations. A longitudinal analysis is applied comparing participant moral point of view as students, to participant perceptions since entering the workforce as university graduates. The results show differences and similarities within the four areas of interest based on moral point of view. The implications of finding differences in participant perceptions based on moral point of view are discussed, and areas for future research are offered.

By use of interview data, this thesis investigates how two moral points of view, the Conventional and Radical, held by study participants relate to: 1) factors that influence ethics; 2) role models of a self-defined well-lived life; 3) factors that help and hinder participants from living their well-lived life; and, 4) experience of pressures to compromise and freedom to live out their ideals within organizations. A longitudinal analysis is applied comparing participant moral point of view as students, to participant perceptions since entering the workforce as university graduates. The results show differences and similarities within the four areas of interest based on moral point of view. The implications of finding differences in participant perceptions based on moral point of view are discussed, and areas for future research are offered.

The purpose of this essay is to analyse the problem of the rational justification of value judgments. To a large extent, I have used Taylor's account of the technique of justification (verification, validation, vindication, and rational choice of a way of life), as this is presented in his book, Normative Discourse. To a lesser extent, I have also used Baier's account of the technique of validation, as it is presented in his book, The Moral Point of View. I have attempted to show that it is possible to justify value judgments, despite the logical dichotomy between factual statements and evaluative statements. 'Justification' is taken as proof of correctness: that is, a statement is said to be justified if it is proven to be correct. On Taylor's technique, justification is possible, although only incompletely so. It is possible to prove that a value judgment is the correct one to make from within the perspective provided by a given way of life. Justification cannot be complete since the adoption of the perspective cannot be justified. On Baier's technique of validation, complete justification can be achieved: once it has been shown that an evaluatum meets the criteria in terms of which it was judged, and that these criteria are relevant (valid) for judging that object since the object must meet these criteria in order effectively to realize its purpose, nothing more needs to be shown. Although Baier's account allows for complete justification while Taylor's allows for only incomplete justification, Baier's account cannot be used to replace that of Taylor. They are appropriate in different contexts. While Baier's account of validation is appropriate for judgments of use-value, Taylor's account is appropriate for value judgments other than those of use-value. Accordingly, justification is possible using either technique, although complete justification may be possible only in the context of judgments of use-value. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)