Moral Philosophies is commonly acknowledged that when marketers approach with decision making situations which is related to ethical content, then will refer ethical guidance or rules supported with different moral philosophies (Ferrell and Gresham, 1985; Ferrell et al., 1989; Hunt and Vitell, 1986, 1993). Due to Ferrell and Gresham (1985, p. 88) had highlighted factors of marketing ethics decision making processes in their marketing ethics model, therefore Moral philosophies is very significant. Consistent with most writers (e.g. Beauchamp and Bowie, 1979; Murphy and Laczniak, 1981), Hunt and Vitell (1986) classified moral philosophies into two major categories, which are teleological and deontological theories. They stated that teleological theories come to the consequences of the behaviors or actions whereas deontological theories concentrated on the specific actions or behaviors of an individual, (p. 6). Hunt and Vitell strongly believe that deontological and teleological evaluations are the main keys for the marketing ethics decision making process. In general, this proposition has been supported through empirical observation (e.g. Mayo and Marks, 1990, Vitell and Hunt, 1990).
Teleological moral theories situate moral goodness in the results or consequences of human actions but not the action itself. It views actions as morally acceptable or correct if they give some wanted outcomes such as career growth, utility, pleasure, the realization of a self-interest or knowledge. Based on teleological (or consequentialist) moral theory, most of the rational human behaviors are teleological in the impression that we sense about the means of accomplishing certain ends. This consequence has moral importance that will bring impacts to person`s decision making process. Therefore, from the teleological standpoint, human behavior is neither right nor wrong in and of itself. What matters is what might happen as a consequence of those behaviors in any given circumstance. Hence, it is the contextualized consequences that affect human actions and decision, right or wrong, good or bad.
From a teleological viewpoint, for example stealing could not be evaluated to be implicitly correct or incorrect independent of the environment and the predictable consequences. Assume that I decide to steal a piece of cake from the bakery. A lot of moral theorists would debate that morality need an analysis of my intents (or motives) which brought about that decision. Nevertheless, from a teleological view, the rightness or wrongness of the decision is not related to the motives. They think that the factors are lying in the pleasures and potential pains linked with the short-term and long-term 12 MORAL INQUIRY consequences. If my children were hungry, and if stealing piece of cake would immediately avoid them from hungry, so I might seriously decide to steal. But I have to understand if the results would importantly harm the bakery or me? What is the effect