Asked whether posting reviews under invented names is acceptable, a manager replies: "It's not illegal." As an ethical answer this is:

Answer

Incomplete — law is the floor, and most conduct is judged above it

Options - A. Incomplete — law is the floor, and most conduct is judged above it - B. Complete — if an act breaks no law, there is nothing further to ask - C. The deontological answer, because it appeals to a rule - D. The front-page test, applied to the legal position of the act Why - A. Correct — legality rules out the floor and says nothing about the code, the duties or the character the act expresses. - B. Legal and ethical are different sets. Deceiving readers with fabricated reviews breaks a clear duty whatever the statute says. - C. The duty lens asks whether the act breaks a rule everyone should follow — "never deceive" — not whether it breaks a statute. - D. The front-page test asks how an objective reporter would describe the act. "It's legal" is not what the headline would say.

Olds ch 15 (opener); OpenStax Business 2.1–2.2; Business Ethics (CNX v3.1) ch 2; concept map C01–C04