Ford Pinto

Ford Pinto

FORD PINTO 

 The Maxim of Ford's Action might be stated ''when it would cost more to make a safety improvement than not, it's alright not to make it ''. Can this maxim be universalised? Does it treat humans as ends in themselves ? Would manufacturers likely be willing to abide by it were the positions reversed, if they were in the role of unsuspecting consumers?

 

Pin on ford

 

 

Text

This maxim is already widely accepted in many business sectors, including agriculture. However, in the automobile industry, this maxim will never be universalized because it removes humanity and prioritizes money over human life. For these companies to sell cars, consumers must be interested in their products, which is ironic because they are willing to make products that endanger their customers simply because they are unwilling to improve their products, but without the consumers, they would not be able to make a profit in the first place. Another reason why this maxim will never be universalized is that there are companies out there, such as Volvo, that prioritize consumer security over all else. The automobile market is so competitive right now with new innovation that I don't see this maxim having even the slightest relevance.

Also, for financial reasons, I do not believe any large corporations will be willing to use this maxim after Ford's reputation was nearly ruined, causing them to lose over $100 million.

As for the manufacturers, I doubt they would tolerate what Ford did if they were in the position of unsuspecting consumers. I also doubt that any of the manufacturers who were aware of what Ford was doing with these cars would be comfortable allowing one of their family members to drive a Ford Pinto.