Analyze the 2012 Penn State scandal using ethical thinking and the Essay

Analyze the 2012 Penn State scandal using respectable thinking and the various ethical theories - Essay ExampleA majority of high-level university officials were charged with perjury, laid-off or suspended for covering up the activities by failing to report to the governing. The cozy assault charges were brought onto Jerry Sandusky for sexual assaulting at least eight underage boys near or on the university property with the full fellowship of almost university officials who failed to intervene or report to the appropriate authorities. The grand jury trial dropped four of the 52 charges against Jerry Sandusky who was found guilty of 45 of the 48 counts of sex assault charges, and he was sentenced to 30-60 years in prison. This typography seeks to discuss ethical thinking and ethical theories involved in the above-mentioned case. The 2012 Penn State scandal raises some very important and crucial ethical questions regarding the incident that saw top ranking university officials cover up sex assault activities of a member of staff. On their part, the members of staff who did not report Jerry Sanduskys activities to the authorities or take pre-emptive measures to intervene illustrate negligence. It was the accountability and it still is for every individual in friendship to report sex abuse crimes to the authorities. ... Revelations that brought Jerry Sanduskys sex abuse charges cast Joes ethical responsibility in a different light that negates his role as coach and protector of his charges. Many ethical issues abound regarding this case because of its multifaceted nature in terms of rationale and perspectives. It can be construed that the universitys officials failed to report on the sex abuse cases for fear of damaging the universitys nature. On the other hand, the dilemma of the abused underage boys comes into sharp focus as to what was more important between the universitys reputation and their wellbeing. According to Gigerenzer, bounded rationality is an idea in termination making that stipulates the rationality behind termination making. It states that decision making in individuals is limited by the amount of information available to them with regard to the adequate to(p) in question. The finite expanse of time available to them in making the decision and their cognitive limitations be also considered in this approach towards decision-making (Gigerenzer, 2010). The theory of bonded rationality terms rationality as an optimization official document that facilitates decision making in finding an optimal solution concerning the information available. Bounded rationality provides the decision makers with the option of arriving at decisions that are viable under their presenting circumstances. In essence, this means that due to limited resources equivalent sufficient information and time, an individual is applies their rationality only after simplifying their choices (Hinman, 2011). This means that the arrival at a decisio n that ensures an optimal solution is not critically considered as paramount compared to the available simplified choices. In the case of the Penn State scandal, the officials