The incident, and his worker’s dismay over representing the company, can be found here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/10/07/working-for-the-most-hated-man-in-america/?utm_term=.c3022c914cb6 However, Shkreli maintains that he was simply trying to maximize profits for this shareholders and that the R&D was being invested into new pharmaceutical innovations. That can be see in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS9blbLrKv4&feature=youtu.be He has also defended his move on a pragmatic basis, claiming that ultimately only “fat cats” would be hurt, since it’s insurance and corporate insurance companies who have to buy the drug at full price. However, what has been notable is his absence of apologies and seemingly total lack of concern for what the price hike would do to consumers. If you want probably the most positive interview with Shkreli, it can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PCb9mnrU1g&feature=youtu.be Taking this issue, is someone like Shrkeli correct to simply focus completely on his CEO duties as opposed to being concerned for all stakeholders, including hospitals and insurance companies? Is his mentality the logical consequence of a postmodern point of view, where morality is simply what we make of it and what we prefer, or perhaps a negotiating of pragmatic good? Or is there something objectively wrong with his position and demeanor? Develop your argument in 3-4 paragraphs