C.P.A. in this scenario assumes that the owner neglects the business because of his dying son; he also assumes that this is unfair to him, as he is the one who handles the work load and his pay is nevertheless decreased. Emotion might influence his decision to quite an extent, since he can imagine himself in the situation of business owner and realizes that work would not have been a priority for him as well under those conditions. Logic is important in this situation; the C.P.A. logically thinks that with time business will only deteriorate, and his pay will decrease as well.
There is certain conflict of values inherent in the situation: the C.P.A. wants to earn what he truly deserves (self realization and self esteem), but at the same time he cannot simply leave the owner with his dying son (sympathy and kindness). Critical thinking can be deployed in order to come up with the best course of action available to C.P.A. in this situation. The C.P.A. has one feasible option that would incorporate all the values described above: he can offer the business owner to become partners in the business at issue.
If this happens, the C.P.A. would earn more money and at the same time help the owner by maintaining the business itself. The C.P.A. would have additional incentives to work hard, while the owner will have the money needed to support his son without having to dedicate more time to the business itself.