Is there any ethics in business ethics
It is argued, against Richard T. De George, that while clarification of concepts, implications, and presuppositions in business ethics largely relies on a ‘neutral territory’ of reason, determination of what moral intuitions are correct depends on ‘non-neutral’ ethical theories. The latter posit eth...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer
1989
|
| In: |
Journal of business ethics
Year: 1989, Volume: 8, Issue: 4, Pages: 261-269 |
| Further subjects: | B
Posit
B Unique Contribution B Clarification B Business Ethic B Economic Growth |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | It is argued, against Richard T. De George, that while clarification of concepts, implications, and presuppositions in business ethics largely relies on a ‘neutral territory’ of reason, determination of what moral intuitions are correct depends on ‘non-neutral’ ethical theories. The latter posit ethics in business to varying degrees. Thus while the Kantian and utilitarian ethical theories are, for De George, proper (philosophical) approaches to business ethics, they are as reliant on affirming and encouraging moral sentiments outside parameters of ‘pure reason’ as theological approaches. And hence if theological approaches can make no unique contribution by virtue of relying on more than reason or experience alone, then philosophical approaches can make no distinctive contribution either. Either both are viable or neither are. Oscillation between the mutually dependent notions of business ethics and ethics in business obfuscates what the field of business ethics is and renders De George's position inadequate. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-0697 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of business ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/BF00383340 |