Unredistributable corporate moral responsibility

Certain cases of corporate action seem especially resistant to a shared moral evaluation. Conservatives may argue that if bad intentions cannot be demonstrated, corporations and their managers are not blame-worthy, while liberals may insist that the results of corporate actions were predictable and...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Garrett, Jan Edward (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Springer Science + Business Media B. V 1989
In: Journal of business ethics
Year: 1989, Volume: 8, Issue: 7, Pages: 535-545
Further subjects:B Moral Responsibility
B Alternate Explanation
B Final Section
B Defend
B Economic Growth
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1785673424
003 DE-627
005 20220112043937.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220112s1989 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1007/BF00382929  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1785673424 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1785673424 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Garrett, Jan Edward  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Unredistributable corporate moral responsibility 
264 1 |c 1989 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Certain cases of corporate action seem especially resistant to a shared moral evaluation. Conservatives may argue that if bad intentions cannot be demonstrated, corporations and their managers are not blame-worthy, while liberals may insist that the results of corporate actions were predictable and so somebody must be to blame. Against this background, the theory that sometimes a corporation's moral responsibility cannot be redistributed, even in principle, to the individuals involved, seems quite attractive., This doctrine of unredistributable corporate moral responsibility (UCMR) is, however, ultimately indefensible. I show this in several steps. After first locating UCMR in the context of the evolving debate about corporate moral agency, the paper reexamines cases cited in defense of UCMR and takes up the attempt to defend it by identifying corporate moral agency with corporate practices. A further section explores the claim that UCMR is a convention distinct from, yet compatible with, traditional “natural” notions of responsibility. The final section develops a notion of combined akratic agency to provide an alternate explanation, compatible with rejection of UCMR, of the phenomena which make the doctrine attractive. 
650 4 |a Moral Responsibility 
650 4 |a Final Section 
650 4 |a Defend 
650 4 |a Alternate Explanation 
650 4 |a Economic Growth 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of business ethics  |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1982  |g 8(1989), 7, Seite 535-545  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)270937129  |w (DE-600)1478688-6  |w (DE-576)121465284  |x 1573-0697  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:8  |g year:1989  |g number:7  |g pages:535-545 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/25071933  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382929  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 8  |j 1989  |e 7  |h 535-545 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4033732322 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1785673424 
LOK |0 005 20220112043937 
LOK |0 008 220112||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-31#DA31C81A8514FCE3B12575BA39CB65D34E344696 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/25071933 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw