College aantekeningen
College aantekeningen The Morality of Commercial Life
- Instelling
- Tilburg University (UVT)
Lecture notes of MOCL for IBA
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 32 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 32 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Morality of Commercial LifeLecture 1 – Introduction – 03/02/2023
Modern business & ethics
- Maximize benefits at all costs
- Might makes right
- Anything for cash
1. Reputation – social media are making people more aware of ethical scandals
2. Talent – younger generations prefer to work in ethically conscious companies
3. Competition – more companies are becoming ethically conscious
- There are aims of business practices other than sheer maximization of profits
- Ethics can be one of those aims (and is arguably becoming a universal aim)
Ethics by businesspeople
- Companies incorporate ethics through codes of conduct = a code in which
organizations (like companies and associations) lay down guidelines for responsible
behavior of their members
- Ethics is a tool to make decisions in moral dilemmas
- Being ethical consists in applying one’s personal philosophies to specific situation
Ethics by ethicists
- Not so much an application of personal philosophies
- Not opinions
- Opinions are a matter of taste. Here we are trying to offer a reasoned argument
which is not based on your taste, but on the application of theory
- Isn’t ethics a matter of opinion if it depends on culture?
- That is an ethical position called moral relativism
o You already hold one fact as true
o You will eventually find some things that do not seem relative
- Separation of morality and legality
- The study of this question is a subfield of ethics called meta-ethics. Here, we assume
that moral relativism is not enough to solve moral dilemmas
Lecture 2 – What is ethics and ethical theories
Consequentialism = the morally right action is the action with the best consequences
Classical utilitarianism (Jeremy Bentham, J.S. Mill)
- Utility = a ‘’property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit, advantage,
pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in the present case comes to the same thing)
or (what comes again to the same thing) to prevent the happening of mischief, pain,
evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered (Bentham, 1789)
- Utilitarians are hedonists = they claim that goodness consists in pleasure and
absence of pain
o Note, there are alternative accounts that can be given
- The right act to perform is the one that will bring about the best balance of pleasure
over pain
Consequentialism is agent-neutral
- Moral rightness is established independently of the person doing the deliberation
- It places equal demands on everyone
,Consequentialism is impartial
- Everyone deserves equal consideration in moral thinking
o Across distance (friends vs. distant strangers)
o Across time (present vs. future generations)
Direct vs. indirect consequentialism
- Act-consequentialism
o Classical utilitarianism: choose the action that maximizes the good
Case-by-case calculus
- Rule-consequentialism
o Choose the action which follows a rule which maximized the good
Internalization of types of action
Deontology = we should act according to certain rules or duties (i.e., do not kill; protect the
vulnerable). The consequences do not matter, in fact, sometimes doing the right thing will
not have the best consequences. Looks at the motive
- In utilitarianism, doing the right thing is the same things as promoting the good. The
good = pleasure. The right thing = act so the consequences maximize pleasure and
minimize pain. Note: this is the case in almost all consequentialist theories, which
precisely differ in their definition of ‘the good’.
- In deontology, the good and the right are independent of each other. Doing the right
thing is acting according to deontological constraint (rules, duties, divine command)
which are not defined by what is good.
Kantian ethics. Deontology
- Act only to that maxi whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become
a universal law. Follow rules that apply to everybody. Not a matter of consensus or
‘do what you would like to happen to yourself’. Follow rules that rational beings can
universally will.
o Killing is wrong. It does not look at the consequences. It looks at the fact that
willing certain rules will incur in a contradiction. Rule: killing is not wrong.
Universalization: anyone can kill. Contradiction: if anyone can kill, you can get
killed too and how are you going to will that killing is not wrong?!
- Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the
person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time
as an end. Never treat rational beings as a mere means to an end.
o Do not kill someone to get their organs. It does not look at the consequences.
It looks at the fact that humans are valuable and have dignity. Action: kill
someone to use their organs to save five people. The person killed is used as
a mere means to save five people. You can use people as means, i.e., you can
call and Internet operator and talk to them as a means to get your internet
fixed, but not as a mere means (i.e., not be a Karen)
- Making a promise. A utilitarian would keep the promise only if it maximized the
good. A deontologist would keep the promise because itself bounds her by duty.
- Harming an innocent person to prevent harm to others. A utilitarian will harm an
innocent person if that prevents overall more pain (for example if multiple lives are
saved). A deontologist would not harm an innocent person ever, given that there is a
duty to not treat people as a means
, - Deontological theories allow for the existence of moral rights, which cannot be
overridden by consequences. Every person has a right to life. Every person has a duty
to respect moral rights, i.e., the right to life. Note: legal rights are not necessarily
moral rights!
- Rights are not absolute and can override each other. I may have a right to self-
defense if my life is threatened, meaning that I will be inflicting on someone’s right
to life. But remember, it will never be because of the consequences.
Virtue ethics = does not base morality on the right action but in good character.
Consequentialism and deontology ask: what should I do? Virtue ethics asks: how should I
be?
- Consequentialism and deontology are act-focused (the morally relevant element of a
situation is properties of the action). For consequentialist, the act maximizes the
good. For deontologists, the act does not break certain rules
- Virtue ethics (VE) is agent focused (the morally relevant element of a situation are
properties of the person acting. These properties are commonly referred to as
virtues or character traits. A disposition to think, feel, and act in certain ways in
certain circumstances
Aristotle’s VE = to be good is to have a flourishing life (eudaimonia) Virtue as excellence
performing one’s function.
- An excellent knife has the function of cutting. Properties: sharpness, firmness of
handle, lightness
- An excellent person has the function of practical wisdom (phronesis). Properties:
honesty, generosity, kindness
Doctrine of the mean: virtues lie between a vice of excess and a vice of deficiency
Normative theory in business ethics. It may seem like a non-discussion: consequentialism is
the most appropriate normative theory for business. Driven by results, i.e., consequences.
However, sometimes businesses make decision which do not have the best result, but
because ‘it is the right thing to do’.
Virtuous & Kantian managers.
- ‘’The manager should want to be, for example, just, generous, and prudent; in
employees, virtuous managers look for virtues such as productivity, cooperativeness,
and beneficence towards coworkers and customer’’.
- ‘’Exploitive treatment, as in sending employees on dangerous missions without
adequate warning and their prosper consent is thus ruled out. Creating a climate of
respect is essential for ethical business, and the good of all stakeholders must be
given due weight’’.
, - ‘’A Kantian practicing businessman should adhere to promised and contracts, refrain
from deceit or fraud, and conduct himself in a way that he could will to be a
standard practice’’.
Utilitarian businesses
- Remember that utilitarianism is agent neutral. ‘The greatest good for the greatest
number’, i.e., not only yourself. ‘Yourself’ applies to the firm. Utilitarianism does not
necessarily support the idea of businesses looking only for their own profit
- Utilitarianism then does not support the ‘anything for profit’ perspective
Kantian businesses
- No business rule or practice can be adopted which is inconsistent with the
categorical imperative. Act in a way that could be universalized. Do not treat people
as mere means
- This is why we consider businesses such as sweatshops unethical. Slavery or quasi-
slavery cannot be universalized. People who do not receive just compensation for
their work are treated as mere means
Virtuous businesses
- The function of the market is mutual benefit
- A businessperson or a firm is virtuous if it excels at finding mutual benefit. This
would be a mean between benefitting oneself (the individual businessperson or the
firm) and benefitting other (for example, society)
Lecture 3 – Corporate Social Responsibility
Responsibility and corporations
CSR. It is a type of responsibility within the social sphere allocated to corporations
- Corporation = a large company or group of companies that is controlled together as
a single organization = an organization, especially a business, that has a legally
separate existence from the people who run it
- Responsibility = an agent is morally responsible for the morally significant outcomes
of their actions, in a way that is assessable in the shape of praise or blame. Not
responding to teammates’ messages, which results in a poorer presentation and
hence a worse grade. Praise and blame liability/accountability. Two types:
1. Forward-looking responsibility = we can have responsibilities in the future –
things that we have duty to do
2. Backwards-looking responsibility = we also can be responsible for things that
went well, or went wrong
You can only have responsibility if
1. You had the power and freedom to do otherwise (no coercion)
2. You are an agent – someone (something) that acts
CSR = the ethical responsibility that corporations have towards society. For instance:
environmental responsibility, responsibility towards employees, or political responsibility
Types of agents
- Most people are individual agents
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper kimbroks26. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,16. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 67474 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen