Already a subscriber? Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 1-10 of 50 documents


1. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 6 > Issue: 3
Abraham Singer Rawls Well That Ends Well: A Response to Welch and Ly
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Welch and Ly register three objections to my argument that the Rawlsian paradigm offers no resources for formulating a normative theory of corporate governance. In this brief response, I note that while I agree with the first of these objection, I don’t think it poses any serious trouble to my argument; the other two objections, on the other hand, I am less convinced by. I then offer two alternative strategies for bringing Rawls to bear on business ethics, which don’t involve trying to apply his principles of justice to the corporation. Finally, I conclude with a reflection on why people are so insistent on talking about Rawls in the first place.
2. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 6 > Issue: 2
Jacob Sparks Can’t Buy Approval: A Response to Taylor
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
James Stacey Taylor claims that my argument in “Can’t Buy Me Love” is both incomplete and doomed to fail. I grant some of Taylor’s points, but remind him that semiotic objections to the commodification of certain goods are strongest when we think not about individual market transactions, but about what it means for a society to support the market in question.
3. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 6 > Issue: 1
Matthew Caulfield The Expressive Functions of Pay
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Jeffrey Moriarty argues that unequal pay for employees who do the same work is not necessarily wrong, but can be wrong if it is discriminatory or deceptive. Moriarty does this in part by stressing that pay should be considered primarily as a price for labor and therefore that our views on price discrimination and unequal pay should mirror each other. In this critique, I argue that Moriarty fails to adequately account for the expressive functions of pay. A pluralist view of pay reveals otherwise overlooked normative concerns regarding pay and cautions against adopting too strong of an analytical connection between price discrimination and unequal pay.
4. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 8
Jacqueline Boaks, Michael P. Levine How Much Aristotle Is in Levine and Boaks’s Leadership Theory?: Response to Schäfer and Hühn
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
While accepting and welcoming our main thesis and project, Schäfer and Hühn’s Commentary on our paper focuses on two main criticisms, both of which seem to us mistaken. The first of these is that our paper falsely argues “that the existing definitions of leadership out there fall short in describing the role of ethics in leadership.” The second seems to be a belief that (i) we claim to be offering an entirely new definition of leadership and misrepresenting its nature because (ii) in the view of Schäfer and Hühn this supposedly new definition “is essentially un-Aristotelian.”
5. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 7
David Ohreen Gaining Perspective on Perspective Taking
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Cojuharenco and Sguera’s study shows that both perspective taking (empathy) and empathic concern (intuitionism) can reduce the acceptability of lying. This critique outlines a number of conceptual difficulties and limitations with their dualistic model. Specifically, they conflate ethical reasoning with perspective taking and empathic concern with intuitionism. Moreover, by limiting moral thinking to these binary options it restricts the ways in which ethical judgements can be made.
6. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 6
James Stacey Taylor Semiotic Arguments and Markets in Votes: A Comment on Sparks
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Jacob Sparks has developed a semiotic critique of markets that is based on the fact that “market exchanges express preferences.” He argues that some market transactions will reveal that the purchaser of a market good inappropriately prefers it to a similar non-market good. This avoids Brennan and Jaworski’s criticism that semiotic objections to markets fail as the meaning of market transactions are contingent social facts. I argue that Sparks’ argument is both incomplete and doomed to fail. It can only show that some preferences are morally problematic, not that the transactions that they lead to are immoral.
7. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 5
Etye Steinberg The Inapplicability of the Market-Failures Approach in a Non-Ideal World
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Joseph Heath (2014) argues that the contribution of competitive markets to Pareto-efficiency generates moral constraints that apply to business managers. Heath argues that ethical behavior on the part of management consists in avoiding profit-seeking strategies which, under conditions of perfect competition, would decrease Pareto-efficiency. I argue that because (1) such conditions do not obtain; and (2) the most efficient result – under imperfect conditions – is not achieved by satisfying the largest possible set of the remaining conditions; it is (3) impossible to draw any substantive ethical guidelines from Heath’s approach.
8. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 4
William Kline Exploitation and Just Price Theory
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Schleper, Blome, and Wuttke attempt to use just price theory to define exploitation. According to the authors, a competitive market equilibrium defines a just price. When certain asymmetries in bargaining power exist, trading at any lower price constitutes unethical exploitation. I argue that a competitive market equilibrium does not provide a price that could be considered just by their own standards, and thus fails to ground a theory of exploitation.
9. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 3
Jeffery Smith Why Justice Matters for Business Ethics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In a recent critique of the so-called “market failures approach” (MFA) to business ethics Abraham Singer maintains that business firms have ethical responsibilities to voluntarily restrain their profit-seeking activities in accordance with the demands of justice. While I ultimately share Singer’s intuition that the MFA has overlooked the importance of justice in business ethics, I argue that he has not presented a fully adequate case to explain why justice-related responsibilities should be assigned to business firms. I conclude by offering a brief – and supportive – alternative to his position.
10. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 5 > Issue: 2
Theodora Welch, Minh Ly Rawls on the Justice of Corporate Governance
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Abraham Singer argues that Rawlsian theories of justice cannot apply to corporate governance and business ethics. On Singer’s view, Rawls regards business corporations as voluntary associations outside of the basic structure, which is the only site where justice applies. In this comment, we show the importance of Rawlsian theory to central questions of corporate governance. The corporation should be considered part of the basic structure, because it is part of society’s system of productive social cooperation. Rawls' proposal for a property-owning democracy also raises crucial corporate governance issues concerning the proper owners of the firm, and the separation of ownership and control.