Graduate studies at Western
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):221-238 (2012)
|Abstract||In latter-day discussions on corporate morality, duties of commission are fiercely debated. Moral institutionalists argue that duties of commission—such as a duty of assistance—overstep the boundaries of moral duty owed by economic agents. “Moral institutionalism” is a newly coined term for a familiar position on market morality. It maintains that market morality ought to be restricted, excluding all duties of commission. Neo-Classical thinkers such as Baumol and Homann defend it most eloquently. They underpin their position with concerns that go to the core of liberalism—the dominant western political theory that sustains the ideals of both the free market and the free, rational person. Those authors claim that liberalism calls for a fully differentiated market because it resents the politicization of the market. Fully differentiated markets exclude duties of commission. They also claim that full differentiation of the market closes the troublesome gap between moral motivation and moral virtue. Full differentiation redeems the promise of “easy virtue”. In this paper moral institutionalism will be rejected from a Kantian point of view, mostly inspired by Herman’s thesis on the invisibility of morality. Liberalism may perhaps ban the politicization of the market; it does not forbid its moralization. The idea of a fully differentiated market must also be rejected because it is either morally over-demanding (to the morally autonomous person) or morally hazardous (to the person with failing moral motivation). Contrary to what the moral institutionalists claim, right action, morally, is actually quite difficult in fully differentiated markets|
|Keywords||Free markets Market morality Duties of commission Invisibility of morality Liberalism Neo-classical (moral) thinking Moral institutionalism Kantian moral thinking Corporate duties|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Lara Denis (1997). Kant's Ethics and Duties to Oneself. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):321–348.
Richard Bellamy (1994). Moralizing Markets. Critical Review 8 (3):341-357.
Mark D. White (2010). Adam Smith and Immanuel Kant: On Markets, Duties, and Moral Sentiments. Forum for Social Economics 39 (1):53-60.
Lara Denis (2008). Animality and Agency: A Kantian Approach to Abortion. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (1):117-37.
Ronald Dworkin (2011). Diamonds in the Cosmic Sands. The Philosopher's Magazine 54 (54):22-31.
Alexei M. Marcoux (2003). A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):1-24.
Dennis R. Cooley (2007). A Kantian Moral Duty for the Soon-to-Be Demented to Commit Suicide. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (6):37 – 44.
Stephanie Collins (2013). Collectives' Duties and Collectivisation Duties. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (2):231-248.
John J. Hanafin (2002). Morality and the Market in China: Some Contemporary Views. Business Ethics Quarterly 12 (1):1-18.
J. O. Famakinwa (2010). The Moderate Communitarian Individual and the Primacy of Duties. Theoria 76 (2):152-166.
Anne Schwenkenbecher (2011). Moral Obligations of States. In Applied Ethics Series. Center of Applied Ethics and Philosophy.
Paul D. Eisenberg (1968). Duties to Oneself and the Concept of Morality. Inquiry 11 (1-4):129 – 154.
Matthew Wilks Keefer (1996). The Inseparability of Morality and Well‐Being: The Duty/Virtue Debate Revisited. Journal of Moral Education 25 (3):277-290.
Anne Schwenkenbecher (2013). Joint Duties and Global Moral Obligations. Ratio 26 (3):310-328.
Allen Wood (2009). Duties to Oneself, Duties of Respect to Others. In Thomas E. Hill (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Kant's Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
Added to index2011-05-04
Total downloads9 ( #122,521 of 739,369 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,369 )
How can I increase my downloads?