This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories

4 found
Order:
  1. Business-Inflicted Social Harm.Edmund F. Byrne - 1998 - In Yeager Hudson (ed.), Technology, Morality and Social Policy. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press. pp. 55-73.
    Businesses cause social harm, meaning harm to society at large and not just to those with whom a business is contractually linked. Evidence introduced: normative claims that businesses should be "socially responsible"; positive claims that they contribute to social well-being; and negative claims that they are sometimes military-like, causing extensive harm for which no one is held personally responsible. The latter point to corporate survivalism, which acknowledges no mandatory civil responsibilities. Neither law nor social pressure has yet counteracted this mind (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Rethinking Corporate Agency in Business, Philosophy, and Law.Samuel Mansell, John Ferguson, David Gindis & Avia Pasternak - forthcoming - Journal of Business Ethics:1-7.
    While researchers in business ethics, moral philosophy and jurisprudence have advanced the study of corporate agency, there have been very few attempts to bring together insights from these and other disciplines in the pages of the Journal of Business Ethics. By introducing to an audience of business ethics scholars the work of outstanding authors working outside the field this interdisciplinary special issue addresses this lacuna. Its aim is to encourage the formulation of innovative arguments that reinvigorate the study of corporate (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. The Social Dimension of Moral Responsibility: Taking Organizations Seriously.David T. Risser - 1996 - Journal of Social Philosophy 27 (1):189-207.
    This article provides a justification for holding complex organizations morally responsible and shows how this moral dimension is implicit in the concept of power. Several objections to organizational moral responsibility are addressed, and a new view of complex organizations as agents which are morally responsible, but do not possess moral rights, is defended.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Do I Think Corporations Should Be Able to Vote Now?Kenneth Silver - 2016 - Business Ethics Journal Review 6 (4):18-23.
    Many proponents of corporate agency take corporations to be responsible for their conduct, but few take them to merit rights over and above the rights of their members. Hasnas (2016) argues that, given a widely-held view of liberal political theory, corporate agency entails that corporations should have the right to vote. In response, I show that there are problems in appealing to liberal political theory, and that the view of voting Hasnas actually endorses need not be accepted. Should it be, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography