In business ethics literature, debate over a special ethics generally has framed examination of the rules governing business. By constructing a dilemma faced by proponents of a special ethics, I argue that this framing is misguided. Proponents must adopt either an insular or a derivative conception. The former, the view that business is insulated from moral rules, is problematic because arguments used to support it force proponents to accept the idea that each aspect of life is insulated from moral rules. (...) This idea, however, renders philosophically insignificant the claim that business has a special ethics. Proponents no longer make a claim about business, but, rather, a relativistic claim about ethics in general. The derivative conception is the view that business is a set of circumstances that bear on the application of moral rules. This, however, is true of each aspect of life, and is simply an application of the principle 'ought implies can'. The result is that there is nothing special about this sense of a special ethics. Despite lacking specialness, however, the derivative conception provides proper framing for examination of the rules governing business. It subjects business to moral rules, but, also, accounts for the challenging circumstances businesspersons face. (shrink)

This article discusses the transition that business ethics has undergone since its start essentially as a philosophical sub-discipline of applied ethics. Today, business ethics—as demonstrated by four examples of gatekeepers—is a well-established field in general management, and increasingly business scholars without a “formal” background in philosophy are entering the scene. I take this transition to examine an updated positioning of business ethics and offer a proposal to redefine what makes a business ethicist. I suggest taking critical thinking as the common (...) denominator of all business ethics activities beyond the academic silos of various disciplines. In conclusion, by borrowing from the post-colonial theorist Edward Said, this article offers a definition of what makes a business ethicist in the broadest possible sense. Implications are discussed, including the consequences suggesting that if critical thinking is the common denominator, business ethics-as-business-case logic is not considered a part of business ethics publications, but should be addressed within more instrumental publication outlets of business. (shrink)

This paper presents the results of and conclusions from a survey of 2,830 college and university undergraduate business andphilosophy departments regarding their business ethics offerings. The impetus for this survey included seeking a better understandingof the problems for which business ethics courses are the solution. It was proposed that, if we knew what it is that professors teachingbusiness ethics believe they are teaching-not in terms of content or methods, but in terms of what criteria they are using to assessstudents' achievement (...) of the course objectives-we would have a better understanding of what issues business ethics attempts toresolve. The survey focused on ranking six possible assessment criteria drawn from the literature on teaching business ethics.In addition to disclosing the specific survey results, the paper draws conclusions based on the fact that there are statistically significantdifferences between the rankings assigned to the six assessment criteria by business professors as contrasted with philosophyprofessors. The results of the survey indicate that there is more uniformity expressed in the responses by the philosophy professorsteaching business ethics than by the business professors. (shrink)