Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Decision-Making: A Case for the Triple Font Theory

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses the philosophical argument and the application of the Triple Font Theory (TFT) for moral evaluation of human acts and attempts to integrate the conceptual components of major moral theories into a systematic internally consistent decision-making model that is theoretically driven. The paper incorporates concepts such as formal and material cooperation and the Principle of Double Effect (PDE) into the theoretical framework. It also advances the thesis that virtue theory ought to be included in any adequate justification of morality and the need to integrate or coordinate notions of virtue into various act-oriented or principles-based ethics. The TFT offers a comprehensive and practical approach to ethical decision-making and is a useful alternative embedded in traditional wisdom. This paper provides a more general framework of the TFT than traditionally presented. Practical judgment is shown to play a constitute role in providing a guide for right action and is the “glue” that integrates the various components of the TFT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anscombe G. E. M. (1982) Action, Intention and Double Effect. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 56:12–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Aqunias T. (1948) Summa Theologica Volume II. Christian Classics, Notre Dame, IN

    Google Scholar 

  • Arjoon S. (2000) Virtue Theory as a Dynamic Theory of Business. Journal of Business Ethics 28:159–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audi R. (1995a) The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Audi R. (1995b) Acting From Virtue. Mind 140(415):449–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnsley J. (1972) The Social Reality of Ethics. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastons, M.: 2006, ‘Moral Competencies in Decision-Making’, Paper Presented at the 4th International Symposium on Ethics, Business and Society on “Toward a Comprehensive Integration of Ethics Into Management: Problems and Prospects', IESE Business School, University of Navarra, May 18–19, Barcelona, Spain

  • Berkman J. (1997) How Important is the Doctrine of Double Effect for Moral Theology? Contextualizing the Controversy. Christian Bioethics 3(2):89–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatright J. (2003) Ethics and the Conduct of Business. Prentice Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle J. (2001) Toward Understanding the Principle of Double Effect. In: Woodward P. A. (ed.), The Doctrine of Double Effect: Philosophers Debate a Controversial Moral Principle. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame Indiana

    Google Scholar 

  • Bricker P. (1980) Prudence. The Journal of Philosophy 77(7):381–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buccholtz R., Rosenthal S. (1998) Business Ethics: The Pragmatic Path Beyond Principles to Process. Prentice Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll A., Buchholtz A. (2000) Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management. South-Western, United States

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh G., Moberg J., Valasquez M. (1995) Making Business Ethics Practical. Business Ethics Quarterly 513:399–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Cessario R. (2001) Introduction to Moral Theology. The Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Crockett C. (2005) The Cultural Paradigm of Virtue. Journal of Business Ethics 62:191–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De George R. (1999) Business Ethics. Prentice Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T., Werhane P. (1996) Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach. Prentice Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Entine, J.: 1988, The Ethical Edge, http://www.about-ecoli.com/news/odevallaib.htm

  • Fagothey A. (1959) Rights and Reason. Tan Books and Publishers Inc, Rockford, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnis, J.: 1999, Natural Law and Natural Rights. Clarendon Law Series (Oxford University Press, Oxford)

  • Fortenbaugh W. (1964) Aristotle’s Conception of Moral Virtue and Its Perceptive Role. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association 95:77–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowers B. (2003) Reason and Human Fortitude: In Praise of Practical Wisdom. The American Behavioral Scientist 47(4):415–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French P. (1996) Integrity, Intentions and Corporations. American Business Law Journal 34(2):141–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynn K. (1999) Double Effect. Commonweal 126(2):10–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Golding M. (1963) Principled Judicial Decision-Making. Ethics 73(4):247–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horvath C. (1995) Excellence vs. Effectiveness: MacIntyre’s Critique of Business. Business Ethics Quarterly 5(3):449–532

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins T. (1992) Man as Man: The Science and Art of Ethics, Revised Edition. Tan Books and Publishers Inc, Rockford, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosenball, M.: 2006, ‘Can the President Order a Killing on US Soil?’, Newsweek February 12, 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer T. (1994) Moral Leadership in Business. Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hursthouse R. (1999) On Virtue Ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsen A., Toulmin S. (1988) The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning. University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaczor C. (1998) Double Effect Reasoning from Jean Pierre Gury to Peter Kraner. Theological Studies 59(2):247–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan J. (1993) The Function of the Principle of Double Effect. Theological Studies 54(2):294–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Laird J. (1946) Act Ethics and Agent Ethics. Mind 55(218):113–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledden (1942) Virtue, Obligatoriness and Rightness. Mind 56(224):351–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Louden, R.: 1984, ‘On Some Vices of Virtue Ethics’, in R. Crisp and M. Stole (eds.), 1997, Virtue Ethics (Oxford University Press, Oxford)

  • Maclagan P. (2003) Varieties of Moral Issue and Dilemma: A Framework for the Analysis of Case Material in Business Ethics Education. Journal of Business Ethics 48(1):21–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masek L. (2000) The Doctrine of Double Effect: Deadly Drugs and Business Ethics: A Reply to Valasquez and Brady. Business Ethics Quarterly 10:483–495

    Google Scholar 

  • Mele D. (1997) Etica en la Dirreccion de Empresas. IESE, Universidad de Navarra, Barcelona

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintz S. (1996) Aristotelian Virtue and Business Ethics Education. Journal of Business Ethics 15:827–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore G., Beadle R. (2006) In Search of Organizational Virtue in Business: Agents, Goods, Practices, Institutions and Environments. Organizational Studies 27(3):369–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum M. (1986) The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge University, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M.: 1988, ‘Non Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach’, in P. French, T. Uehling and H. Wettstein (eds.), Midwest Studies in Philosophy, in Ethical Theory, Character and Virtue (University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame)

  • O’Keefe M. (1987) Known from the Things That Are: Fundamental Theory of the Moral Life. Center for Thomistic Studies, University of St. Thomas, Houston, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • Post J., Lawrence A., Weber J. (2002) Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, and Ethics. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Quill T., Dresser R., Brock D. (1997) The Role of Double Effect: A Critique of its Role in End-of-Life Decisions. The New England Journal of Medicine 337(24):1768–1772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossouw G. J. (2002) Business is Not Just War: Transferring the Principle of Double Effect from War to Business. South African Journal of Philosophy 22(3):236–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman N. (1989) The Fabric of Character: Aristotle’s Theory of Virtue. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith J. (1991) Humanae Vitae: A Generation Later. The Catholic University of America Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sulmasy D. (2000) Commentary: Double Effect-Intention is the Solution, Not the Problem. The Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28(1):26–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tully P. (2005) The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Question of Constraints on Business Decisions. Journal of Business Ethics 58:51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, A.: 1997, `Today the Sheep...', Newsweek, March 10, pp. 48

  • Valasquez M. (2002) Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Prentice Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Waide J. (1988) Virtues and Principles. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48(3):455–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace W. (1997) The Elements Of Philosophy: A Compendium For Philosophers and Theologians. Alba House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss J. (2003) Business Ethics: A Stakeholder And Issues Management Approach. Thomson/South Western, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetstone J. T. (2001) How Virtue Fits Within Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 33(2):101–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams G. (2001) The Principle of Double Effect and Terminal Sedation. Medical Law Review 9(1):41–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward P. A. (2001) The Doctrine of Double Effect: Philosophers Debate a Controversial Moral Principle. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management Studies, University of The West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad, Trinidad and Tobago

    Surendra Arjoon

Authors
  1. Surendra Arjoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Surendra Arjoon.

Additional information

Surendra Arjoon is an Associate Professor of Business Ethics at the University of the West Indies, Trinidad. He has served as Chair, Department of Management Studies and as Associate Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences. He is also Vice President of the Trinidad & Tobago Economics Association. His work has appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Markets and Morality, Global Development Studies, Applied Financial Economics, and Social and Economic Studies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arjoon, S. Ethical Decision-Making: A Case for the Triple Font Theory. J Bus Ethics 71, 395–410 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9142-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9142-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation