Authors
Kendy Hess
College of the Holy Cross
Gunnar Björnsson
Stockholm University
Abstract
Recently, a number of people have argued that certain entities embodied by groups of agents themselves qualify as agents, with their own beliefs, desires, and intentions; even, some claim, as moral agents. However, others have independently argued that fully-fledged moral agency involves a capacity for reactive attitudes such as guilt and indignation, and these capacities might seem beyond the ken of “collective” or “ corporate ” agents. Individuals embodying such agents can of course be ashamed, proud, or indignant about what the agent has done. But just as an entity needs to have its own beliefs, desires, and intentions to qualify as a bona fide agent, the required capacity for reactive attitudes is a capacity to have one’s own reactive attitudes. If fully-fledged moral agency requires reactive attitudes, the corporate agent must itself be capable of guilt and indignation. In this paper, we argue that at least certain corporate agents are. Or, more precisely, we argue that if there are bona fide corporate agents, these agents can have the capacities that are both associated with guilt and indignation and plausibly required for moral agency; in particular certain epistemic and motivational capacities
Keywords Corporate agency  Collective agency  Moral agency  Reactive attitudes
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2017
DOI 10.1111/phpr.12260
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

References found in this work BETA

Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame.Thomas Scanlon - 2008 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Intention, Plans, and Practical Reason.Michael Bratman - 1987 - Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

View all 93 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Normative Responsibilities: Structure and Sources.Gunnar Björnsson & Bengt Brülde - 2017 - In Kristien Hens, Dorothee Horstkötter & Daniela Cutas (eds.), Parental Responsibility in the Context of Neuroscience and Genetics. Springer. pp. 13–33.
Aggregating Causal Judgments.Richard Bradley, Franz Dietrich & Christian List - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (4):491-515.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How Autonomy Alone Debunks Corporate Moral Agency.David Rönnegard - 2013 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 32 (1-2):77-107.
The Free Will of Corporations.Kendy M. Hess - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 168 (1):241-260.
Responsible Psychopaths.Patricia S. Greenspan - 2003 - Philosophical Psychology 16 (3):417 – 429.
Corporate Versus Individual Moral Responsibility.C. Soares - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 46 (2):143 - 150.
Can Emotions Communicate?Trip Glazer - 2014 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 3 (3):234-242.
Horror Films and the Argument From Reactive Attitudes.Scott Woodcock - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):309-324.
Critical Reactions: Verdicts and Virtue. [REVIEW]Elise Springer - 2005 - Journal of Value Inquiry 39 (2):183-201.
Three Kinds of Collective Attitudes.Christian List - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S9):1601-1622.
Corporate Speech as Commercial Speech.Jeffrey Nesteruk - 2007 - Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (1):97-103.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-09-09

Total views
527 ( #11,451 of 2,401,777 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
50 ( #15,414 of 2,401,777 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes