Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (4) (2016)
The practice of official apology has a fairly poor reputation. Dismissed as ‘crocodile tears’ or cheap grace, such apologies are often seen by the public as an easy alternative to more punitive or expensive ways of taking real responsibility. I focus on what I call the role-playing criticism: the argument that someone who offers an apology in public cannot be appropriately apologetic precisely because they are only playing a role. I offer a qualified defence of official apologies against this objection, considering them through the lens of fiduciary duties. This focus draws our attention to formal or impersonal relationships that are nevertheless normatively rich, capable of sustaining trust, concern, and care. At the same time, I highlight several pitfalls for fiduciary apologisers, including the tension between apology as a mode of truth telling and the duty of confidentiality. I consider whether the fiduciary apologiser, in reflecting on her fiduciary obligations, has ‘one thought too many’ for genuine apology, and argue that the issue of mixed motives is not limited to fiduciary contexts, cautioning against excessive idealism in our conception of apology. I conclude with some reflections on possible conflicts between fiduciary obligations and the conscientious desire to apologise.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Fiduciary Duties and the Ethics of Public Apology.Alice MacLachlan - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (4).
In Search of the Nature and Function of Fiduciary Loyalty: Some Observations on Conaglen's Analysis.Rebecca Lee - 2007 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 27 (2):327-338.
Intentions, Compliance, and Fiduciary Obligations.Stephen R. Galoob & Leib - 2014 - Legal Theory 20 (2):106-132.
Fiduciary Duty and Socially Responsible Investing.George R. Gay - 2003 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):49-54.
Vulnerability and the Basis of Business Ethics: From Fiduciary Duties to Professionalism. [REVIEW]Eric Brown - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 113 (3):489-504.
Fiduciary Duties and the Shareholder-Management Relation.John R. Boatright - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):393-407.
Socially Responsible Investing: Is Your Fiduciary Duty at Risk?William Martin - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (4):549-560.
Fiduciary Duties and the Shareholder-Management Relation: Or, What's so Special About Shareholders?John R. Boatright - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):393-407.
Getting Real: Stakeholder Theory, Managerial Practice, and the General Irrelevance of Fiduciary Duties Owed to Shareholders.Richard Marens & Andrew Wicks - 1999 - Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (2):273-293.
Academic Deans, Codes of Ethics, and……Fiduciary Duties?William DeAngelis - 2014 - Journal of Academic Ethics 12 (3):209-225.
Philosophical Foundations of Fiduciary Law.Andrew S. Gold & Paul B. Miller (eds.) - 2016 - Oxford University Press UK.
Philosophical Foundations of Fiduciary Law.Andrew S. Gold & Paul B. Miller (eds.) - 2014 - Oxford University Press.
Review of Sovereignty’s Promise: The State as Fiduciary by Evan Fox-Decent. [REVIEW]Matthew Lister - 2012 - Ethics 123 (1):150-4.
Added to index2017-02-07
Total downloads3 ( #700,617 of 2,172,023 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #117,665 of 2,172,023 )
How can I increase my downloads?