Corporate responsibility and corporate personhood
Journal of Business Ethics 3 (1):77 - 84 (1984)
Abstract
In this paper, I consider the claim that a corporation cannot be held to be morally responsible unless it is a person. First, I argue that this claim is ambigious. Person flags three different but related notions: metaphysical person, moral agent, moral person. I argue that, though one can make the claim that corporates are metaphysical persons, this claim is only marginally relevant to the question of corporate moral responsibility. The central question which must be answered in discussions of corporate moral responsibility is whether corporations are moral agents or moral persons. I argue that, though we can make a case for saying corporations are moral agents, they are not moral persons, and hence, we can hold them responsible. In addition, we need not treat them the way we would be obligated to treat a moral person; we needn't have the same scruples about holding a corporation morally responsible as we would a moral person.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1007/bf00381720
My notes
Similar books and articles
The fiction of corporate scapegoating.P. Eddy Wilson - 1993 - Journal of Business Ethics 12 (10):779 - 784.
Corporate executives: Disasters and moral responsibility. [REVIEW]Robert Larmer - 1996 - Journal of Business Ethics 15 (7):785 - 788.
Toward an Intermediate Position on Corporate Moral Personhood.Kevin Gibson - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 101 (S1):71-81.
Corporate moral responsibility in health care.Stephen Wilmot - 2000 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 3 (2):139-146.
Dismemberment, divorce and hostile takeovers: A comment on corporate moral personhood. [REVIEW]Rita C. Manning - 1988 - Journal of Business Ethics 7 (8):639 - 643.
Unredistributable corporate moral responsibility.Jan Edward Garrett - 1989 - Journal of Business Ethics 8 (7):535 - 545.
A Political Account of Corporate Moral Responsibility.Jeffery Smith - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (2):223 - 246.
Corporate Speech as Commercial Speech: A Response to Mayer’s Nike v. Kasky Analysis.Jeffrey Nesteruk - 2007 - Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (1):97-103.
Corporate moral responsibility: What can we infer from our understanding of organisations? [REVIEW]Stephen Wilmot - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 30 (2):161 - 169.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
152 (#84,265)
6 months
4 (#182,797)
2009-01-28
Downloads
152 (#84,265)
6 months
4 (#182,797)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
The Fallacy of Corporate Moral Agency.David Rönnegard (ed.) - 2015 - Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Can a Corporation be Worthy of Moral Consideration?Kenneth Silver - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics 159 (1):253-265.
Corporate moral agency: Review and implications. [REVIEW]Geoff Moore - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 21 (4):329 - 343.
Should Corporations Have the Right to Vote? A Paradox in the Theory of Corporate Moral Agency.John Hasnas - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 150 (3):657-670.