Journal of Business Ethics 8 (5):383 - 390 (1989)

Ethical reasoning as an action (praxis) as opposed to a knowing (epistemology) strategy is not always effective in guilding ethical, stopping or turning around unethical organizational behavior. In contrast, nonviolent forcing strategies can be very effective, but also destructive. If reasoning is an idealistic thesis and forcing is its pragmatic, material antithesis, then do we need a synthesis action (praxis) strategy such as problem solving negotiating? There are also limitations with negotiating.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00381730
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 54,410
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy.Bernard Williams - 1985 - Harvard University Press.
Morals by Agreement.David Gauthier - 1986 - Oxford University Press.
Consequences of Pragmatism.Richard Rorty - 1982 - University of Minnesota Press.
Principia Ethica.G. E. Moore - 1903 - Dover Publications.

View all 32 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Dialogic Leadership as Ethics Action (Praxis) Method.Richard P. Nielsen - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (10):765 - 783.
Organization Ethics From a Perspective of Praxis.Richard P. Nielsen - 1993 - Business Ethics Quarterly 3 (2):131-151.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
26 ( #390,377 of 2,368,291 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #557,530 of 2,368,291 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes