Sweatshops and Free Action: The Stakes of the Actualism/Possibilism Debate for Business Ethics

Journal of Business Ethics 171 (4):683-694 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Whether an action is morally right depends upon the alternative acts available to the agent. Actualists hold that what an agent would actually do determines her moral obligations. Possibilists hold that what an agent could possibly do determines her moral obligations. Both views face compelling criticisms. Despite the fact that actualist and possibilist assumptions are at the heart of seminal arguments in business ethics, there has been no explicit discussion of actualism and possibilism in the business ethics literature. This paper has two primary goals. First, it aims to rectify this omission by bringing to light the importance of the actualism/possibilism debate for business ethics through questions about the ethics of sweatshops. Second, it aims to make some progress in the sweatshop debate by examining and defending an alternative view, hybridism, and describing the moral and practical implications of hybridism for the sweatshop debate.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-02-25

Downloads
1,122 (#11,955)

6 months
231 (#11,585)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Abe Zakhem
Seton Hall University
Travis Timmerman
Seton Hall University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Exploitation.Alan Wertheimer - 1996 - Princeton University Press.
Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective.Norman E. Bowie - 1982 - New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
Do I Make a Difference?Shelly Kagan - 2011 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 39 (2):105-141.
The Concept of Moral Obligation.Michael J. Zimmerman - 1996 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The All or Nothing Problem.Joe Horton - 2017 - Journal of Philosophy 114 (2):94-104.

View all 69 references / Add more references