18 found
Order:
Disambiguations
John R. Danley [18]John Robert Danley [1]
  1. Robert Nozick and the Libertarian Paradox.John R. Danley - 1979 - Mind 88 (351):419-423.
  2.  43
    Polestar Refined: Business Ethics and Political Economy. [REVIEW]John R. Danley - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (12):915 - 933.
    Although Friedman's The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits is widely read, the central argument is rarely identified. Stone's discussion of Friedman in Where the Law Ends, is often used as a companion piece. Stone claims that the most important argument in Friedman is the Polestar argument but never succeeds in explaining what it is. This paper shows that Friedman's position must be read in the context of his theory of political economy, and that at least four distinct (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  3. The Role of the Modern Corporation in a Free Society.John R. Danley - 1994
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  4.  24
    Liberalism, Aboriginal Rights, and Cultural Minorities.John R. Danley - 1991 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (2):168-185.
  5.  20
    Ethics Companion.John R. Danley - 1990 - Teaching Philosophy 13 (4):382-385.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  33
    Corporate Moral Agency.John R. Danley - 1980 - Bowling Green Studies in Applied Philosophy 2:140-149.
  7.  29
    “Ought” Implies “Can”, or, the Moral Relevance of a Theory of the Firm.John R. Danley - 1988 - Journal of Business Ethics 7 (1-2):23 - 28.
    Since ought implies can, i.e., one cannot be obligated to do what one cannot do, the question of corporate responsibility cannot be discussed intelligibly without an inquiry into the range of corporate or managerial discretion. Hence, the moral relevance of a theory of the firm. Within classical or neo-classical economic theory, for instance, firms which act other than to maximize profit are eliminated. They cannot do otherwise, and thus either have no obligations at all or only the duty to maximize (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  8.  24
    Polishing Up the Pinto.John R. Danley - 2005 - Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (2):205-236.
    This paper revisits the Pinto case not merely for the purpose of demythologizing the case, but as an opportunity to examine the broader issue of the logic of blame, the ascription of legal and moral responsibility. Three issues are addressed in the contexts of fault and liability in tort, criminal liability and product liability: 1) To what extent can judgments of moral wrongdoing or blame be inferred from legal judgments? 2) What are the strengths and weaknesses of attempting to model (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  10
    Toward a Theory of Bribery.John R. Danley - 1983 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 2 (3):19-39.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10.  9
    Abstract.John R. Danley - 1983 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 3 (1):79-79.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11.  30
    Ethics and the Organizational Person: Revisiting Degeorge. [REVIEW]John R. Danley - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (12):935 - 950.
    In this paper I review the dispute over DeGeorge's analysis of the issue of the ethical responsibilities of engineers in large organizations. I argue that this issue is no different than the question of the ethical responsibilities of any other relevantly situated employee because engineers have no special duty to hold paramount the safety of the public distinct from that of others. I demonstrate how critics like Mankin, James, and Curd and May have misread and misinterpreted DeGeorge's position and his (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  11
    Contracts, Conquerors, and Conquests.John R. Danley - 1979 - Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):171-177.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  24
    Philosophy, Science and Business Ethics: Frederick's New Normative Synthesis. [REVIEW]John R. Danley - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 26 (2):111 - 122.
    After examining Frederick's charge in his recently published Values, Nature, and Culture in the American Corporation that philosophers and others in the field of business ethics and business and society ignore nature and technology, the paper investigates Frederick's attempt to articulate and defend a New Normative Synthesis (NNS). Since the NNS is the result of a synthesis between Frederick's theory of business values and the body of principles in business ethics, I focus on the nature of each component, the nature (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  9
    Polishing Up the Pinto: Legal Liability, Moral Blame, and Risk.John R. Danley - 2005 - Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (2):205-236.
    This paper revisits the Pinto case not merely for the purpose of demythologizing the case, but as an opportunity to examine the broader issue of the logic of blame, the ascription of legal and moral responsibility. Three issues are addressed in the contexts of fault and liability in tort, criminal liability and product liability: 1) To what extent can judgments of moral wrongdoing or blame be inferred from legal judgments? 2) What are the strengths and weaknesses of attempting to model (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  7
    An Examination of the Fundamental Assumption of Hypothetical Process Arguments.John R. Danley - 1978 - Philosophical Studies 34 (2):187 - 195.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  3
    Abstract Of: "Toward a Theory of Bribery" [with Commentaries].John R. Danley, Kendall D'Andrade & Scott Turow - 1983 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 3 (1):79 - 86.
    The prevailing opinion in our culture is that bribery is in principle wrong. I challenge that view and offer an analysis that suggests that bribery is a morally neutral concept. The analysis closely parallels the legal notions, suggesting that this analysis may have a firm grounding in our own tradition in spite of the prevailing views. To bribe someone is to offer something of value to another with the intent of inducing an action that is contrary to the positional duties (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Internationalizing Business and Society.John R. Danley - 1995 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 6:439-450.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Risk V. Risk: DDT and Malaria.John R. Danley - 2000 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 11:131-141.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography