Businesses can have Ethical Standards but Businesses are Not Moral Agents
Alfred North Whitehead's statement: “What is morality in any given time and place? It is what the majority then and there happen to like and immorality is what they dislike” is a very controversial statement. Think about this statement as you consider the following questions as a guide to help your formulate a thesis statement.
Select 1 of the following questions to answer and develop your thesis statement:
-Businesses can have ethical standards, but businesses are not moral agents. Do you agree or disagree?
-Is it true that the “bottom line” of business is profit and profit alone?
-In business, are there other less tangible goals that are intrinsic to and just as important as making money?
-In a business environment, why should people be moral as individuals?
-Why should a corporation or organization be moral?
-Could you apply the first formulation of Kant's categorical imperative to a business environment?
Part 2: Developing the Essay
-Identify your thesis statement (argument claim) within the introduction of your paper.
-Conduct research using library resources.
-Outline your essay, considering deontological ethics, teleological ethics, moral objectivism, and ethical relativism in your argument.
-Provide at least 3 valid reasons to support your argument.
-Also, be sure to include the following in your APA formatted essay: ◦Use of explanations of philosophical concepts such as utilitarianism, categorical imperatives, process philosophy, moral relativism, moral absolutism, ethical relativism, moral objectivism, deontological ethics, or teleological ethics to structure your essay and provide evidence to support your claims.
Your argument and reasons (claims) should be defended by philosophical concepts supported by evidence, which is based on your research. Please use the APA library to begin your research.
Part 3: Conclusion
Consider morality and ethics from the perspective of Alfred North Whitehead's process philosophy and Immanuel Kant's universal categorical imperative. After conducting your research and writing your essay, could you conclude that businesses can have ethical standards, despite the fact that businesses are not moral agents? Why or why not? Please explain summing up your argument.
Name
Institution
Businesses Can Have Ethical Standards, but Businesses Are Not Moral Agents
The idea of corporation or organizations being moral agents has been viewed in different perspectives. Several philosophers believe that organizations are moral agents basing their arguments on the fact that business organizations have some moral duties to play in the society as they pursue their ultimate goal, which is to make profits. However, some would want to believe that corporate’s actions do not originate from the corporation, but the members of the organizations who execute them, and so the members would be the ones responsible for the actions, making them morally and ethically liable for their deeds. Such a contention exhibits the existence of variances in how different people or philosophers define morality. Defining morality in any given time and place could be challenging. Utilitarian theorists believe it is what is liked by the majority then and there aimed at achieving happiness, with immorality being what is not liked (Zimmerli, Richter, & Holzinger, 2007). Such a definition, differs in the context of deontological theorists, who affirm that morality is what is right and does not have to be necessary aligned with the achievement of happiness or morally admirable ends. This emphasizes that morality defines ethics. To understand whether the corporation or business organizations are moral agent or not, and whether businesses can have ethical standards, it is necessary to consider the issue of morality and ethics from the perspective of different theories including the viewpoints of Alfred North Whitehead’s process philosophy and Immanuel Kant’s universal categorical imperative.
For those who advocate corporates or businesses as moral agents, they base their claim on how the law defines a corporate entity. The law defines a corporation as an entity separate in its personality for the individual who bear its ownership. In this definition, it emerges that a corporation should act and behave as a person and conduct activities solely on its behalf (Zimmerli, Richter, & Holzinger, 2007). The legal stand concerning the corporation’s separate personality elucidate that a corporate entity is obligated to cater for its own legal obligations such as taxation, just the way a person would be liable for his/her own personal income taxation. If corporation were not a separate person, then if would have turned out that those bearing the ownership could take upon themselves to bear the legal responsibilities such as paying taxes on behalf of the entities. This would mean a corporate firm would not be subjected to taxation or any other legal obligations. By forming a corporation, the owners accept the fact that the body would have to legally own assets separately from the personal assets of the owners. A shareholder’s liability in the corporation is limited to his/her asset contribution to the organization and in case of any corporate legal liability, for instance, a debt, a shareholder can only pay up to the amount of his/her own asset contribution to the corporation.
The law stipulates that every legal person is also a moral person. This suggests that the corporation is a moral person owing to its legally recognized personality. Going by Kant’s moral theory, the corporation is supposed to act rationally by adhering to the existing moral law and duty (Zimmerli, Richter, & Holzinger, 2007). The corporation should be motivated to oblige to what is required of it by the law and the society. Morality provides the corporation with a framework under which to base their rational principles. Conversely, Kant explains that for one to be a moral agent, it is necessary for one to have the unique capacity for rationality or the propensity to reason. In t...