Alfred North Whitehead’s Statement: “What Is Morality In Any

Alfred North Whitehead’s statement: “What is morality in any

Read the article by Jay Feldman discussing the evolution of corporate responsibility and its impact on society. Consider 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.” Analyze this statement within the context of business ethics, exploring whether businesses can have ethical standards despite not being moral agents, and examine the roles of morality and ethics in individual and organizational conduct. Incorporate relevant ethical theories such as deontological ethics, teleological ethics, moral objectivism, and ethical relativism, as well as philosophical perspectives like Whitehead’s process philosophy and Kant’s categorical imperative. Develop a clear thesis that argues your position on whether businesses can harbor ethical standards without being moral agents and justify your stance with logically valid reasoning.

Paper For Above instruction

In the contemporary discourse on corporate ethics, the question of whether businesses can possess ethical standards despite not being moral agents remains a pivotal issue. Alfred North Whitehead’s assertion that morality is merely what the majority approves of at a given time invites critical reflection on the societal and philosophical basis of ethics within organizational contexts. This paper posits that while businesses cannot inherently be moral agents, they can nonetheless uphold ethical standards grounded in societal norms and professional principles. The argument unfolds through an exploration of core philosophical concepts, the distinction between descriptive and normative morality, and an analysis of the application of Kant’s categorical imperative to business practices.

Understanding the Philosophical Frameworks

To ground this discussion, it is essential to clarify key terms and frameworks. Utilitarianism, a teleological ethical theory, advocates for actions that maximize overall happiness or welfare (Mill, 1863). Conversely, Kant’s categorical imperative is a deontological principle emphasizing actions performed out of duty, applicable universally, regardless of consequences (Kant, 1785). Moral objectivism asserts that moral truths are universal and independent of individual preferences, whereas moral relativism posits that moral standards are culturally or situationally dependent (Ross, 1939). Process philosophy, as articulated by Whitehead, views reality as a series of interconnected processes rather than static substances, emphasizing becoming over being and suggesting that morality can evolve with societal development (Whitehead, 1929). These frameworks provide diverse lenses through which to evaluate corporate morality.

Are Businesses Moral Agents?

Fundamentally, businesses are collective entities composed of individuals whose moral capacities facilitate ethical decision-making. However, as organizations, they lack moral consciousness or agency comparable to individuals, raising the question: can an entity without moral awareness be considered moral or immoral? According to deontological ethics, moral agency involves intentionality and consciousness, which organizations lack, rendering them non-moral agents (Shaw, 2016). Nonetheless, organizations can establish ethical standards, codes of conduct, and compliance mechanisms that reflect societal moral expectations, influencing their actions. Therefore, it is accurate to state that businesses can embody ethical principles institutionally, even if they lack moral agency in a strict sense.

Distinguishing Descriptive and Normative Morality

Descriptive morality examines how individuals and societies actually behave regarding moral issues, often revealing discrepancies between moral ideals and practice (Haidt, 2012). Normative morality, however, involves prescriptions about how individuals and organizations ought to behave, guided by ethical principles and theories. In corporate ethics, normative standards dictate the responsible conduct expected of organizations, such as honesty, fairness, and respect for stakeholder interests. Recognizing this distinction underscores that while businesses may not be moral agents in a descriptive sense, they are subject to normative moral expectations derived from societal values and legal frameworks.

Applying Kant’s Categorical Imperative in Business

Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative states: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” In a business context, this principle encourages organizations to adopt policies that could be consistently universalized without contradiction. For example, a company considering whether to cut corners on environmental regulations should evaluate if such a maxim—prioritizing profit over environmental responsibility—could be universally adopted without leading to a contradiction or undesirable societal outcome. If not, it should be rejected.

Reasons for Applying Deontological Ethics, Moral Objectivism, and Whitehead’s Process Philosophy

1. Consistency and Universalizability: Kantian ethics promotes decision-making based on principles that could be universally accepted, fostering consistency and fairness across business practices (Kant, 1785).
2. Respect for Stakeholders: Deontological approaches emphasize the inherent dignity of all stakeholders, encouraging organizations to act ethically out of duty rather than solely for profit (Shaw, 2016).
3. Evolution of Morality as Process: Whitehead’s process philosophy suggests that moral understanding is dynamic, advocating for organizations to adapt and grow ethically in response to societal changes, rather than adhering to static codes (Whitehead, 1929).

Arguments Supporting Ethical Standards in Business

Despite lacking moral agency, businesses play a significant role in societal well-being, and thus can and should uphold ethical standards. Firstly, establishing ethical standards ensures organizational legitimacy and public trust, which are vital for long-term success (Donaldson & Dunfee, 1994). Secondly, ethical conduct mitigates risks associated with legal penalties and reputational damage, aligning corporate interests with societal welfare (Mele, 2012). Thirdly, fostering an ethical organizational culture promotes employee engagement and societal contribution, reinforcing social capital and economic stability (Trevino & Nelson, 2017).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the assertion that businesses cannot possess ethical standards because they are not moral agents holds merit in a strict philosophical sense. However, from a normative perspective, organizations can and must adopt ethical standards to fulfill societal expectations, support stakeholder interests, and ensure sustainable success. Applying Kant’s categorical imperative demonstrates the importance of universalizable principles in guiding corporate conduct, while Whitehead’s process philosophy underscores the evolving nature of morality. Ultimately, organizations serve as moral actors through their policies and practices, even if they lack intrinsic moral consciousness.

References

• Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252-284.
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Penguin Books.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Mary Gregor. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Mele, D. (2012). The social responsibility of business: Reconciling profit and purpose. Harvard Business Review, 90(10), 65-71.
• Ross, W. D. (1939). The right and the good. Oxford University Press.
• Shaw, W. H. (2016). Business ethics: A textbook with cases. Cengage Learning.
• Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2017). Managing business ethics: Straight Talk about how to do it right. John Wiley & Sons.
• Whitehead, A. N. (1929). Process and Reality. typical editions from the Free Press, 1978.
• H. (2012). Sunday Dialogue: How Corporations Behave. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com