Read The Following Article By Jay Feldman Sunday Dialogue

Read The Following Article By Jay Feldmansunday Dialogue How Corpora

Read the following article by Jay Feldman: Sunday Dialogue: How Corporations Behave Considering the article, write an APA-formatted paper of 4–5 pages that addresses the following: Part 1: Developing the Philosophical Thesis Statement 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. Part 4: Review Checklist before submitting essay Your essay should be checked for proper use of grammar, spelling, and punctuation. You may find that you change your mind on the issue as you are writing your paper. That is fine, but be sure to present your ultimate decision at the beginning of the paper, and stick to it consistently throughout. This may require that you go back and change paragraphs to support your changed thesis statement. Your argument should be clear, concise, and supported with logically valid claims and evidence followed by APA in-text citations. A reference page documenting your sources should be included. Please submit your assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

The relationship between morality and business ethics has long been a subject of philosophical debate. The assertion by Alfred North Whitehead that morality is merely what the majority prefers during a specific time and place prompts an examination of whether moral standards are purely contingent on societal preferences or anchored in objective principles. This paper argues that, although businesses can uphold ethical standards, they are not moral agents. Consequently, their adherence to ethical guidelines does not qualify them as morally responsible entities. This position is supported through exploring deontological and teleological ethics, as well as the concepts of moral relativism and moral objectivism, aiming to demonstrate that ethical standards within corporations can be meaningful without implying moral agency.

Introduction

The core of this discussion revolves around whether corporations can maintain ethical standards independently of being moral agents. The debate raises essential questions about the foundation of morality in business contexts, the role of societal preferences, and the application of philosophical principles such as Kant’s categorical imperative and Whitehead’s process philosophy. This essay posits that businesses can indeed set and follow ethical standards, but they do not possess moral agency—an attribute reserved for individuals capable of moral reasoning. This stance is substantiated by examining various ethical frameworks and their implications for corporate behavior.

Philosophical Concepts and Frameworks

Deontological ethics, primarily associated with Immanuel Kant, emphasizes the importance of duty and adherence to moral principles regardless of outcomes. Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative—acting only according to maxims that can be universally applied—serves as a benchmark for evaluating business ethics. For example, a corporation’s decision to engage in honest advertising aligns with Kantian principles if it can be consistently universalized without contradiction.

Teleological ethics, such as utilitarianism, assess the morality of actions based on their consequences. Companies often justify ethical practices by highlighting benefits such as customer trust, brand loyalty, and overall social welfare. However, these outcomes do not inherently make corporations moral agents, as their decision-making processes lack moral consciousness.

Whitehead’s process philosophy emphasizes that morality is a dynamic, ever-evolving process embedded within the relationships of beings and entities. From this perspective, corporations are part of a broader, interconnected moral fabric but do not possess intrinsic moral agency themselves. This supports the notion that ethical standards can exist within organizations without attributing to them moral responsibility.

Moral relativism suggests that moral standards vary across cultures and societies, which could justify corporate ethical lapses if they align with local preferences. Conversely, moral objectivism asserts that certain ethical principles are universally valid, providing a basis for the imposition of consistent standards regardless of societal differences.

Supporting Arguments for the Thesis

Firstly, ethical standards set by corporations often reflect societal expectations rather than intrinsic moral commitments. For instance, corporate social responsibility initiatives are designed to build reputation and shareholder value, aligning with societal values rather than moral duty per se.

Secondly, the absence of intrinsic moral reasoning within corporate decision-making processes underscores their classification as non-moral agents. Unlike individuals capable of moral reflection, corporations operate through structured policies and profit motives, which do not inherently involve moral deliberation.

Thirdly, applying Kantian principles to corporate actions reveals that, although organizations can follow moral rules, they cannot bear moral duties in the philosophical sense. Kant’s moral agency presupposes consciousness and autonomous moral reasoning—attributes absent in corporate entities.

Conclusion

In conclusion, despite their capacity to uphold ethical standards, businesses are not moral agents because they lack the consciousness and moral reasoning essential for moral responsibility. Drawing from Whitehead’s process philosophy and Kant’s categorical imperative, it is evident that ethical standards within organizations serve practical and societal functions without implying moral agency. Therefore, businesses can maintain ethical standards, but these do not make them morally responsible agents. Recognizing this distinction clarifies the ethical obligations of corporations and the nature of morality in the business world.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. Hackett Publishing.
• MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue: A study in moral theory. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Whitehead, A. N. (1929). Process and reality. Free Press.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. Harvard University Press.
• Vincent, L. (1972). Moral relativism and moral objectivism. Journal of Philosophy, 69(7), 183-193.
• Williams, B. (1981). Moral luck and other essays. Cambridge University Press.