The Biggest Corporation Like The Humblest Citizen Must Be He

The Biggest Corporation Like The Humblest Citizen Must Be Held To S

The assignment involves analyzing the ethical responsibilities of corporations and individuals within a societal framework, emphasizing that both entities must adhere to the will of the people and uphold moral standards. It explores the concepts of ethics, social rules, business ethics, and various moral perspectives, including moral relativism, moral universalism, and moral perspectivalism. The discussion extends to different ethical theories such as utilitarianism, ethical egoism, rights approach, virtue ethics, and the ethics of care, highlighting their application in business settings. The importance of ethical decision-making amid complex stakeholder interests, conflicting goals, and evolving societal norms is underscored, emphasizing that ethical choices are often nuanced and context-dependent.

Paper For Above instruction

In contemporary society, the ethical obligations of large corporations are often scrutinized, especially in comparison to the moral responsibilities of individual citizens. Recognizing that corporations wield significant influence and power, similar to that of individual citizens, it is imperative that they are held accountable to the will of the people and uphold societal moral standards. This perspective aligns with Theodore Roosevelt’s assertion that “the biggest corporation, like the humblest citizen, must be held to strict compliance with the will of the people,” emphasizing that power and influence do not exempt entities from moral and social responsibilities.

The concept of ethics provides the foundation for evaluating actions and behaviors within society, encompassing social rules that govern acceptable conduct, and serve to limit purely self-interested desires to facilitate coexistence (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2019). In a corporate context, organizational ethics reflect shared values that guide acceptable behavior, fostering trust and legitimacy with stakeholders. When businesses harbor ethical standards, they demonstrate commitment to social responsibility alongside economic performance, which is vital for long-term success and societal well-being.

However, business ethics often involve complex dilemmas where financial performance—profits, revenues, costs—and social obligations to stakeholders—employees, customers, communities, shareholders—conflict (Crane, Matten, & Spence, 2019). This tension accentuates the importance of applying moral frameworks that aid in navigating these dilemmas ethically. For instance, utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall happiness and minimizing harm, suggesting that decisions should be evaluated based on their net societal benefit (Mill, 1863). Conversely, the rights approach, rooted in Kantian morality, emphasizes respecting individual rights and dignity, advocating that actions must adhere to universal principles irrespective of outcomes (Kant, 1785).

Diverse moral perspectives, such as moral relativism and moral universalism, influence how societies interpret ethical standards. Moral relativism posits that morality is society-dependent; what is considered morally acceptable varies across cultures and contexts (Herskovits, 1948). For example, practices like polygamy or specific business customs may be tolerated in some societies but condemned in others. This relativistic view raises concerns about undermining international consensus on fundamental human rights, as it difficulties moral criticism across cultures (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Conversely, moral universalism asserts that certain ethical principles are universally applicable, such as respect for human rights and fairness, providing a shared moral foundation across diverse cultures (Becker, 2010).

Moral perspectivalism offers a nuanced view, advocating for examining multiple viewpoints to approach a more balanced ethical stance. This compromise position recognizes cultural differences while striving for universal moral standards through dialogue and understanding (Kincaid, 2004). In practice, this perspective encourages multinational corporations to respect cultural diversity while adhering to core ethical principles like honesty and fairness, thereby fostering global ethical consistency.

Various ethical theories provide different tools for managing moral dilemmas. Utilitarianism, championed by John Stuart Mill, evaluates actions based on their outcomes; the best decisions are those that produce the greatest good for the greatest number (Mill, 1863). Ethical egoism, aligned with Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy, advocates acting in self-interest, provided that such actions lead to long-term personal or organizational benefits (Hobbes, 1651). Meanwhile, rights-based approaches rooted in Kantian ethics emphasize respecting individuals as ends in themselves, never merely as means (Kant, 1785). These frameworks guide corporate decision-making, shaping policies on employee treatment, customer rights, and corporate social responsibility.

Virtue ethics, originating from Aristotle, emphasizes the importance of developing moral character and virtues such as honesty, courage, and integrity (Aristotle, 4th century BCE). This approach advocates making decisions consistent with virtuous character traits, promoting ethical organizational cultures. The ethics of care, influenced by feminist philosophical thought, emphasizes relationships and responsiveness to the needs of others, advocating for empathy and compassion in decision-making (Gilligan, 1982). Both approaches recognize that ethical actions are rooted in moral character and relational considerations, essential for fostering ethical workplaces and stakeholder trust.

In today’s complex business environment, ethical decision-making must navigate multiple stakeholders with conflicting claims and values. Standardized formulas may be inadequate; instead, ethical judgments require context-aware analysis that considers the interests of shareholders, employees, customers, communities, and environment (Crane et al., 2019). Ethical theories serve as guides, but human imperfection and cultural differences challenge the universal application of moral standards (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Moreover, modern corporations face dilemmas related to environmental sustainability, labor practices, corporate transparency, and fair competition (Friedman, 1970).

The importance of ethics in business extends beyond compliance; it fosters public trust, enhances reputation, and promotes sustainable growth (Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001). Ethical lapses—such as fraud, corruption, or environmental negligence—damage not only stakeholders but also the long-term viability of organizations. Consequently, fostering an ethical corporate culture involves integrating ethical principles into corporate governance, employee training, and internal policies (Kapstein, 2010). Ethical leadership sets the tone at the top, encouraging employees to act with integrity even in challenging situations.

In summary, both corporations and individuals bear moral responsibilities to uphold societal values and the collective good. Recognizing the diversity of moral perspectives and applying appropriate ethical frameworks help navigate the complexities of modern business ethics. As society evolves, so too must corporate morality, ensuring that economic pursuits do not eclipse social and moral obligations. Ultimately, ethical corporate conduct supports sustainable development, societal trust, and the realization that power and influence should be exercised with accountability and integrity.

References

• Becker, L. C. (2010). Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory. Wadsworth.
• Crane, A., Matten, D., & Spence, L. J. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility: Readings and Cases in a Global Context. Routledge.
• Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
• Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Harvard University Press.
• Herskovits, M. J. (1948). Man and His Works. Alfred A. Knopf.
• Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
• Kincaid, H. (2004). Moral relativism and global ethics. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(2), 191-213.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism.
• Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2019). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? The impact of corporate social responsibility on financial performance. Marketing Science, 20(2), 224-232.