Oxymoron: Taking Business Ethics Denial Seriously

Abstract

Business ethics denial refers to one of two claims about moral motivation in a business context: that there is no need for it, or that it is impossible. Neither of these radical claims is endorsed by serious theorists in the academic fields that study business ethics. Nevertheless, public commentators, as well as university students, often make claims that seem to imply that they subscribe to some form of business ethics denial. This paper fills a gap by making explicit both the various forms that business ethics denial can take, and the reasons why such views are ultimately implausible. The paper argues that this type of serious engagement with business ethics denial should be an important part of the job description for teachers of business ethics.

The Moral Vocabulary Approach

“…In the first class, students will have explored some challenges to the overall project of applied or professional ethics, e.g. some forms of relativism or subjectivism or, in the case of business ethics, the notion that business ethics is an oxymoron (von Kriegstein 2019;2022). By the end of that class, most students are ready to accept (a) that (at least some) ethical questions are not a mere matter of taste or preference, (b) that some, but not all, of our ethical disagreements are ultimately grounded in disagreements about non-normative issues, and (c) that those ethical xi disagreements that are not grounded in non-normative disagreements cannot be resolved via the scientific method.…”

Spoof, Bluff, Go For It: A Defence of Spoofing

“…Part of the power of the poker bluffing business analogy made famous by Carr's Harvard Business Review article (Carr, 1968) derives from the fact that poker would lack much of its purpose or strategy if bluffing were not permissible (Cooper et al, 2016, p. 2). Since Carr, there has been significant critique of the business as poker analogy (Solomon, 1992;Varelius, 2006;Radoilska, 2008;von Kriegstein, 2019;Sinnicks, 2021a). In particular, Koehn points out that the strength of arguments from analogy can only be as strong as the analogic relationship itself (Koehn, 1997).…”

Excusing Corporate Wrongdoing and the State of Nature

“…Conduct in business cannot be separated out and treated as not beholden to moral norms (Harris & Freeman, 2008;cf. Sandberg, 2008;von Kriegstein, 2019). Instead, the disagreement within business ethics often comes from how far these obligations extend.…”