IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v15y2005i01p113-135_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In Defense of a Self-Disciplined, Domain-Specific Social Contract Theory of Business Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Wempe, Ben

Abstract

This article sets out two central theses. Both theses primarily involve a fundamental criticism of current contractarian business ethics (CBE), but if these can be sustained, they also constitute two boundary conditions for any future contractarian theory of business ethics. The first, which I label the self-discipline thesis, claims that current CBE would gain considerably in focus if more attention were paid to the logic of the social contract argument. By this I mean the aims set by the theorist and method of reasoning by which normative conclusions are drawn in the contract model. The second, to which I refer as the domain-specificity thesis, argues that current CBE needs to be better adapted to its field of application and the specific goals which it aims to establish. I will substantiate these two theses on the basis of a comparative analysis of CBE with two earlier families of social contract theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Wempe, Ben, 2005. "In Defense of a Self-Disciplined, Domain-Specific Social Contract Theory of Business Ethics," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 113-135, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:15:y:2005:i:01:p:113-135_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00007375/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giacomo Degli Antoni & Marco Faillo & Lorenzo Sacconi & Pedro Francés-Gomez, 2016. "Distributive Justice with Production and the Social Contract. An Experimental study," Econometica Working Papers wp60, Econometica.
    2. Kirsten Martin, 2016. "Understanding Privacy Online: Development of a Social Contract Approach to Privacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 551-569, September.
    3. David Amani & Ismail Juma Ismail, 2022. "Investigating the predicting role of COVID-19 preventive measures on building brand legitimacy in the hospitality industry in Tanzania: mediation effect of perceived brand ethicality," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Kirsten Martin, 2012. "Diminished or Just Different? A Factorial Vignette Study of Privacy as a Social Contract," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(4), pages 519-539, December.
    5. J. Oosterhout & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Extant Social Contracts in Global Business Regulation: Outline of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 729-740, October.
    6. Federico Ast, 2019. "The Deliberative Test, a New Procedural Method for Ethical Decision Making in Integrative Social Contracts Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 207-221, March.
    7. Pedro FrancŽs-G—mez & Lorenzo Sacconi & Marco Faillo, 2012. "Behavioral Business Ethics as a Method for Normative Business Ethics," Econometica Working Papers wp42, Econometica.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:15:y:2005:i:01:p:113-135_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.