IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v18y2008i02p253-265_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciliation in Business Ethics: Some Advice from Aristotle

Author

Listed:
  • Hartman, Edwin M.

Abstract

It may be nearly impossible to use standard principles to make a decision about a complex ethical case. The best decision, say virtue ethicists in the Aristotelian tradition, is often one that is made by a person of good character who knows the salient facts of the case and can frame the situation appropriately. In this respect ethical decisions and strategic decisions are similar. Rationality plays a role in good ethical decision-making, but virtue ethicists emphasize the importance of intuitions and emotions as well.Virtue ethics suggests a reconciliation of the factual and the normative. Virtues may explain as well as justify actions. The same is true of other psychological states and events. That psychological terms have normative implications does not render them useless in explanation. As Aristotle does not distinguish cleanly between the normative and empirical, so many moral philosophers today reject the is-ought dichotomy. They are prepared to learn from economists, psychologists, and other empirical scientists who offer information about the nature of the good life and of values. Social psychologists who study community or corporate culture suggest a close relationship between organizational and ethical features, much as Aristotle saw a close relationship between politics and ethics. We should infer from all this that in business ethics there is good reason for philosophers and organization scholars to work closely together.

Suggested Citation

  • Hartman, Edwin M., 2008. "Reconciliation in Business Ethics: Some Advice from Aristotle," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 253-265, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:18:y:2008:i:02:p:253-265_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00010964/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. Michael S. McLeod & G. Tyge Payne & Robert E. Evert, 2016. "Organizational Ethics Research: A Systematic Review of Methods and Analytical Techniques," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 429-443, March.
    2. Marina Balboa & Germán López-Espinosa & Antonio Rubia, 2012. "Non-linear Dynamics in Discretionary Accruals: An Analysis of Bank Loan-Loss Provisions," Faculty Working Papers 07/12, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
    3. Roberta Sferrazzo & Renato Ruffini, 2021. "Are Liberated Companies a Concrete Application of Sen’s Capability Approach?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(2), pages 329-342, May.
    4. Andrew Abela & Ryan Shea, 2015. "Avoiding the Separation Thesis While Maintaining a Positive/Normative Distinction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 31-41, September.
    5. Sandrine Frémeaux, 2020. "A Common Good Perspective on Diversity," Post-Print hal-03232779, HAL.
    6. Edward O’Boyle & Luca Sandonà, 2014. "Teaching Business Ethics Through Popular Feature Films: An Experiential Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(3), pages 329-340, May.
    7. Majid Ghorbani & Yuan Liao & Sinan Çayköylü & Masud Chand, 2013. "Guilt, Shame, and Reparative Behavior: The Effect of Psychological Proximity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 311-323, May.
    8. Giovanna Centorrino, 2020. "Covid-19 and the Search for the Common Good: The Case of Parmon Spa (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.
    9. Harris, Jared D. & Sapienza, Harry J. & Bowie, Norman E., 2009. "Ethics and entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 407-418, September.
    10. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.
    11. Mar Pérezts & Jean-Philippe Bouilloud & Vincent Gaulejac, 2011. "Serving Two Masters: The Contradictory Organization as an Ethical Challenge for Managerial Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 33-44, March.
    12. Alma Acevedo, 2012. "Personalist Business Ethics and Humanistic Management: Insights from Jacques Maritain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 197-219, January.
    13. Dirk Vriens & Jan Achterbergh & Liesbeth Gulpers, 2018. "Virtuous Structures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 671-690, July.
    14. Domènec Melé, 2009. "Integrating Personalism into Virtue-Based Business Ethics: The Personalist and the Common Good Principles," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 227-244, August.
    15. Miguel Alzola, 2011. "The Reconciliation Project: Separation and Integration in Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(1), pages 19-36, March.
    16. Andrew West, 2018. "After Virtue and Accounting Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 21-36, March.
    17. Sandrine Frémeaux & Anouk Grevin & Roberta Sferrazzo, 2023. "Developing a Culture of Solidarity Through a Three-Step Virtuous Process: Lessons from Common Good-Oriented Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 89-105, November.

    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:18:y:2008:i:02:p:253-265_01. 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.