IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v18y2008i04p561-565_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Tide is Turning on the Separation Thesis?: A Response to Commentators

Author

Listed:
  • Sandberg, Joakim

Abstract

In my article “Understanding the Separation Thesis†I noted that most scholars in the business ethics field seemed to have accepted R. Edward Freeman’s argument to the effect that what he calls “the separation thesis†should be rejected. I argue, however, that they seemed to understand this thesis (and its rejection) in quite different ways. This volume contains three responses to my article which, interestingly enough, can be taken to corroborate my original argument. I here make some brief comments on these responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandberg, Joakim, 2008. "The Tide is Turning on the Separation Thesis?: A Response to Commentators," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 561-565, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:18:y:2008:i:04:p:561-565_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X0001006X/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. 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.

    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:04:p:561-565_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.