IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlelg/v2012y2012i1id324p1-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Společné dobro - realita, nebo fikce?

Author

Listed:
  • Marek Loužek

Abstract

In spite of the widespread use of the term "the common good", there was a remarkable dissension among the ancient and medieval thinkers about its specific content. Sometimes, the common good was regarded as the good of the individuals involved or as the good of the community as a whole. As soon as political philosophy started to be based on more individualist foundations, the common good, as a concept, retreated into the shadow. The common good should have two properties: it is good and, moreover, it is common. However, good is not an inner quality per se but it is the subjective judgement of man. It depends on our judgement whether we consider an action or a situation to be good or bad. The basic characteristic of every judgement is its subjectivity. Subjectivity in the concept of good is the main problem of the common good. The common good can only be common, if it is a goal, which is shared by all the reasonable players inside the political community. If the common good were to be the goal regulating political considerations and the source of loyalty to the community, it would have to be shared by everyone. However, that is extremely difficult to guarantee in practice. There is no neutral voting mechanism that would decide on what the common good is. The common good is too vague a concept to be useful in political theory and in practical politics. The public interest must be judged particularly and locally, always with regard to the specific times and places. That which forms a general interest or "the common good" does not stem from philosophical theory but from practice. Although the common good can be useful in political as well as church rhetoric, it has little or no scientific meaning.

Suggested Citation

  • Marek Loužek, 2012. "Společné dobro - realita, nebo fikce?," E-LOGOS, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2012(1), pages 1-22.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlelg:v:2012:y:2012:i:1:id:324:p:1-22
    DOI: 10.18267/j.e-logos.324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.324.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://elogos.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.e-logos.324.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.e-logos.324?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Thomas W., 1999. "Aristotle on the Conditions for and Limits of the Common Good," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 625-636, September.
    2. J. Brian Benestad, 1986. "Henry George and the Catholic Views of Morality and the Common Good, II," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(1), pages 115-123, January.
    3. Joseph Carcello, 2009. "Governance and the Common Good," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 11-18, May.
    4. Evensky,Jerry, 2007. "Adam Smith's Moral Philosophy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521703864.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frémeaux, Sandrine & Puyou, François-Régis & Michelson, Grant, 2020. "Beyond accountants as technocrats: A common good perspective," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 67.
    2. Ozlem Arikan & Juliane Reinecke & Crawford Spence & Kevin Morrell, 2017. "Signposts or Weathervanes? The Curious Case of Corporate Social Responsibility and Conflict Minerals," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 469-484, December.
    3. Grigoriadis, Theocharis, 2018. "Aristotle vs. Plato: The distributive origins of the Cold War," Discussion Papers 2018/9, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    4. Surendra Arjoon & Alvaro Turriago-Hoyos & Ulf Thoene, 2018. "Virtuousness and the Common Good as a Conceptual Framework for Harmonizing the Goals of the Individual, Organizations, and the Economy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 143-163, January.
    5. Alejo Sison & Joan Fontrodona, 2011. "The Common Good of Business: Addressing a Challenge Posed by «Caritas in Veritate»," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(1), pages 99-107, March.
    6. Gary Peters & Andrea Romi, 2014. "Does the Voluntary Adoption of Corporate Governance Mechanisms Improve Environmental Risk Disclosures? Evidence from Greenhouse Gas Emission Accounting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(4), pages 637-666, December.
    7. Le Luo & Qingliang Tang, 2021. "Corporate governance and carbon performance: role of carbon strategy and awareness of climate risk," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(2), pages 2891-2934, June.
    8. DeBoskey, D.G. & Luo, Yan & Wang, Jeff J., 2018. "Do specialized board committees impact the transparency of corporate political disclosure? Evidence from S&P 500 companies," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 8-19.
    9. Joan Fontrodona & Joan Enric Ricart & Pascual Berrone, 2018. "Ethical Challenges in Strategic Management: The 19th IESE International Symposium on Ethics, Business and Society," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(4), pages 887-898, November.
    10. Carla Millar & Chong Choi, 2009. "Networks, Social Norms and Knowledge Sub-Networks," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 565-574, December.
    11. Cristina Bota-Avram & Roumen Vesselinov & Paula Ramona Răchişan & Adrian Groşanu, 2022. "Determinant factors on ethical behavior of firms: evidence from a cross-country survey," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(8), pages 1-25, August.
    12. Krishnamurti, Chandrasekhar & Velayutham, Eswaran, 2018. "The influence of board committee structures on voluntary disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions: Australian evidence," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 65-81.
    13. Mullineux, Andy, 2014. "Banking for the public good," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 87-94.
    14. Yasemin Zengin Karaibrahimoglu & Burcu Guneri Cangarli, 2016. "Do Auditing and Reporting Standards Affect Firms’ Ethical Behaviours? The Moderating Role of National Culture," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 55-75, November.
    15. Kevin Morrell & Ian Clark, 2010. "Private Equity and the Public Good," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(2), pages 249-263, October.

    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:prg:jnlelg:v:2012:y:2012:i:1:id:324:p:1-22. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.html .

    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.