International Journal of Modern Research in Engineering and Technology (IJMRET) www.ijmret.org Volume 2 Issue 5 ǁ September 2017.
–Corporate Activity, Social Responsibility, and Quining Moral Blameworthiness Dr. Syed Adeel Ahmed&Brendan James Moore, MA College of Continuing Studies, 800 E Commerce Rd., Tulane University, Elmwood, 70123, Louisiana, United States Xavier University of Louisiana, 1 Drexel Drive, New Orleans, 70125, Louisiana, United States
Abstract : Whenever an unfortunate situation arises, we typically blame an agent whom is causally responsible if one is available; however, if a blameworthy agent is unavailable, such as in the case of a natural disaster, labeling the event as a blameless situation seems appropriate. The idea of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is that businesses have extra responsibilities to a benefit society beyond mere adherence to legality and maximization of profits for shareholders. We argue for a group realist stance where corporations are understood as group agents that may be causally responsible for their actions, and still have the kind of agency that warrants social responsibility, while at the same time be morally blameless for their actions. In other words, CSR can still be said of corporations, while assigning moral blameworthiness to group agents for corporate activity would be misplaced. Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Moral Blame, Moral Responsibility, Social Responsibility, Corporate Personhood, Action Theory, Group Agency.
I.
Introduction
blameworthiness to group agents for corporate
Whenever an unfortunate situation arises, we typically blame
an
agent
whom
activity would be misplaced. In expounding our
is causally
position, we will adopt a non-eliminativism position
responsible if one is available; however, if a
regarding corporate intentions, which will allow us to
blameworthy agent is unavailable, such as in the case
deny both the popular eliminativist judgment that
of a natural disaster, labeling the event as a blameless
moral blame of corporate activity reduces to
situation seems appropriate. The idea of Corporate
individuals acting in their roles within a company and
Social Responsibility (CSR) is that businesses have
deny that moral blame can be ascribed to the group.
extra responsibilities to a benefit society beyond mere
First, we will define moral blameworthiness and
adherence to legality and maximization of profits for
its relation to an individual‟s ability to intend and
shareholders. Some, such as Milton Friedman, have
choose actions. Then, we will describe both
argued that corporations do not have social
similarities and differences a corporation has with
responsibilities beyond
for
natural persons and how a corporation lacks the
shareholders [1]. Others, such as group eliminativists,
morally relevant features to be considered morally
argue that there is no CSR, because corporations are
blameworthy. Third, we will construct arguments
not complex group moral agents where social
demonstrating why ascribing moral blameworthiness
responsibility can meaningfully attach.
to both group agents and the individuals who
maximizing profits
We argue for a group realist stance where
comprise the group is inappropriate. Finally, we
corporations are understood as group agents that may
expound why sanctions and punishments might still
be causally responsible for their actions, and still
be warranted in cases of undesirable practices
have the kind of agency that warrants social
regardless
responsibility, while at the same time be morally
blameworthiness, and how CSR can still be held by
blameless for their actions. In other words, CSR can
morally
of
an
blameless
assignment agents,
before
of
moral
addressing
still be said of corporations, while assigning moral
w w w. i j mre t . o r g
ISSN: 2456-5628
Page 30