Custom Corporate Social Responsibility Essay Example
Other possibilities come to mind. It may be, for example, that as honest men the students and junior faculty are attempting to find out the truth for themselves rather than ceding the responsibility to “experts” or to government; and it may be that they react with indignation to what they discover. These possibilities Kristol does not reject. They are simply unthinkable, unworthy of consideration. More accurately, these possibilities are inexpressible; the categories in which they are formulated (honesty, indignation) simply do not exist for the tough-minded social scientist.
Are you going to write an essay on corporate social responsibility
The recognition of diversity within the concept or amongst conceptsof moral responsibility has generated new reflection on whether theconditions on being morally responsible are in tension with oneanother (Nagel 1986; G. Strawson 1986, 105–117, 307–317; Honderich1988: vol. 2, ch. 1; Double 1996a: chs. 6–7; Bok 1998: ch. 1;Smilansky 2000: ch. 6); For example, some have argued that while acompatibilist sense of freedom is sufficient for attributability,genuine accountability would require that agents be capable ofexercising libertarian freedom. A rapidly expanding body of empiricaldata on folk intuitions about freedom and responsibility has addedfuel to this debate (Nahmias et. al. 2005 and 2007; Vargas 2006;Nichols & Knobe 2007; Nelkin 2007; Roskies & Nichols 2008; andKnobe & Doris 2010).
Ledger views belong to a broader class of views which regardresponsibility to be a matter of proper attributability. As GaryWatson has highlighted, the central concern in such views is whetherthe agent's action or attitude discloses her evaluative judgments orcommitments (1996). Satisfying some baseline conditions ofresponsibility as attributability would appear to be necessary inorder to be responsible in the sense of accountable. For example, itwould seem unfair to hold someone accountable for an action viareactive attitudes such as resentment or indignation, if the actionwas not properly attributable to the agent--say, because she succumbedto a genuinely coercive psychological compulsion. Yet beingresponsible in the attributability sense is not sufficient for beingresponsible in the accountability sense. As Watson points out, it maymake no sense to hold the agent responsible for the action inquestion, since it may not be the sort of thing for which they areaccountable to us. For example, one may think that in making a careerdecision, an acquaintance failed to give due consideration to whatwould most fully develop and exercise his talents. Though this is nota moral judgment in the narrow sense favored by accountabilitytheorists (that is, it is unconnected to any interpersonal demand, ormutual expectation, of the sort presupposed by the reactive attitudes)it is a case of finding fault in the way an agent has exercised hisjudgment. If responsibility as accountability and attributability cancome apart in this way, then there appear to be at least two distinctconcepts of responsibility.
The Social Responsibility of Business Essay Examples
There is an instructive ambiguity in Aristotle's account ofresponsibility, an ambiguity that has led to competing interpretationsof his view. Aristotle aims to identify the conditions under which itis appropriate to praise or blame an agent, but it is not entirelyclear how to understand the pivotal notion of appropriateness in hisconception of responsibility. There are at least two possibilities: a)praise or blame is appropriate in the sense that the agentdeserves such a response, given his behavior and/or traits ofcharacter; or b) praise or blame is appropriate in the sense that sucha reaction is likely to bring about a desired consequence, namely animprovement in the agent's behavior and/or character. These twopossibilities may be characterized in terms of two competinginterpretations of the concept of moral responsibility: 1) themerit-based view, according to which praise or blamewould be an appropriate reaction toward the candidate if and only ifshe merits—in the sense of ‘deserves’—sucha reaction; vs. 2) the consequentialist view, according towhich praise or blame would be appropriate if and only if a reactionof this sort would likely lead to a desired change in the agent and/orher behavior.
The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase ..
Strawson's concept of moral responsibility yields a compatibilistaccount of being responsible but one that departs significantly fromearlier such accounts in two respects. First, Strawson's is acompatibilist view by default only. That is, on Strawson's view, theproblem of determinism and freedom/responsibility is not so muchresolved by showing that the objective conditions on beingresponsible are consistent with one's being determined but ratherdissolved by showing that the practice of holding peopleresponsible relies on no such conditions and therefore needs noexternal justification in the face of determinism. Second, Strawson'sis a merit-based form of compatibilism. That is, unlike most formerconsequentialist forms of compatibilism, it helps to explain why wefeel that some agents deserve our censure or merit our praise. They doso because they have violated, met, or exceeded our demand for areasonable degree of good will.