Armchair versus Armchair: Let's not Try to Guess the Social Value of Corporate Objectives

Business Ethics Journal Review 4 (3):14-20 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Jones and Felps claim that social welfare would be enhanced, if corporate managers adopted the goal of directly improving the happiness of their stakeholders instead of profit maximization. I argue that their argument doesn’t establish this. They show that a utilitarian case for profit orientation cannot be made from the armchair. But neither can the case for Jones and Felps’ preferred alternative. And their defense of it relies on empirically unsubstantiated assumptions.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-16

Downloads
192 (#132,724)

6 months
59 (#97,891)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Hasko von Kriegstein
Toronto Metropolitan University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations.Adam Smith - 1976 - Oxford University Press. Edited by R. H. Campbell, A. S. Skinner & W. B. Todd.
The province of jurisprudence determined.John Austin (ed.) - 1954 - Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, Etc.John Austin - 1956 - Philosophy 31 (117):165-166.

View all 6 references / Add more references