When confronted with an ethical dilemma, most of us like to think we would stand up for our principles. But we are not as ethical as we think we are. In Blind Spots, leading business ethicists Max Bazerman and Ann Tenbrunsel examine the ways we overestimate our ability to do what is right and how we act unethically without meaning to. From the collapse of Enron and corruption in the tobacco industry, to sales of the defective Ford Pinto, the downfall (...) of Bernard Madoff, and the Challenger space shuttle disaster, the authors investigate the nature of ethical failures in the business world and beyond, and illustrate how we can become more ethical, bridging the gap between who we are and who we want to be. Explaining why traditional approaches to ethics don't work, the book considers how blind spots like ethical fading--the removal of ethics from the decision--making process--have led to tragedies and scandals such as the Challenger space shuttle disaster, steroid use in Major League Baseball, the crash in the financial markets, and the energy crisis. The authors demonstrate how ethical standards shift, how we neglect to notice and act on the unethical behavior of others, and how compliance initiatives can actually promote unethical behavior. They argue that scandals will continue to emerge unless such approaches take into account the psychology of individuals faced with ethical dilemmas. Distinguishing our "should self" from our "want self", the authors point out ethical sinkholes that create questionable actions. Suggesting innovative individual and group tactics for improving human judgment, Blind Spots shows us how to secure a place for ethics in our workplaces, institutions, and daily lives. (shrink)

It is a standard feature of the BSA and its variants that systematizations of the world competing to be the best must be expressed in the same language. This paper argues that such single language privileging is problematic because it enhances the objection that the BSA is insufficiently objective, and it breaks the parallel between the BSA and scientific practice by not letting laws and basic kinds be identified/discovered together. A solution to these problems and the ones that prompt single (...) language privileging is proposed in the form of privileging the best system competition. (shrink)

In his famous work on the stranger, Alfred Schutz focuses on the interpretative discrepancies between in-groups and out-groups from the per­spective of a stranger approaching a new group. In doing so, Schutz emphasizes that strangers can overcome their strangeness within a social group by adapting to the prevalent cultural patterns. Shifting the perspective from the stranger to the in-group this essay aims to argue that the experience of the Other’s strangeness due to a discrepancy of interpretative schemes is only one (...) dimension of how the stranger is perceived in everyday life. A second dimension can be derived from Schutz’ work on appresentation. This essay will follow four analytical steps. First, this essay summarizes the Schutzian approach on perceiving the Other as a taken-for-granted part of everyday life within an assumed intersubjective understanding based on an assumed reciprocity of perspectives. Referring to Eberle’s description of an irreciprocity of perspectives, the second section analyzes the Schutzian stranger based on an intersubjective understanding. The third section then focuses on the appresentational pro­cesses of perceiving the stranger in everyday life. By using Goffman’s distinction between virtual and actual social identity, the interplay of categorizing and experiencing the Other in everyday life can be described. Finally, considering the question of how it comes that people can find themselves strangers in their own society, this paper closes by merging the argumentation with a description of the Schutzian perspective on the processes of stigmatization. (shrink)

Chaque science comprend des jugements ayant trait à Fa venir, non seulement par la formation de „types abstraits“ et de lois (ce qu’on a appelé la „prévision“), mais par des „prédictions“ concrètes, impliquées dans chaque loi scientifique. Les jugements hypothétiques et catégoriques (prévisions et prédictions) exercent, dans le développement des sciences, une influence mutuelle les uns sur les autres. — A l’encontre de la conception traditionnelle, H. est d’avis que la prévision scientifique est facilitée si elle porte plutôt sur des (...) objets pour lesquels la volonté joue un rôle que si elle porte sur la nature hors de l’homme. La prédiction sociologique sera d’autant plus exacte que les événements historiques perdront le caractère de faits provenant d’un mécanisme aveugle et seront en réalité l’oeuvre de la liberté de l’homme.Every science utilizes judgments which embody prediction of the future : this is so, not only in the construction of „abstract types“ and laws (prévision) but also of concrete predictions (prédiction) which are implicated in such laws. Hypothetical and categorical judgments mutually influence each other in the progress of science. H. argues in opposition to the traditional conception, that scientific prediction is less difficult and more reliable in such fields where human freedom plays a role, than in nature external to man. Sociological prediction, will thus become more perfect the more readily social events lose their blind and mechanistic character, and the more they become the works of a rational condition of free man. (shrink)

If Haecker's book on History and the Attitude of the Christian be considered as an index, there seems to be a strong humanistic current in present day Catholicism. Haecker develops in his book the Christian belief that history manifests the will of God, and that all wars, upheavals and revolutions really occur for the salvation of the soul of the individual. He opposes the modern trend to deify nation and race, and presents the elevation of man from his fall, and (...) his return to God, as the eternal goal of all that ever happens. Because Haecker insists upon the intrinsic value of each single man, because he refuses to accept the ruling totalitarian ideology of the day, even the non-Catholic can go a long way with him in his humanism.Horkheimer, however, demonstrates that the connection between this kind of humanism and Catholicism is a very loose one. The deep understanding of human misery that is evident in Haecker's pages fits other convictions and persuasions just as well as it does a Catholic philosophy. Haecker's contention that to reject a sense and a meaning transcending the temporal world is to drive man to despair, does not invalidate the rejection of a supernatural significance. Despair is no argument against truth. Grief over the present is well justified ; nevertheless an attitude is possible which permits of a positive cooperation in the historical tasks of the day.Le livre de Haecker sur la philosophie chrétienne de l'histoire donne à Horkheimer l'occasion de présenter quelques remarques de principe au sujet du courant humaniste dans le catholicisme contemporain. Haecker développe Vidée chrétienne que l'histoire est soumise à la volonté de Dieu, et que dans toutes les guerres, les crises et les révolutions, c'est en vérité le salut de l'âme individuelle qui est en jeu. Il s'oppose à la divinisation moderne du peuple et de la race, et montre dans le relèvement de l'homme après la chute et dans son retour à Dieu le but éternel du devenir. Dans cette affirmation de la valeur de chaque personne, dans la négation des idéologies totalitaires régnantes, s’exprime un humanisme que le philosophe non-catholique peut reconnaître et approuver.Cependant, Horkheimer indique que le lien de cet humanisme et du catholicisme est — logiquement — très lâche. La compréhension de la misère humaine, qui apparaît dans le livre de Haecker, ne peut nullement confirmer la vision catholique du monde, elle s'adapte aussi bien à d'autres convictions. Certes, on comprend l'affirmation de Haecker que le refus de la transcendance doit mener l'homme au désespoir ; mais la négation d'une signification supranaturelle n'est pas ainsi réfutée : le désespoir n'est pas un argument contre la vérité. La tristesse légitime que nous inspire le présent, appelle, bien loin de l'exclure, la décision de travailler aux tâches que l'histoire nous assigne. (shrink)

This title from the De Gruyter Book Archive has been digitized in order to make it available for academic research. It was originally published under National Socialism and has to be viewed in this historical context. Learn more. >.

Moral problems often prompt emotional responses that invoke intuitive judgments of right and wrong. While emotions inform judgment across many domains, they can also lead to ethical failures that could be avoided by using a more deliberative, analytical decision-making process. In this article, we describe joint evaluation as an effective tool to help decision makers manage their emotional assessments of morality.

Negotiation and decision-making expert Max Bazerman discusses how we can make more ethical choices by reframing our intentions toward being better rather than being perfect.

There have been spectacular villains in business that have received a great deal of attention in recent years, such as Elizabeth Holmes, Adam Neumann, and the Sackler family. All of them were supported to varying extents by others who were integral to their rise and fall, what business psychologist Max Bazerman calls "a cast of complicitors." Did those others know the extent they were contributing to unethical behaviour? How responsible were they for such behavior? In Profiles in Complicity, Bazerman explores (...) the role that others play in supporting unethical behavior in workplaces and organizations, through a host of examples such as those above, and offers a guide for readers to examine the roles they themselves may have in enabling wrongdoing and the responsibility we all have to keep harm-doers from destroying our organizations and our society. The book synthesizes scholarship from a range of disciplines, including psychology, philosophy, economics, and sociology, and provides useful approaches to thinking about all levels of complicity. Bazerman starts with a set of chapters exploring various profiles on differnet types of complicity, ranging from those who are knowing, true partners of wrong-doers to those who unknowingly benefit from systemic priviledge, or those who are overly loyal to an organization. Many readers will have witnessed people engaging in behaviors they believed were wrong, behaviors they would never engage in themselves, and then had to discern whether and how to take action. Profiles in Complicity will help readers understand the psychology of complicity, avoid being complicit in wrongdoing, and become better employees, citizens, and human beings in the process. The book will also offer direct guidance for organizations seeking to avoid ethical lapses, beyond simply looking for bad apples. (shrink)