Logic and Examples

One of the many reasons that philosophers rather than MBAs or other professionals should teach the foundational course in Business Ethics is that one needs a firm foundation in logic and the techniques of argumentation in order to substantially improve student problem-solving skills. Next chance you get, kindly inform your friendly local college administrator (as opposed to any random money-grubbing fool who has finally reached his level of incompetence) of this fact. I jest...sort of.

While cleaning out my files, I was reminded of this truism about teaching Business Ethics by one of my own examples. Here is a worksheet and video combination I worked out for a now defunct online social network group.





I only wish I had provided more examples of these errors in this video. Perhaps in some future online presentation.

Student Research - Types of Capitalism

I have occasion to revisit my initial post on 5 types of capitalism (http://teachingbe.blogspot.com/2008/07/5-types-of-capitalism.html).

I received two responses to this post:

1. "In describing China's up-and-coming form of Capitalism and the several unjust practices it brings with it, the writer described so much of the "American Stile".

Response: This is a kind of "moral equivalency" argument that the Left has been using for decades. On the other hand, I deserve some criticism for pouncing on China, simply describing what I think are its faults and not rounding out my concept. Essentially, I was pointing to two kinds of "fifth" forms of capitalism.

First, the current "organizational narcissism" Zuboff mentions that may give rise to a "fifth" form, the details of which are unclear (to me at least).

Second, something akin to National Socialism (Nazism, in the strict economic sense) but fueled with political and military power (Nazism in the cultural/political sense) may end up being the "fifth" form of "capitalism." (Although in my view such a state of affairs hardly deserves to be called "capitalism.")

To some limited extent, we see this developing in the U.S. in the form of hyper-welfare state capitalism combined with moves to nationalize the insurance industry. We do not see, as my critic would have it, any lack of individual liberties or new waves of racism, or any kind of imperialism developing in the U.S. . Citizens in the U.S. are clearly opposed to severe abridgements of liberty, racism, and imperialism. No amount of invective from the Left will change this basic fact of American life.

In China, on the other hand, we see forced labor camps, population control, conscription of under-age athletes, limits on free speech, and a host of other violations of human rights, not to mention one-party rule.

My main point was that IMHO democracy and capitalism need to inextricably linked, just as Kant's notion of humanity needs to be linked to practical utilities and human creativity. I don't look forward to a day when non-democratic nations are hailed as models of capitalism.

2. "Thanks. this would be very helpful in my report tomorrow about capitalism and its type. Could you give me links that would could help me in my topic tomorrow?..thanks!"

Sorry, I don't have anything specific to recommend aside from Shaw and Barry's treatment of the four forms of capitalism in their book Moral Issues in Business. In any case, doing your own research first is always best! Never accept the what you see on this blog or any other Internet resource at face value!

That said, I see that the wikipedia entry on "mercantilism" appears to be quite good and includes the reasons for Smith's repudiation of it. People who argue for protectionism (tariffs on foreign goods) today usually show no understanding of this historical dialogue.

The wikipedia entry under "welfare capitalism" shows the effect of transfer payments, but one has to be careful with such "data." What is the effect morally and psychologically of transfer payments? This moral/psychological effect is one of the concerns of a global business ethics -- an ethics yet to be developed.

Copyright Infingement: Deep Framing

Below is a copy of an email I recently sent to a new course creator for Mindtools.net. It is a useful reminder and a good discussion starter for students. Most instructors will easily be able to find examples of infringement in courses at their schools, since disregard for deep framing is common.

Just a reminder to course builders.

The word is "deep framing". It means that when you construct an online course, you put in a page from ANY OTHER WEBSITE MATERIAL ON THE INTERNET OF ANY KIND into your own course by copying it or by causing the Learning Management System to display it as if the page were part of the course itself.

DEEP FRAMING is copyright infringement. By default, ALL materials on the Internet are copyrighted. Very few items are not under copyright, including emails.

Instead of DEEP FRAMING, simply write something like "read paragraphs 2 and 3 on the following web page: http://xyzqrs.com".

You may forward this message to anyone! (It IS copyrighted by me, Anthony Birch (tbirch@gis.net), but with this message you are free to use it, copy it, and forward it.)

Reputed Values vs. Real Values

I have been very remiss in posting to this blog due to my involvement with the Introduction to Philosophy book for Florida Community College at Jacksonville, due to be published in the Spring of 2010.

A topic came up two days ago: what are the real vs. the reputed values of the majority of people? I suggested that the three values I identified in my WizIQ presentation (truthfulness, humility, and charity, based on Huston Smith's appraisal of world religions) reside at the core of human aspirations and probably practice. My interlocutor suggested otherwise. People may want to live according to such virtues, but ever since Reagan (approximately), our culture has shifted to the Ayn Rand individualist/egoist type. As a result, people in the real world of business people rarely act according to religiously-inspired values. Laissez-faire values rule.

I thought of my Global Business Ethics Quiz (http://www.mindtools.net/cgi-bin/quiztest.cgi?globalethicsquiz). I wondered how it was doing, since it had been at least one year since I looked at its data. I imagined all sorts of inspiring input!

Much to my chagrin, I found the database corrupted with links to ads!

Well, the quiz was quite biased in that it makes very leading suggestions as to virtues in any case. Also, my friend has a point: it is the way in which people actually act that matters. What can we discern from the behavior of businesses?

Nevertheless, I reviewed what data there were regarding my quiz. Utilitarians are in the distinct minority! Most people adhere to Kantian/Christian values in the scenario provided (which is not much of a business scenario). I note that integrity, faith, and truthfulness lead the list of characteristics needed in business, with only one entry for self-interest out of some 50 responses.

For those of you teaching business ethics, I suggest you ask (again, as I have urged many times in this blog) for your students to do self-appraisals, but to also couple this with appraisals of ACTUAL business practices. Ask them what suggestions they have for bringing any disparities in these realms together.

Anyone who wants a copy of the data, just contact me.

Deconstructionism

Chris Hedges, in Empire of Illusion, writes about philosophical forces at work in higher education which undermine the Good: “English professors, who see novels divorced from society, speak in the obscure vocabulary of deconstructionism, disempowering and emasculating the very works they study. Writers from Euripides to Russell Banks have used literature as both a mirror and a lens, to reflect back to us, and focus on, our hypocrisy, moral corruption, and injustice. Literature is a tool to enlighten societies about its ills. It was Charles Dickens who directed the attention of the middle-class readers to slums and workhouses of London. It was Honoré de Balzac who through the volumes of his Human Comedy, ripped open the callous heart of France. It was Sinclair Lewis who took us into the stockyards and shantytowns of Chicago in The Jungle. In the hands of academics, however, who rarely understand or concern themselves with the reality of the world, works of literature are eviscerated and destroyed. They are mined for obscure trivia and irrelevant data. This disconnect between literature and philosophy on the one hand and the real on the other is replicated in most academic disciplines. Economists build elaborate theoretical models yet know little of John Law, have never closely examined the tulip crisis, and do not study the railroad bubbles or the deregulation that led to the Great Depression.” (From Page 97, Empire of Illusion, Chris Hedges.) As students, we have to be on guard that the very essence of what higher education brings to advance the Good (the liberal arts) is deconstructed and rendered inert, at the very least.

Principles as Heuristics

"The more complicated the situation, and the less we really know about it, the more insistent is the orthodox type of moral theory upon the prior existence of some fixed and universal principle or law which is to be directly applied and followed. Ready-made rules available at a moment's notice for settling any kind of moral difficulty and resolving every species of moral doubt have been the chief object of the ambition of moralist."* -- John Dewey

This admonition from John Dewey is something to take to heart in the study of Business Ethics. Dewey recommends that traditional theories be treated as heuristic devices that will stimulate the production of new heuristics for new situations. Inflexible principles are to be avoided. At the same time, there is no reason to suppose that this will mean a decent into chaos. A universal, impersonal, outlook will always be a part of rational solutions.

In our time, as we attempt to develop global perspectives, Dewey's advice could not be more appropriate.

Reference:
Dewey, John (1929). Human Nature and Conduct. Page 220.
*The last 5 words involve some sort of error. Perhaps a missing word? "...of the ambition of THE moralist."

The Problem of Business Ethics -- again

At the beginning of the course it's always a good idea to discuss the limitations of subject matter.


The Acton Institute has an interesting website and an associated blog, which recently posted some insightful comments on business ethics, pointing out the limitations of such courses. I responded to some of the issues raised by that post.


While I think it important to make students aware of ethical objectivism (ethical realism) as a way of understanding the scope of ethical theories, one must also be realistic. Without descending into absolute relativism, it is possible to acknowledge the limitations of theory while defending against overt violations of the principal -- flawed -- theories that have guided the West (utilitarianism, Kant, Rawls, virtue ethics, prima facie duties). The theories we have appear to be, as Hinman has observed, partially true. I think more business ethics courses need to acknowledge this kind of limitation.


What then will be the point of Business Ethics courses? Many may cringe at the thought that one of the main points -- as I believe -- is exposure to theory. It is to show students how to start thinking about problems. Not about solving them permanently -- nor about falling back into relativism.

In addition to this, business ethics should also address the problem I have mentioned at the outset of this blog: the integration of moral values (the work/home "gap" in value systems). To a certain extent, this can be presented objectively, as D'Souza has discussed and I commented upon (the presentation does not start until slide 7).