<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Wempe, B.H.E.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/14212/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Contractarian Business Ethics: Credentials and Design Criteria (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/13883/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-10-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Contractarian business ethics (CBE) is in great vogue in the present study of corporate morality. Its stated ambition is to provide better practical guidance than the more general ethical theories of business ethics, such as Kantianism, pragmatism, utilitarianism, virtue ethics or the stakeholder model. But how good is this new trend in business ethics theorizing? This article aims to assess CBE's credentials as a social contract argument. For this purpose, it embarks on a comparative analysis of the use of the social contract model in two earlier domains: political authority and social justice. Building on this comparison, it then develops four criteria for any future CBE. To apply the social contract model properly to the domain of corporate morality, it should be: (1) self-disciplined, i.e. not aspire to results beyond what the contract model can realistically establish; (2) argumentative, i.e. provide principles that are demonstrative results of the contractarian method; (3) task-directed, i.e. it should be clear what the social contract thought-experiment is intended to model; and (4) domain-specific, i.e. the contractarian choice situation should be tailored to the defining problems of corporate morality.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Four Design Criteria for Any Future Contractarian Theory of Business Ethics (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/13654/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-09-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>This article assesses the quality of Integrative Social Contracts Theory (ISCT) as a social contract argument. For this purpose, it embarks on a comparative analysis of the use of the social contract model as a theory of political authority and as a theory of social justice. Building on this comparison, it then develops four criteria for any future contractarian theory of business ethics (CBE). To apply the social contract model properly to the domain of business ethics, it should be: (1) self-disciplined, i.e., not aspire results beyond what the contract model can realistically establish; (2) argumentative, i.e., it should seek to provide principles that are demonstrative results of the contractarian method; (3) task-directed, i.e., it should be clear what the social contract thought-experiment is intended to model; and (4) domain-specific, i.e., the contractarian choice situation should be tailored to the defining problems of business ethics.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Rethinking Organizational ethics: a plea for pluralism (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/12033/</link>
      <pubDate>2004-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>This paper challenges a pervasive, if not always explicit assumption of the present state of theorising in business ethics. This is the idea that a workable theory of organizational ethics must provide a unified perspective on its subject matter. In this paper we will sketch the broad outlines of an alternative understanding of business ethics, which focuses on constraints on corporate conduct that cannot reasonably be rejected. These constraints stem from at least three different levels or spheres of social reality, i.e. the preconditions of a well-ordered society, the internal morality of economic activity and the preconditions of autonomous agency.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>