Talk:Business ethics

Section on religious ethics

I put the religious views section in its own section. To my knowledge, most philosophers discussing business ethics do not pay much attention to religious views on business ethics. --LMS

I don't think this is a wholly philosophical topic; there should, perhaps, be a political section, a philosophical section and a religious one. The views and discussion can probably divided like that. -- Sam

This breakdown is a bad idea. By all means introduce things like Islami banking up front, but, this is a practical topic, and should be laid out according to the decisions made. Imagine the audience is a manager, not "most philosophers". Not every ethicist is a philosopher, that is an academic bias to say that, LMS. And, if religious authority, political ideology, or a philosophical stance hold some position on an issue, or consider some position particularly idious, that too can be laid out as part of the decision. Certainly it is part of business not to unnecessarily offend those who may become employees, customers, regulators or partners later on. So if making a decision a certain way will offend a whole group very badly, then, that is important input to the decision. EofT

I agree that business ethicists generally do not take a religious and casuistric view of ethical issues. They tend to look for general principles that can be applied in specific situations rather than depending on a particular religious casuistry. But some business people do depend on their religious casuistry and principles so we should probably mention them. My problem is as the article now stands the religious section says little more than "My religion has an extensive body of writing on the topic". If this is all that can be said, it should be erased. mydogategodshat 18:30, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Until recently, this was a stub article; it doesn't need to be erased. Wikipedia is a work-in-progress, and a great many of our articles are stub articles. Your recent work is an excellent example of why this article should stay here; its very existence is encouraging others to contribute. I wrote about religious forms of business ethics rather than secular forms, merly because I know slightly more about the former rather than the latter. I encourage and welcome new contribution to this article from you and others! RK 18:55, Dec 7, 2003 (UTC)

Well I hope someone can turn the religious section into something more than praise for three religions. mydogategodshat 20:42, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Political section and philosophy of business

As for the political section, that is probably better in a philosophy of business article but we don't have one yet, so here is as good as anywhere. mydogategodshat 18:43, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Volunteer

This article is marked as needing attention, so I volunteer to give it. I just finished a university course in Business Ethics a week ago and received an "A," so I'm ready. However, this will be my first major contribution to Wikipedia. Are there others who want me to add the information in pieces or rewrite it as one complete overhaul? I plan to go more in-depth on the philosophers, cultures (religions), and modern issues. --Psients 18:20, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think it would be best to add info in pieces, one section at a time. RK

Christian business ethics

The purpose of this article is to discuss Business ethics, the field of ethics that examines moral controversies relating to the social responsibilities of business practices, in any economic system. It looks at various business activities and asks "Is this ethically right or wrong?" There are a number of Christian philosophers and economists who have written on the intersection between Christian ethics and real-life practical business situations, and how Christian ethics affects the actual use of money, loans, business, banking, investment, etc. Such work should be discussed here.

I understand that a general statement by someone not involved in business ethics might be "the life of a Christian is informed by more than biblical laws, but also by the loving freedom that the gospel offers.", but that is vague, and is really not connected to the specific topic we are dealing with here. RK

Michael E. Berumen and his book

I had removed the link to Michael E. Berumen and his book as it is self-published and I didn't think it was a generally accepted text. Icut4you then put it back.

One would expect an accepted text on business ethics to be found within university libraries. Yet his book is not in the libraries of a handful of universities I tried: Yale, Harvard, MIT, Northwestern, Pennsylvania, and Chicago. Among these are some of the top business schools in the US, who might be expected to have a book on business ethics. Nor is it in the British Library or the Library of Congress. (The book is in the Stanford catalogue, his alma mater.)

On Amazon, the only place that I can find where the book is reviewed, only one of the reviewers has reviewed any other books. I think a book should be more generally accepted before it is included as a reference.

Opinions? --Blorg 13:51, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The book is at UCLA and UCI. Reviewed in Society for Business Ethics and Stanford GSB's Business magazine. I think it belongs there. He has lectured fairly widely; heard him is SoCal. Several of the religious texts referenced are even more obscure without a publisher. Should they be eliminated, too?Ockham

I myself don't think being well known is a qualification for being a high-quality general reference, which should be the point on this or any other one that is made for others to read. If that were the case, we should put down Business Ethics for Dummies or the like. icut4u

What's the harm? I think it belongs there. Lots of good books are self published nowadays.Surfsup

Seems kind of petty to exclude it from a list. One could argue all day long about the merits of this or that author, including several there who I have never heard of, and I hae been reading this stuff for years. The solution is simple: let people decide for themselves by making their own choice. But at least give them the choice. Gyges 15:34, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Maybe Blog is being just a bit too censorious about what others should read? Chuck.

For heaven's sake, Blorg, the man's testified before the U.S. Congress on business practices and he's a columnist in the Valley Business Journal in LA. I'd say that's more than many others in the field can claim. In the immortal words of Sir Paul, Let it Be. Abloke

It is at the Hoover Institute and California State University. J.

This book is also at Barnes and Noble; Powells, and several other major chains. It is much easier to find than several of the other writings in the references, especially the religious works. Not everything mentioned is in the Library of Congress, either. It takes time to make the indices and aquisitions. I know becaue I worked there. If there were a factual error or misstatement it would be one thing. But a published book on a list of references dealing with the subject at hand strikes me as perfectly legitimate. The complaint boils down to a matter of personal taste if you ask me, and you did. Goodgolly 17:17, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)