The purpose of the present article is to argue against the minimalist theory of social responsibility (i.e., that the sole responsibility of business is to maximize profit in conformity with law), particularly as it is advanced by Butler D. Shaffer. Against this view, I argue that such a theory does not necessarily support or achieve greater levels of corporate efficiency than does a more demanding theory of social responsibility, and that the argument for the former view is no more valueneutral (...) than for the latter. Finally, I argue that Shaffer fails to show that the more maximal theory demands too much from executives and is too unclear to be applicable to their decision-making. (shrink)

As in the field of economics, the questions of business ethics can be divided into two distinguishable types — micro and macro. Micro-ethical questions arise primarily for subordinates in an organization and concern what should be done when the demands of conscience conflict with perceived occupational requirements. Macro-ethical questions arise principally for superiors and concern the setting of policy for the organization in general. The present article elaborates upon this distinction and advances a line argument for resolving micro-ethical problems when (...) their affinity to macro-ethical issues is noted. (shrink)

The purpose of the article is to give a deontological defense of the reasonableness standard of corporate disclosure presently mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission of the U.S. government. The first part of the article distinguishes the reasonableness standard from the older standard of materiality. The second part presents three deontological arguments, inspired by the work of Ross and Kant, for the prima facie compellingness of the new standard.