- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
The principle of moral projection: A reply to professor Ranken [Book Review]
Journal of Business Ethics 6 (4):329 - 332 (1987)
Abstract
This article responds to two criticisms by Professor Nani Ranken of the Principle of Moral Projection in business ethics. In the process it enlarges upon our understanding of the moral agenda of management and the corporation as a participant in ethical transactions.Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
Freedom and Moral Responsibility: A Reply to Hunter's Reply.P. Gosselin - 1980 - Dialogue 19 (4):572-574.
The concept of corporate responsibility.Kenneth E. Goodpaster - 1983 - Journal of Business Ethics 2 (1):1 - 22.
Causation in torts, crimes, and moral philosophy: A reply to professor Thomson.Paul F. Rothstein - manuscript
Conscientiousness and Work Roles.Nani L. Ranken - 1986 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 5 (1):51-68.
Projection and realism in Hume's philosophy.P. J. E. Kail - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Gilding and Staining and the Significance of Our Moral Sentiments.Jacqueline Taylor - 2010 - Hume Studies 36 (1):89-95.
Morality in Business: disharmony and its consequences.Nani L. Ranken - 1987 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 4 (1):41-48.
A Professor’s Moral Thinking at the Abstract Level Versus The Professor’s Moral Thinking in the Real Life Situation.Mladen Pečujlija, Ilija Ćosić & Velibor Ivanišević - 2011 - Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2):299-320.
Corporations as persons: Objections to Goodpaster's 'principle of moral projection'. [REVIEW]Nani L. Ranken - 1987 - Journal of Business Ethics 6 (8):633 - 637.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
42 (#370,011)
6 months
3 (#992,474)
2009-01-28
Downloads
42 (#370,011)
6 months
3 (#992,474)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Corporate moral agency: Review and implications. [REVIEW]Geoff Moore - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 21 (4):329 - 343.
Foreign Investment and Ethics: How to Contribute to Social Responsibility by Doing Business in Less-Developed Countries. [REVIEW]Roland Bardy, Stephen Drew & Tumenta F. Kennedy - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 106 (3):267-282.
Policing transnational commerce: Global awareness in the margins of morality. [REVIEW]Michael L. Maynard - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 30 (1):17-27.
References found in this work
Why Corporations Are Not Morally Responsible for Anything They Do.Manuel G. Velasquez - 1983 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 2 (3):1-18.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-7c76586df8-5tf24 uwo