One field in ethics that has been developed during recent decades is virtue ethics, represented most importantly by Alasdair MacIntyre's work After Virtue. Virtue ethics is not opposed to principle-based ethics, but rather complements its task and develops it more fully. In the field of US bioethics, this option has proved to be even more fruitful, especially in the work of Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma. Virtue ethics is also being reappraised in relation to the ethics of organisations and business. (...) It is considered that the best way of running a company does not depend solely on a group of ethical principles or agreed criteria, but on the effective exercise of certain qualities of character. Indeed, minimal ethics do not guarantee the excellence of organisations, or even their correct development. They guarantee certain standards of coexistence, but this is not sufficient to carry forward a collective enterprise in a creative way. It is impossible to achieve the aims of an organisation without ambition, magnanimity, humility, prudence, responsibility and courage. This group of intangible elements are virtues. This article explores the process of decision-making in the light of Aristotelian ethics, in particular his work _Nicomachean Ethics_. Making decisions is a common task on the managerial agenda. The decisions of a manager affect individuals, the future of the organisation and, of course, they have consequences for the organisation and its surroundings. Aristotle dedicates Book III of the work in question to studying the art of deliberation and examining which virtues must be taken into account when reaching the best decision. Aristotle tells us that we deliberate about things that are within our power and can be done. There can be no deliberation upon exact and sufficient knowledge; however, we deliberate upon the things that are brought about by our own efforts, although not always in the same way. Leading an organisation is not a mechanical matter, but rather a process that requires creativity and responsibility. There are many different ways of doing it. Following the Aristotelian doctrine, this article aims to examine the elements that must be taken into consideration for correct decisions to be made. The following virtues play a fundamental role in this process: prudence, fortitude, justice and temperance, referred to below as called cardinal virtues. (shrink)

Antonio Argandoña, Norbert Bilbeny, Victòria Camps, Miquel Calsina, Àngel Castiñeira, Cristian Palazzi, Ferran Requejo, Raimon Ribera, Begoña Román, Ferran Sàez, Miquel Seguró, Francesc Torralba, Josep Maria Vallès, Rosamund Thomas Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics 2012 3(3):9-16.

Coherence is today a source of moral authority. Being coherent frees us from external influences and gives us the capacity to decide for ourselves, but also places us in a privileged position with regard to others. We will turn our attention now to coherence as a foundation of authority in organisations. And to do that, organisations must be divided into different levels and different dimensions. Coherence will only be possible when the worker is capable of weighing up the distance between (...) the organisation's specific vision and the operational processes that effectively take place within it. All companies, as a sum of possibilities, respond to the intention of those who govern them insofar as their assets permit it, and their ultimate value resides therein; the possibility of being recognised for their way of being, their corporate ethos. (shrink)

One field in ethics that has been developed during recent decades is virtue ethics, represented most importantly by Alasdair MacIntyre's work After Virtue. Virtue ethics is not opposed to principle-based ethics, but rather complements its task and develops it more fully. In the field of US bioethics, this option has proved to be even more fruitful, especially in the work of Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma. Virtue ethics is also being reappraised in relation to the ethics of organisations and business. (...) It is considered that the best way of running a company does not depend solely on a group of ethical principles or agreed criteria, but on the effective exercise of certain qualities of character. Indeed, minimal ethics do not guarantee the excellence of organisations, or even their correct development. They guarantee certain standards of coexistence, but this is not sufficient to carry forward a collective enterprise in a creative way. It is impossible to achieve the aims of an organisation without ambition, magnanimity, humility, prudence, responsibility and courage. This group of intangible elements are virtues. This article explores the process of decision-making in the light of Aristotelian ethics, in particular his work Nicomachean Ethics. Making decisions is a common task on the managerial agenda. The decisions of a manager affect individuals, the future of the organisation and, of course, they have consequences for the organisation and its surroundings. Aristotle dedicates Book III of the work in question to studying the art of deliberation and examining which virtues must be taken into account when reaching the best decision. Aristotle tells us that we deliberate about things that are within our power and can be done. There can be no deliberation upon exact and sufficient knowledge; however, we deliberate upon the things that are brought about by our own efforts, although not always in the same way. Leading an organisation is not a mechanical matter, but rather a process that requires creativity and responsibility. There are many different ways of doing it. Following the Aristotelian doctrine, this article aims to examine the elements that must be taken into consideration for correct decisions to be made. The following virtues play a fundamental role in this process: prudence, fortitude, justice and temperance, referred to below as called cardinal virtues. (shrink)

En el presente artículo se discute críticamente el alcance axiológico de la "hermenéutica analógica" de Mauricio Beuchot. Para ello se expone en primer lugar el fundamento ontológico sobre el que se sustenta su propuesta hermenéutica, para luego proceder a una clarificación de su traslación al campo axiológico y de sus problemas. Una vez ponderado y discutido críticamente su planteamiento, en un tercer momento se deducen los principios aporéticos que se vislumbran en los intentos de resolución analógica de los dilemas éticos. (...) El telón de fondo de toda la problemática no es otro que el de la insoslayable finitud primera que constituye la realidad ontológica humana y su capital influencia en el planteamiento fundamental de la cuestión ética. (shrink)

Coherence is today a source of moral authority. Being coherent frees us from external influences and gives us the capacity to decide for ourselves, but also places us in a privileged position with regard to others. We will turn our attention now to coherence as a foundation of authority in organisations. And to do that, organisations must be divided into different levels and different dimensions. Coherence will only be possible when the worker is capable of weighing up the distance between (...) the organisation's specific vision and the operational processes that effectively take place within it. All companies, as a sum of possibilities, respond to the intention of those who govern them insofar as their assets permit it, and their ultimate value resides therein; the possibility of being recognised for their way of being, their corporate ethos. (shrink)