Very little has been done to find out what corporations have done to build ethical values into their organizations. In this report on a survey of 1984 Fortune 1000 industrial and service companies the Center for Business Ethics reveals some facts regarding codes of ethics, ethics committees, social audits, ethics training programs, boards of directors, and other areas where corporations might institutionalize ethics. Based on the survey, the Center for Business Ethics is convinced that corporations are beginning to take steps (...) to institutionalize ethics, while recognizing that in most cases more specific mechanisms and strategies need to be implemented to make their ethics efforts truly effective. (shrink)

In his What is Business Ethics? Peter Drucker accuses business ethics of singling out business unfairly for special ethical treatment, of subordinating ethical to political concerns, and of being, not ethics at all, but ethical chic. We contend that Drucker's denunciation of business ethics rests upon a fundamental misunderstanding of the field. This article is a response to his charges and an effort to clarify the nature, scope and purpose of business ethics.

A growing body of literature critical of ethics review boards has drawn attention to the processes used to determine the ethical merit of research. Citing criticism on the bureaucratic nature of ethics review processes, this literature provides a useful provocation for (re)considering how the ethics review might be enacted. Much of this criticism focuses on how ethics review boards _deliberate,_ with particular attention given to the lack of transparency and opportunities for researcher recourse that characterise ethics review processes. Centered specifically (...) on the conduct of ethics review boards convened within university settings, this paper draws on these inherent criticisms to consider the ways that ethics review boards might enact more communicative and deliberative practices. Outlining a set of principles against which ethics review boards might establish strategies for engaging with researchers and research communities, this paper draws attention to how _Deliberative communication_, _Engagement with researchers_ and the _Distribution of responsibility_ for the ethics review might be enacted in the day-to-day practice of the university human ethics review board. This paper develops these themes via a conceptual lens derived from Habermas’ (The theory of communicative action. Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society, 1984 ) articulation of ‘communicative action’ and Fraser’s (Social Text, 25(26), 56–80, 1990 ) consideration of ‘strong publics’ to cast consideration of the role that human ethics review boards might play in supporting university research cultures. _Deliberative communication_, _Engagement with researchers_ and the _Distribution of responsibility_ provide useful conceptual prompts for considering how ethics review boards might undertake their work. (shrink)

Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need (...) to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent. (shrink)

IntroductionDeep brain stimulation has become a standard treatment option for select patients with Parkinson’s disease. The selection process and surgical procedures employed have, to date, not been standardized.MethodsA comprehensive 58-question web-based survey was developed with a focus on DBS referral practices and peri-operative management. The survey was distributed to the Parkinson’s Foundation Centers of Excellence, members of the International Parkinson’s Disease and Movement Disorders Society, and the Parkinson Study Group between December 2015 and May 2016.ResultsThere were 207 individual respondents drawn (...) from 59 countries and 6 continents, of whom 64% received formal training in DBS. Thirteen percent of centers reported that DBS could proceed despite a confidence level of < 50% for PD diagnosis. A case-based approach to DBS candidacy was applied in 51.3% of centers without a cut-off for levodopa-responsiveness. Surprisingly, 33% of centers regularly used imaging for diagnostic confirmation of idiopathic PD. Thirty-one percent of centers reported that neuropsychological evaluation did not affect DBS target selection. Approximately half of the respondents reported determination of DBS candidacy based on a multidisciplinary committee evaluation and 1/3rd reported that a committee was used for target selection. Eight percent of respondents felt that psychosocial factors should not impact DBS candidacy nor site selection. Involvement of allied health professionals in the preoperative process was sparse. There was high variability in preoperative education about DBS outcome expectations. Approximately half of the respondents did not utilize a “default brain target,” though STN was used more commonly than GPi. Specific DBS procedure techniques applied, as well as follow-up timelines, were highly variable.ConclusionResults revealed high variability on the best approaches for DBS candidate selection, brain target selection, procedure type, and postoperative practices. Cognitive and mood assessments were underutilized. There was low reliance on multidisciplinary teams or psychosocial factors to impact the decision-making process. There were small but significant differences in practice across global regions, especially regarding multidisciplinary teams. The wide variability of responses across multiple facets of DBS care highlights the need for prospective studies to inform evidence-based guidelines. (shrink)

J.S. Mill famously equated physical things with "permanent possibilities of sensation." This view, known as phenomenalism, holds that a rock is a tendency for experiences to occur as they do when people perceive a rock, and similarly for all other physical things. In _Phenomenalism_, Michael Pelczar develops Mill's theory in detail, defends it against the objections responsible for its current unpopularity, and uses it to shed light on important questions in metaphysics, the philosophy of science, and the philosophy of (...) mind. Identifying physical things with possibilities of sensation establishes a transparent connection between the world of physics and the world of sense, provides an attractive alternative to currently fashionable structuralist and panpsychist metaphysics, offers a fresh perspective on the problem of consciousness, and yields a satisfying theory of perception, all by taking two things notoriously resistant to reduction, chance and experience, and constructing everything else out of them. (shrink)

Mill schrieb seine Lebensgeschichte 1853–1854 nieder, als er seinen nahen Tod durch Tuberkulose befürchtete. Die Autobiographie sollte an der Spitze einer Essaysammlung als John Stuart und Harriet TaylorTaylor, Harriet Mills geistiges Vermächtnis stehen. Er überarbeitete sie in Zusammenarbeit mit seiner Frau und ergänzte sie zweimal nach ihrem Tod (1861, 1869–1870). Sie wurde letztendlich von Harriets Tochter Helen TaylorTaylor, Helen posthum 1873 publiziert. Die aktuelle Standardausgabe bildet den ersten Band der Collected Works von Robson und Stillinger und druckt die erste (...) und letzte Version parallel ab. Mit dieser Position im Gesamtwerk erfüllen die Herausgeber die Intentionen der Verfasser: Die Autobiographie dient als Einführung wie Begründung seiner Schriften, denn sie entwirft Mills Entwicklung als Ideengeschichte von Einflüssen und deren Verarbeitung. Umgekehrt strukturieren Mills zentrale Theorien intertextuell seine eigene Lebensgeschichte. (shrink)

John Stuart Mill wird häufig als prototypischer Vertreter eines „negativen Freiheitsbegriffs“ dargestellt. Eine solche Charakterisierung ist anachronistisch. Die Unterscheidung zwischen positiver und negativer Freiheit ist erst lange nach Mills Tod von Isaiah BerlinBerlin, Isaiah eingeführt worden. Durch Berlin ausgelöste Fragen begrifflicher Abgrenzung, die in der Politischen Philosophie der letzten fünfzig Jahre große Aufmerksamkeit erhalten haben (nicht zuletzt aufgrund der Unklarheiten in Berlins Distinktion), tauchen bei Mill nicht auf und – wichtiger noch – lassen sich auch nicht ohne weiteres auf (...) ihn anwenden. Mill selbst bezieht sich in seinen politikphilosophischen Arbeiten auf Freiheit mittels gesellschaftstheoretischer Attribute. Er handelt von ‚bürgerlicher‘ (‚sozialer‘) und von ‚politischer‘ Freiheit. Wer frei leben möchte, braucht ihm zufolge beide Freiheiten. (shrink)

Aus Sicht von Libertären des 20. Jahrhunderts ist Mill durch seine Eigentumstheorie zu einem gefährlichen Wegbereiter des Sozialismus geworden. „Mill“, so schreibt Ludwig von MisesMises, Ludwig von, „is the great advocate of socialism. All the arguments that could be advanced in favour of socialism are elaborated by him with loving care. In comparison with Mill all other socialist writers – even MarxMarx, Karl, EngelsEngels, Friedrich, and LassalleLassalle, Ferdinand – are scarcely of any importance“ (Ludwig von Mises, zit. nach Miller 2003, (...) 213–214). Richtig ist an dieser Einschätzung, dass nach Mill jegliche Eigentumsordnung an Maßstäben der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit zu messen ist. Insofern kann man ihn tatsächlich als Vordenker moderner Gerechtigkeitstheorien sehen. Irreführend ist jedoch, Mill als ‚Advokaten‘ des Sozialismus zu bezeichnen, weil er es als eine offene Frage betrachtete, ob eine sozialistische oder eine auf Privateigentum an Produktionsmitteln basierende Markwirtschaft zu bevorzugen wäre. (shrink)

A reconsideration of mill's theory of "higher pleasures," construed as a way of evaluating changes in preferences or character that result from changes in social environment. mill's account is criticized and partly reconstructed in light of modern preference theory, but viewed favorably as an illuminating attempt to address a fundamental problem in moral evaluation of social institutions. mill's advocacy of the higher pleasures is defended in particular against the charge that it is incompatible with his commitment to liberty.

Introduction: Doing the right thing -- Utilitarianism : Bentham and J.S. Mill -- Libertarianism -- John Locke -- Markets and morals -- Immanuel Kant -- John Rawls -- Affirmative action -- Aristotle -- Liberals and communitarians -- Conclusion: Reconnecting politics and morals.

One might have thought that any right-thinking utilitarian would hold that motives and intentions are morally on a par, as either might influence the consequences of one's actions. However, in a neglected passage of Utilitarianism, John Stuart Mill claims that the rightness of an action depends 'entirely upon the intention' but does not at all depend upon the motive. In this paper I try to make sense of Mill's initially puzzling remarks about the relative importance of intentions and motives in (...) a way that highlights the importance of other elements of his moral philosophy and action theory. (shrink)

This article examines the concept of creating shared value as articulated by Michael Porter and Mark Kramer, in non-Western and Western contexts. We define non-Western contexts as those in so-called “developing” countries and emerging economies, whereas Western ones pertain to dominant thinking in “developed” regions. We frame our research in postcolonial theory and offer an overview of existing critiques of CSV. We conduct a critical discourse analysis of 66 articles to identify how CSV is being cited by authors, and (...) potential underlying power dynamics that affect its relevance for non-Western contexts. Our review exposes increasingly critical views about the paradoxical positioning of CSV as an instrumental concept that can offer “win-win” solutions, particularly from those working in non-Western settings. Western perspectives generally tend to be more supportive of its instrumental nature, but also recognize the increasing complexity of the business-society nexus and stakeholder engagement. We argue that the CSV framework requires further development to maintain credibility and applicability, especially in non-Western domains. (shrink)

Comparing Mill's "Non-Intervention" and Walzer's "Just and Unjust Wars" links two classic statements on just wars of intervention. Doyle concludes that interventionist arguments should go beyond the three paradigmatic cases Walzer explores in "Just and Unjust Wars.".

I argue that Mill introduced the distinction between quality and quantity of pleasures in order to fend off the then common charge that utilitarianism is ‘a philosophy for swine’ and to accommodate the (still) widespread intuition that the life of a human is better, in the sense of being intrinsically more valuable, than the life of an animal. I argue that in this he fails because in order to do successfully he would have to show not only that the life (...) of a human is preferable to that of an animal on hedonistic grounds, but also that it is in some sense nobler or more dignified to be a human, which he cannot do without tacitly presupposing non-hedonistic standards of what it means to lead a good life. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Mill on Capital Punishment-Retributive Overtones?Michael ClarkI.In his famous parliamentary speech of 18681 Mill defends the retention of capital punishment for the worst murderers on the Benthamite grounds of frugality and exemplarity.2 Punishment being an intrinsic "mischief," it should be no more severe than it needs to be to achieve its desired effect, principally that of deterring others from crime. That effect can be achieved more economically if the (...) suffering appears greater than it really is. Execution, Mill thinks, is less cruel than the alternative of life imprisonment with hard labour,3 for the offender would have died anyway sooner or later, probably in greater pain. It is also the most impressive way of punishing murder, since it closely resembles the offence. The more a penalty impresses itself upon people's minds the more likely it is to deter. And, as Bentham said, "exemplarity tends to increase the apparent, frugality to reduce the real [suffering]."4But the language Mill uses has seemed to import non-utilitarian, quasi-retributive elements into his thought. Thus Tom Sorrell says, "He brings in the appropriateness of execution to certain offences. The argument from appropriateness, if it is not retributivist, is at least consistent with retributivism, and has whatever intuitive appeal attaches to punishing purely on account of guilt."5 Is this perhaps another of those non-utilitarian elements in Mill's philosophy that many commentators have, rightly or wrongly, claimed to detect, like the supposed tension between the Principle of Utility and Mill's regard for the value of liberty? I shall argue, however, that it is a mistake to interpret Mill's remarks in a retributive way. [End Page 327]The critical passage is:[I]t appears to me that to deprive the criminal of the life of which he has proved himself unworthy—olemnly to blot him out from the fellowship of the living—is themost appropriate, as it is certainly the most impressive, mode in which society can attach to so great a crime the penal consequences which for the security of life it is indispensable to annex it.6The italicised phrases are those responsible for the retributive impression, particularly "the most appropriate." Is Mill here falling back on the idea that the criminal should receive a penalty which fits the crime because he has made himself worthy of it?Originally, Mill had opposed capital punishment, and, though he did allow that there might possibly be "atrocious crimes" against which it was the only effective deterrent, he doubted whether there were any such cases. "I have therefore always been favourable to the entire abolition of capital punishment, though I confess I do not attach much importance to it in the case of the worst criminals of all," he wrote in an 1841 letter to Robert Barclay Fox (CW XIII: 474). It is evident that he is making the usual assumption that the death penalty is more severe than life imprisonment. As a utilitarian, he could countenance the death penalty only if it were "the only effective deterrent" against aggravated murder.By the time of the Parliamentary Speech he had changed his mind about the relative severity of execution and life imprisonment. Execution was swift and generally less painful than the death the murderer would otherwise eventually face. The alternative was to immure "him in a living tomb, there to linger out what may be a long life in the hardest and most monotonous toil... cut off from all earthly hope" (CW XXVIII: 268). Life imprisonment seemed milder only because the suffering was at no time "of terrifying intensity."Indeed Bentham had made the same point about the exemplarity of capital punishment, which was "of all punishment, of the greatest apparent magnitude, the most impressive and the most exemplary" while being "less rigorous than it appears to be," and he noted that it was "often more gentle than natural death."72.Mill, of course, inherited his theory of punishment from Bentham, whom he regarded as leaving the theory nearly complete,8 and the consequentialist stance is clear from his early writings:The only right by which society is warranted in inflicting pain upon any... (shrink)

Most deontologists find bedrock in the Pauline doctrine that it is morally objectionable to do evil in order that good will come of it. Uncontroversially, this doctrine condemns the killing of an innocent person simply in order to maximize the sum total of happiness. It rules out the conscription of a worker to his or her certain death in order to repair a fault that is interfering with the live broadcast of a World Cup match that a billion spectators have (...) been enjoying. It rules out such sacrifice even if it would maximize the sum total of everyone's happiness. An act utilitarian, by contrast, would require the sacrifice of the one whenever this latter condition obtains, since such a utilitarian is committed to the view that one ought always to act so as to bring about the greatest sum total of happiness. An act utilitarian might, however, consistently hold that a large number of rather insignificant pleasures, such as that which a spectator derives from witnessing men in shorts running around and kicking a ball, is never sufficient to justify the infliction of a great harm on a single individual. 4 He might take such a position without abandoning utilitarianism by denying that the sum total of such minor pleasures could ever be sufficiently great to outweigh the harm of death to the one. Under the inspiration of John Stuart Mill, a utilitarian might draw a more general distinction between serious and trivial harms and pleasures and maintain that no amount of a trivial pleasure could ever amount to a sum of happiness that is greater than the disutility of a serious harm. (shrink)

The question of when or if a nation should intervene in another country’s affairs is one of the most important concerns in today’s volatile world. Taking John Stuart Mill’s famous 1859 essay “A Few Words on Non-Intervention” as his starting point, international relations scholar Michael W. Doyle addresses the thorny issue of when a state’s sovereignty should be respected and when it should be overridden or disregarded by other states in the name of humanitarian protection, national self-determination, or national (...) security. In this time of complex social and political interplay and increasingly sophisticated and deadly weaponry, Doyle reinvigorates Mill’s principles for a new era while assessing the new United Nations doctrine of responsibility to protect. In the twenty-first century, intervention can take many forms: military and economic, unilateral and multilateral. Doyle’s thought-provoking argument examines essential moral and legal questions underlying significant American foreign policy dilemmas of recent years, including Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. (shrink)

Commentators disagree about the extent to which Kant’s ethics is compatible with consequentialism. A question that has not yet been asked is whether Kant had a view of his own regarding the fundamental difference between his ethical theory and a broadly consequentialist one. In this paper I argue that Kant does have such a view. I illustrate this by discussing his response to a well-known objection to his moral theory, namely that Kant offers an implicitly consequentialist theory of moral appraisal. (...) This objection was most famously raised by Mill and Schopenhauer, but also during Kant’s time by Pistorius and Tittel. I show that Kant’s response to this objection in the second Critique illustrates that he sees the fundamental difference between his moral theory and a broadly consequentialist one to be one that concerns methodology. (shrink)

Es dürfte kaum möglich sein, die Bedeutung des Werks von John Stuart Mill für das politische Denken der Gegenwart zu übertreiben. Insbesondere die Schrift Über die Freiheit ist unbestritten ein Hauptwerk liberalen Denkens und ein unerlässlicher Referenzpunkt für gegenwärtige Debatten über Ziele und Grenzen staatlicher und gesellschaftlicher Machtausübung. Das 19. Jahrhundert in Großbritannien wird heute häufig gedanklich mit der Dominanz des Manchester-Liberalismus verbunden.

John Stuart Mill's best-known work is On Liberty. In it he declared that Western society was in danger of coming to a standstill. This was an extraordinarily pessimistic claim in view of Britain's global dominance at the time and one that has been insufficiently investigated in the secondary literature. The wanting model was that of China, a once advanced civilization that had apparently ossified. To understand how Mill came to this conclusion requires one to investigate his notion of the stages (...) from barbarism to civilization, and also his belief in imperialism as part of the civilizing process. Here India plays a central role, as both Mill and his father worked for the East India Company. This study, then, investigates the relationship between Mill's liberalism and his justification of imperialism. It takes us into the Utilitarianism of his family background, and such other influences as Romanticism, Scottish political economy and such key French thinkers as Saint- Simon, Guizot, Comte and Tocqueville. Mill, then, provides the focus of a debate on the origins, meaning, and consequences of Western civilization. It encompasses discourses on colonialism and orientalism, on Enlightenment optimism and conservative despair, on the need for leadership and the advance of democracy; in short, on the blessings, curses and dangers of modernization from approximately the time of the American and French revolutions to that of the so-called mid-Victorian calm in which On Liberty was written. Furthermore, current political issues concerning the West and Islamic countries have heightened interest in just the kind of question that this book discusses: that of how the West relates to, and assesses, the rest of the world. (shrink)

Zwar hat John Stuart Mill keine konsequentialistische Tugendtheorie im engeren Sinne entwickelt; jedoch finden sich bei ihm deren Grundgedanken angelegt. Tugenden spielen eine zentrale Rolle in seiner Theorie des guten Lebens, seiner Moraltheorie und seiner Politischen Philosophie.