3 ms·

They also have the wherewithal to solve homelessness. Is that also their responsibility? Corporations are, like Westphalian nation-states, explicitly amoral e

They also have the wherewithal to solve homelessness. Is that also their responsibility? Corporations are, like Westphalian nation-states, explicitly amoral entities. The extent to which they behave morally is due to market and/or political pressure, not any inherent moral judgement. Apple makes consumer devices. That's their business. They have a responsibility to make the greatest possible profit selling those devices. That's where their responsibility begins and ends. Now, there are all sorts of moral dimensions that can affect their decisions. If their phones were made with slave labour, people might not buy them and talent might not want to work for them. But the reason Apple doesn't employ slave labour isn't because it is a moral entity; it isn't. Apple doesn't employ slave labour because doing so would hurt its bottom line. If you want companies to behave in an ethical fashion, you need to align legal, social, market, tax, and other incentives in order to push them in that direction. Expecting them to do so out of the goodness of their hearts is quixotic: they have no hearts with which to be good.

YeGoblynQueenne 11y ago
>> If you want companies to behave in an ethical fashion, you need to align legal, social, market, tax, and other incentives in order to push them in that direction. Expecting them to do so out of the goodness of their hearts is quixotic: they have no hearts with which to be good. You mean, if I want the big companies to do good (or "not do evil") I have to pay up to them? But the people who make up those big companies also have to live in the same society as everyone else. So they should already have an incentive to do good to those societies- they will personally benefit from that good-doing. Why do they need me, or anyone else, to provide that incentive? We all live in the same world, we all have a responsibility to be morally considerate in it. "Companies" are not "amoral entities", neither are nations. Because they are groups of lots of people, who all are subject to moral judgement. "I was just following orders" is not an excuse anymore, and neither should "I was just doing my job" be.
- redthrowaway 11y ago
  >You mean, if I want the big companies to do good (or "not do evil") I have to pay up to them? It means you need to align incentives. Those can be positive (tax breaks for hiring veterans) or negative (penalties for violating antitrust laws), but they are incentives nonetheless. >So they should already have an incentive to do good to those societies- they will personally benefit from that good-doing. Do you, individually, benefit more from living in a society where mining companies don't dump toxic chemicals in rivers in third world countries, or from making your quarterly bonuses? This is a classic tragedy of the commons. >Why do they need me, or anyone else, to provide that incentive? Because companies are amoral profit-maximization constructs. >"Companies" are not "amoral entities", neither are nations. There are many corporations and politicians who are more than happy to indulge that fantasy in exchange for your money or vote. You can rant and rave about evil corporations till you're blue in the face, and you won't change a damned thing. Corporations respond to incentives, not moral pleas. Change the incentives if you want to change the behaviour.

YeGoblynQueenne 11y ago

>> If you want companies to behave in an ethical fashion, you need to align legal, social, market, tax, and other incentives in order to push them in that direction. Expecting them to do so out of the goodness of their hearts is quixotic: they have no hearts with which to be good. You mean, if I want the big companies to do good (or "not do evil") I have to pay up to them? But the people who make up those big companies also have to live in the same society as everyone else. So they should already have an incentive to do good to those societies- they will personally benefit from that good-doing. Why do they need me, or anyone else, to provide that incentive? We all live in the same world, we all have a responsibility to be morally considerate in it. "Companies" are not "amoral entities", neither are nations. Because they are groups of lots of people, who all are subject to moral judgement. "I was just following orders" is not an excuse anymore, and neither should "I was just doing my job" be.

redthrowaway 11y ago
>You mean, if I want the big companies to do good (or "not do evil") I have to pay up to them? It means you need to align incentives. Those can be positive (tax breaks for hiring veterans) or negative (penalties for violating antitrust laws), but they are incentives nonetheless. >So they should already have an incentive to do good to those societies- they will personally benefit from that good-doing. Do you, individually, benefit more from living in a society where mining companies don't dump toxic chemicals in rivers in third world countries, or from making your quarterly bonuses? This is a classic tragedy of the commons. >Why do they need me, or anyone else, to provide that incentive? Because companies are amoral profit-maximization constructs. >"Companies" are not "amoral entities", neither are nations. There are many corporations and politicians who are more than happy to indulge that fantasy in exchange for your money or vote. You can rant and rave about evil corporations till you're blue in the face, and you won't change a damned thing. Corporations respond to incentives, not moral pleas. Change the incentives if you want to change the behaviour.