Business Ethics Chapter 9 Question & Answer

Some philosophers think that there are good ethical reasons for holding corporations morally as well as legally responsible for the results of their decisions. For example, we can talk meaningfully of corporate character. Just because the corporation is morally accountable, it does not mean that individuals within the corporation are not also morally accountable for their decisions and actions.

Some philosophers think that business organizations, such as joint-stock companies, cannot be morally accountable because they do not have mental lives. Corporate accountability reduces without remainder to the accountability of individuals within the organization.

Different forms of ethical reasoning give different reasons for holding agents morally accountable. These reasons include the decision-maker’s character, motives, duties, special responsibilities, causal role, and the welfare consequences of possible assignments of accountability.

The analogy between moral accountability and legal responsibility breaks down in case of vicarious responsibility and deep pockets. Unlike compensation, accountability is not limited in size.

Value judgments about moral accountability are more than just facts about causal responsibility. Sometimes moral accountability requires causal responsibility, as in retributive justice, and sometimes it does not as in judgments about character or motive.