What should be taught in courses on social ethics?

The purpose of this article is to discuss the concept and the content of courses on “social ethics”. I will present a dilemma that arises in the design of such courses. On the one hand, they may present versions of “applied ethics”; that is, courses in which moral theories are applied to moral and social problems. On the other hand, they may present generalised forms of “occupational ethics”, usually professional ethics, with some business ethics added to expand the range of the course. Is there, then, not some middle ground that is distinctively designated by the term “social ethics”? I will argue that there is such a ground. I will describe that ground as the ethics of “social practices”. I will then illustrate how this approach to the teaching of ethics may be carried out in five domains of social practice: professional ethics, commercial ethics, corporate ethics, governmental ethics, and ethics in the voluntary sector. My aim is to show that “social ethics” courses can have a clear rationale and systematic content

Multi-disciplinary research ethics review: is it feasible?

This paper reviews the currently rapid changes in research ethics governance affecting many kinds of social research. Arguments for and against single‐discipline and multidisciplinary research ethics committees will be considered, with examples of how medical and social research ethics can inform one another. We conclude that the use of multidisciplinary research ethics committees, guidance and governance can be an effective and necessary part of social research methodology

Public Preferences about Fairness and the Ethics of Allocating Scarce Medical Interventions

This chapter examines how social- scientific research on public preferences bears on the ethical question of how those resources should in fact be allocated, and explain how social-scientific researchers might find an understanding of work in ethics useful as they design mechanisms for data collection and analysis. I proceed by first distinguishing the methodologies of social science and ethics. I then provide an overview of different approaches to the ethics of allocating scarce medical interventions, including an approach—the complete lives system—which I have previously defended, and a brief recap of social-scientific research on the allocation of scarce medical resources. Following these overviews, I examine different ways in which public preferences could matter to the ethics of allocation. Last, I suggest some ways in which social scientists could learn from ethics as they conduct research into public preferences regarding the allocation of scarce medical resources

Virtue ethics and social psychology

Virtue ethics has emerged as an alternative to deontological and utilitarian theory in recent moral philosophy. The basic notion of virtue ethics is to reassert the importance of virtuous character in ethical judgement in contrast to the emphasis on principles and consequences. Since questions of virtue have been largely neglected in modern moral theory, there has been a return to Aristotle’s account of virtue as character. This in turn has been questioned as the basis of virtue ethics and there has been a search for alternative accounts of moral agency. One aspect of this critical reflection on virtue ethics is an engagement with social psychology as a source of criticism of the Aristotelian conception of character and as a more plausible alternative foundation for a theory of moral character with contemporary relevance. This paper aims to introduce this area of moral theory to a psychological audience and reflect on the interpretation of social psychological theory and evidence in criticisms of virtuous character, focusing on the use of Milgram’s (1974) experiments on obedience to authority as an argument for situationism. A number of questions emerge concerning the interpretation and use of social psychological theory and evidence in debates within moral philosophy

G. E. Moore and theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences

G. E. Moore’s critical analysis of right action in utilitarian ethics and his consequentialist concept of right action is a starting point for a theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences. The terms right and wrong have different meanings in these theories. The author explores different aspects of right and wrong actions in ethics of social consequences and compares them with Moore’s ideas. He positively evaluates Moore’s contributions to the development his theory of moral/right action

Kant and Consequentialism (Reflections on Cummiskey’s Kantian Consequentialism)

In his article, the author considers possible forms of relationship between Kant’s ethics and consequentialism. In this context, he analyses David Cummiskey’s views which are expressed in his book, Kantian Consequentialism (1996). He demonstrates the possibility of justifying the consequentialism on the basis of Kant’s ethics and its values. Likewise, several other authors (such as Scott Forschler, Philipp Stratton-Lake, Michael Ridge) are of the opinion of the possible compatibility of Kant’s ethics and consequentialism. On the other hand, however, Christine M. Korsgaard is an example of a strict rejection of the similarity between Kant and the consequentialist ethics. The author based on the ethics of social consequences as a form of non-utilitarian consequentialism claims (like Cummiskey), that there are similarities between Kant’s ethics and consequentialism. Unlike Cummiskey, however, he sees similarity in the Kant’s formula of humanity and the understanding of humanity in ethics of social consequences, especially in the form of additional moral value

Marketing ethics and social responsibility

understand the importance of ethics in marketing decision making, it is necessary to examine factors that influence ethical decision. These are: personal moral philosophy, organizational relationships and opportunities. They are intertwined in determining ethical decisions in marketing

Intellectual evolution of strategic management and its relationship with ethics and social responsibility

The main purpose here is to present an overview of the historical development of strategic management, through a critical review of the most relevant theoretical proposals, and to consider its links to ethics and corporate social responsibilities. From the very beginning of strategic management thought attempts have been made to fuse ethical aspects such as values of senior management or social values or social expectations to strategic management. More recently the stakeholder view of the firm has permitted the introduction of ethical theories into strategic management, and the resources-based view of the firm has lead to the consideration of competences, including moral virtues. Here it is argued that in spite of some advances, the integration of ethics into strategic management is not yet entirely satisfactory. Thus, it is suggested that new directions to focus the integration of ethics and strategic management are necessary.Strategic management; Integrating ethics in management; Business ethics; Corporate social responsibility;

Does Germany Need a (New) Research Ethics for the Social Sciences?

This paper evaluates the German, UK, and US approaches to dealing with research ethics in the social sciences. It focuses 1) on the extent to which these research ethic frameworks protect the key rights of research subjects and 2) the extent to to which they take into account the methodology and approaches used in social science and do not simply emulate those of the natural sciences. The U.S. approach stands for a highly regulated, and partly bureaucratic, approach where the ethics review is modeled on the methodology of natural sciences. In the UK, in contrast, a social science research ethics framework has been developed that remedies some of these shortcomings. It is implemented through pressure from funding institutions and aims to respond to the needs of social science research. The German social science ethics framework consists of non-binding codes of conduct, guidelines about good scientific practice, and ethic codes of the German professional associations and funding institutions. We find that ethical behavior in Germany is most typically understood as ethical behavior towards the peers. We recommend the establishment of a new research ethics framework for the social sciences in Germany modeled on the UK's.research ethics, good scientific practice, institutional review boards