论政府推动企业履行道德责任的有效路径

如何发挥政府的促进作用,有效地推动企业履行道德责任,实现企业的可持续性发展,是当前我国企业在转型过程中不得不面对的一个重大课题.政府应当根据企业道德责任的不同层次,准确把握我国企业当下发展的特点,从四个方面推进企业道德责任的自律:一是塑造宽松生存环境,为企业践行道德责任奠定和谐空间;二是推进道德立法,促企业基本道德责任从他律走向自律;三是建立健全道德激励机制,确保企业道德责任自我选择;四是给予企业自由意志空间,实现企业崇高道德责任的持续超越.     

后形而上学视野里的“德福观”

传统形而上学以抽象的“神性”、“理性”来确保德福的绝对同一性.后现代主义通过对同一性哲学的批判、对个体差异性的强调,否认道德与幸福的必然联系.后形而上学主张德福相即,通过对话在交往中达成共识,实现主体间的相互承认,既是道德的,也是幸福的;在风险社会中,团结之德是获得人类安全之福的条件;主体交往的平等性决定了尊重他者幸福意愿构成践履道德责任的限度.     

伦理学基本问题之我见

伦理学是关于道德问题的科学。换言之,伦理学就是关于道德的思想、观点的科学理论。伦理学以道德为对象,所以道德的基本问题,自然也就是伦理学的基本问题。 那么,究竟什么是伦理学的基本问题呢?学术界的看法很不一致。其中有代表性的一种见解,就是所谓:“道德与社会历史条件的关系问题。”“这个问题有两个方面:一方面是社会历史条件决定道德,是道德的基础;另一方面道德对社会历史条件又有反作用”。笔者认为,此种见解很值得商榷。     

论企业道德责任的依据、表现与内化

企业道德责任的含义大体有广义和狭义两个方面,从较为广泛和普遍的意义上,我们认为企业的道德责任是体现在企业的经济责任、法律责任和精神文化责任之中的,同时又是同企业伦理建设密切相关的诸种责任的有机统一。而从狭义的视角来看,企业的道德责任是企业所肩负的对自己、对同道和对社会的道德义务的自觉承担和精神担纲,它在其精神实质上可以用“敬业求精、贵和乐群”来概括。企业道德责任的内化即为企业良心。企业良心就是企业道德责任的自我意识和自我评价。它由企业爱心、企业诚心和企业义心或公正之心所构成。     

企业伦理:社会的普遍约束与企业的内在构成

近几十年以来,企业经营管理中的伦理问题受到国内外学界的广泛重视。围绕企业伦理的核心问题即企业道德责任,美国学者提出了诸种理论,比如,普拉利(Peter Pratley)提出的“核心道德责任论”、恩德勒(George Enderle)提出的“多层次的企业责任框架”理论、卡罗尔(Archie B.Carroll)提出的“企业社会责任金字塔”理论等。我国学界也在20世纪80年代开始了企业伦理的研究,虽然稍晚于国外,但成果颇丰。国内外学者探讨的主要问题有:企业伦理精神、企业行为的道德推理方式与模型、企业伦理与经济绩效、企业的社会责任、利益相关者及其管理等。笔…     

伦理学基本问题刍议

什么是伦理学的基本问题,目前学术界主要存在如下四种不同看法:第一种看法认为伦理学的基本问题是“道德与社会历史条件的关系问题”;第二种看法认为“善恶问题是道德的特殊矛盾,也是伦理学的基本问题”;第三种看法认为“伦理学的基本问题应是道德的性质、起源与标准的问题”;第四种意见认为伦理学的基本问题是利益和道德的关系问题。我们认为对这些问题开展讨论,求得比较一致的意见是很有必要,也是很有意义的。     

企业社会责任的经济伦理检视

从经济伦理的视域来看,作为企业"灵魂"的社会责任与社会发展的脚步渐行渐远。企业社会责任的伦理意蕴关涉历史性、人本性和公正性三个基本维度;人本关怀乏力、生态学危机加剧以及社会担当严重不足是当代中国企业社会责任缺失的主要表现;要破解企业社会社会责任缺失的道德悖论,建立消费者与企业联动的伦理整合机制、注重社会核心价值的伦理导向机制以及注重良法善治的伦理控制机制是三条可行的现实路径。     

企业生态道德责任浅析

本文分析了企业生态道德责任提出的原因,指出了企业承担生态道德责任是建设社会主义生态文明的内在要求,也是企业迎接国际挑战、增强企业核心竞争力的保证,更是企业自身建设伦理文化的需要.企业要具有生态道德责任,则必须从企业确立生态道德责任的价值目标、培养员工生态道德素质、建立企业生态道德责任的系统工程这几个方面入手.只有这样,我们的企业才能将经济活动、生态智慧和伦理关怀融为一体,最终才有可能实现与社会经济相协调发展.     

道德责任意识建设:现实语境中公民道德建设的一项突出任务

道德责任意识应当而且必须包含两方面的内容:其一是对自身所应担当的道德责任“是什么”的明确认知和判断,其二是对自身道德责任之“为什么”的深刻体认。加强道德责任意识建设,以道德责任意识的自觉来促成道德行为的自律,是当今中国公民权责关系状况、社会道德生活境况、道德推理方式特点和公民道德责任意识现状条件下为更加富有成效地搞好公民道德建设所必须高度重视并着力解决好的一项突出任务。     

企业社会责任的道德考察

企业作为影响社会财富的创造积累、社会利益的分配格局和社会需求的有效供给的基本经济细胞,需要擢升其企业公民意识、关怀利益相关者以及尊重社会及其成员道德尊严的企业社会责任的履行能力,以向社会传递一种荻取企业自我价值实现的社会道德认同境界.     

Is there an ivory tower in reality?

What is the measure of the social responsibility of scientists? Even if technology is not just applied science, the scientist cannot simply waive responsibility for the negative manifestations of technological progress borne out of scientific research. However, there are limits to the practicable realization of any moral maxims in this sphere, concerning, for instance, the very awareness of the future consequences of basic research. Insofar as it is possible to believe in a distinction between pure and applied research, there exists a difference in the corresponding measure of social responsibility for scientists.     

道德信仰的发生机制

道德信仰的发生机制至少包括三个方面 ,即 :需要的体认机制 ;伦理义务的内化机制 ;道德心理的整合机制。需要的体认机制涉及到对人性、人生的价值、人的使命等问题 ,它是道德信仰形成的主体基础 ;伦理义务的内化机制涉及到人的社会伦理关系、社会规定性和制约性、社会价值、社会道德规范及其教化等问题 ,它是道德信仰形成的客观条件 ;道德心理的整合机制涉及到道德认知、道德情感、道德意志和道德人格等问题 ,它是道德信仰形成的主、客观方面的动态的统一。     

信念与结果对道德、法律责任判断的影响

在"执行者"和"旁观者"两个情境中,通过操纵当事人的信念和事件结果,考察了被试的道德与法律责任判断。结果显示:进行道德责任判断时,被试对当事人的信念信息更敏感;进行法律责任判断时,则对事件结果的信息更敏感。"执行者"情境中的道德和法律责任评分均高于"旁观者"情境中的责任评分。这说明道德、法律责任判断的内部机制有所不同,并且当事人的不同角色导致第三方对其的责任判断出现差异。     

The Structure of Max Weber's Ethic of Responsibility

Max Weber's distinction in "Politics as a Vocation" between the ethic of conviction and the ethic of responsibility is best understood as a distinction between mutually exclusive ethical worldviews. Interpretations that correlate the two ethics with Weber's distinction between value-rational social action and instrumental-rational social action are misleading since Weber assumes that both types of rational social action are present in both ethics. The ethic of conviction recognizes a given hierarchy of values as the context for moral endeavor. The ethic of responsibility acknowledges value obligations, but assumes the absence of any given hierarchy of values and the inevitability of value conflict as the context for moral endeavor. When interpreted in the context of his multilayered understanding of value conflict, Weber's ethic of responsibility emerges as a coherent ethical perspective.     

A Political Account of Corporate Moral Responsibility

Should we conceive of corporations as entities to which moral responsibility can be attributed? This contribution presents what we will call a political account of corporate moral responsibility. We argue that in modern, liberal democratic societies, there is an underlying political need to attribute greater levels of moral responsibility to corporations. Corporate moral responsibility is essential to the maintenance of social coordination that both advances social welfare and protects citizens’ moral entitlements. This political account posits a special capacity of self-governance that corporations can intelligibly be said to possess. Corporations can be said to be “administrators of duty” in that they can voluntarily incorporate moral principles into their decision-making processes about how to conduct business. This account supplements and partly transforms earlier pragmatic accounts of corporate moral responsibility by disentangling responsibility from its conventional linkages with accountability, blame and punishment. It thereby represents a distinctive way to defend corporate moral responsibility and shows how Kantian thinking can be helpful in disentangling the problems surrounding the concept.     

伦理智慧视野中的企业竞争与企业社会责任

在市场经济发展中,应树立正确的竞争意识,避免导致企业灾难的恶性竞争。企业应在有合作的竞争中,在追求“内在利益”的经营中实现“双赢”。唤起企业的社会责任是企业伦理建设的重要内容。伦理智慧在企业竞争中,在追求"内在利益"中,在承担社会责任中表现出来。     

A Critique of Positive Responsibility in Computing

It has been claimed that (1) computer professionals should be held responsible for an undisclosed list of "undesirable events" associated with their work and (2) most if not all computer disasters can be avoided by truly understanding responsibility. Programmers, software developers, and other computer professionals should be defended against such vague, counterproductive, and impossible ideals because these imply the mandatory satisfaction of social needs and the equation of ethics with a kind of altruism. The concept of social needs is debatable with no one possessing the authority to impose their version of them. Similarly, the notion of "positive responsibility" is difficult to apply, does not effectively change computing practice, and confuses good (i.e., efficient) computer engineering with good (i.e. moral) computer engineering.     

Responsibility as Answerability

ABSTRACT

It has recently become fashionable among those who write on questions of moral responsibility to distinguish two different concepts, or senses, of moral responsibility via the labels ‘responsibility as attributability’ and ‘responsibility as accountability’. Gary Watson was perhaps the first to introduce this distinction in his influential 1996 article ‘Two Faces of Responsibility’ (in Agency and Answerability, 260–86. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), but it has since been taken up by many other philosophers. My aim in this study is to raise some questions and doubts about this distinction and to argue that it has led to confusion rather than clarification in debates over moral responsibility. In place of the attributability/accountability distinction, I propose that there is a single (and unified) concept of moral responsibility underlying our actual moral practices. This core notion of moral responsibility, which I call ‘responsibility as answerability’, is well positioned to explain those aspects of our moral practice that Watson associates with the ‘attributability’ face of moral responsibility as well as those aspects of our moral practice he associates with the ‘accountability’ face. But it does so in a way that does not require us to multiply senses of moral responsibility and that allows us to continue to have meaningful disagreements over the basic conditions of moral responsibility.     

企业为何履行社会责任却落得“伪善”名声?——企业社会责任类型和感知品牌伪善间的关系

2015年中国300强企业慈善捐款达60.03亿元,形成鲜明对照的是,消费者对企业社会责任行为动机的质疑呈整体上升趋势。企业耗费巨资履行社会责任反遭遇感知伪善,无疑与其初衷背道而驰,而现有理论不能充分解释这一现象的原因。自Wagner等学者2009年在营销顶级期刊开启感知品牌伪善相关研究以来,学者多从社会学借鉴感知个体伪善研究中言行不一的分析框架,把企业社会责任单维化,显然不能反映由多样性利益相关者所决定的企业社会责任类型的差异性和复杂性,所以应从利益相关者视角揭示感知品牌伪善的形成机制。根据利益相关者特征划分企业社会责任类型——技术性和公共性,进而引入其中间机制——合法性理论和感知道德资产理论,最终验证企业社会责任类型的交互作用、企业社会责任类型与宣传的交互作用对感知品牌伪善的影响。考虑到企业社会责任的经济和社会双重影响,这一成果将指引企业正确履行社会责任,促进企业和社会良性互动。     

青少年网络不道德行为与父母教养方式的关系——道德脱离、责任心、道德同一性的中介作用

研究采用问卷法,对764名青少年进行测试,用结构方程模型检验了教养方式、责任心、道德同一性、道德脱离和网络不道德行为之间的关系模型。结果表明,拒绝型教养方式通过责任心、道德同一性和道德脱离的中介来间接影响网络不道德行为。责任心可以直接作用于网络不道德行为,也可以通过道德脱离的中介来影响网络不道德行为。道德同一性只能通过道德脱离来影响不道德行为。