A Critical Inquiry into a Justification of Teaching Ethics in the Business Schools

Abstract

Any attempt at teaching Ethics in disciplines other than Philosophy should be well justified. One justification is that through ethics teaching across the curriculum, pre-professionals and professionals get well equipped to apply ethical theories to resolve moral crises in practical life. One example is popular enough, i.e., through ethical teaching we prepare competent professionals in our business schools, who may further apply this knowledge in their field as well as assume the role of ethics consultants to resolve moral crisis in the field of management. I have tried to show why such a justification is completely unfounded. A critique of this justification leads us to know what applying ethics consists in and, in what sense teaching ethics across the curriculum, for instance, in business management curriculum may be useful.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Prasada

Rajendra

, ‘Applying Ethics’, J.I.C.P.R., Vol. XIV, No.2, 1997, pp 5–6.

2. Ibid. p.10.

3. Ibid. p.5.

4. Ibid. p.6.

5. Ibid. p.5.

6. Ibid. p.10.

7. Frankena

W.K.

, ‘Ethics’, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi, 1989, p.13.

8. “Whistle blowing” and “free riding” are unique value-laden problems in the field of business, which are faced by our managers. The problem simply stated is whether or not it is ethically desirable to raise a warning against the malpractice of a business organization even if you are a responsible manager. The moral dilemma of choice is clear – whether or not to blow the whistle or to make a piggy ride on the seat of egocentric desire fulfillment.

9. Readers may refer to A.L. Caplan's “Mechanics of Duty: The Limitations of a Technical Definition of Moral Expertise for work in Applied Ethics” in Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary volume VIII, 1982, pp. 1–18.

10.

10. Ethical principles are those generalized standards or criteria that are believed to be well justified set of axioms from which we may derive several secondary rules of decision-making and moral actions, as well as evaluate the moral actions and decisions taken by a moral agent. These principles are mainly deontology advocated by Immanuel Kant and teleology, for example, utilitarianism of J.S. Mill. We have a number of teleological standards apart from Utilitarianism but deontology is largely monolithic.