The Bystander in Commercial Life: Obliged by Beneficence or Rescue

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Liberalist thinking argues that moral agents have a right (or duty) to pursue an ordinary life. It also insists that moral agent can be bystanders. A bystander is involved with morally bad states of affairs in the sense that they are bound by moral duty, but for a non-blameworthy reason. A common view on the morality of commercial life argues that commercial agents cannot and ought not to assume the status of bystander, when confronted with child labor, pollution, or other overwhelmingly big morally bad states of affairs (oMBS). According to the common view, the agent will get overdemanded. In this paper, the overdemandingness charge is interpreted as a criticism of the liberalist position. According to this charge, bystander status must be given up in the market because otherwise the right (or duty) to pursue a personal life is crushed. In this paper, we demonstrate that the overdemandingness charge fails. It does not make sense if bystander status is grounded in the duty of beneficence. It would make sense if the status were grounded in the duty of rescue but that duty does not apply in relation to oMBS. The condition of ‘subjective urgency’ is not fulfilled. Hence, liberalist thinking can withstand the charge of overdemandingness and commercial agents cannot assume a right never to acknowledge bystander status (on account of the overdemandingness argument).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-13
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Business Ethics
Volume149
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2018

Fingerprint

child labor
morality
criticism
market
Bystander
Beneficence
Rescue
Charge
States of Affairs
Moral Agents

Keywords

  • Beneficence
  • Bystander
  • DISTANCE
  • DUTY
  • Morally bad states of affairs
  • OBLIGATIONS
  • Overdemandingness
  • Personal morality
  • RESPONSIBILITY
  • Rescue
  • Subjective urgency

Cite this

@article{4e42ef2e9dd8407fb97305198f36e187,
title = "The Bystander in Commercial Life: Obliged by Beneficence or Rescue",
abstract = "Liberalist thinking argues that moral agents have a right (or duty) to pursue an ordinary life. It also insists that moral agent can be bystanders. A bystander is involved with morally bad states of affairs in the sense that they are bound by moral duty, but for a non-blameworthy reason. A common view on the morality of commercial life argues that commercial agents cannot and ought not to assume the status of bystander, when confronted with child labor, pollution, or other overwhelmingly big morally bad states of affairs (oMBS). According to the common view, the agent will get overdemanded. In this paper, the overdemandingness charge is interpreted as a criticism of the liberalist position. According to this charge, bystander status must be given up in the market because otherwise the right (or duty) to pursue a personal life is crushed. In this paper, we demonstrate that the overdemandingness charge fails. It does not make sense if bystander status is grounded in the duty of beneficence. It would make sense if the status were grounded in the duty of rescue but that duty does not apply in relation to oMBS. The condition of ‘subjective urgency’ is not fulfilled. Hence, liberalist thinking can withstand the charge of overdemandingness and commercial agents cannot assume a right never to acknowledge bystander status (on account of the overdemandingness argument).",
keywords = "Beneficence, Bystander, DISTANCE, DUTY, Morally bad states of affairs, OBLIGATIONS, Overdemandingness, Personal morality, RESPONSIBILITY, Rescue, Subjective urgency",
author = "Wim Dubbink",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1007/s10551-016-3109-7",
language = "English",
volume = "149",
pages = "1--13",
journal = "Journal of Business Ethics",
issn = "0167-4544",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

The Bystander in Commercial Life : Obliged by Beneficence or Rescue. / Dubbink, Wim.

In: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 149, No. 1, 04.2018, p. 1-13.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Bystander in Commercial Life

T2 - Obliged by Beneficence or Rescue

AU - Dubbink, Wim

PY - 2018/4

Y1 - 2018/4

N2 - Liberalist thinking argues that moral agents have a right (or duty) to pursue an ordinary life. It also insists that moral agent can be bystanders. A bystander is involved with morally bad states of affairs in the sense that they are bound by moral duty, but for a non-blameworthy reason. A common view on the morality of commercial life argues that commercial agents cannot and ought not to assume the status of bystander, when confronted with child labor, pollution, or other overwhelmingly big morally bad states of affairs (oMBS). According to the common view, the agent will get overdemanded. In this paper, the overdemandingness charge is interpreted as a criticism of the liberalist position. According to this charge, bystander status must be given up in the market because otherwise the right (or duty) to pursue a personal life is crushed. In this paper, we demonstrate that the overdemandingness charge fails. It does not make sense if bystander status is grounded in the duty of beneficence. It would make sense if the status were grounded in the duty of rescue but that duty does not apply in relation to oMBS. The condition of ‘subjective urgency’ is not fulfilled. Hence, liberalist thinking can withstand the charge of overdemandingness and commercial agents cannot assume a right never to acknowledge bystander status (on account of the overdemandingness argument).

AB - Liberalist thinking argues that moral agents have a right (or duty) to pursue an ordinary life. It also insists that moral agent can be bystanders. A bystander is involved with morally bad states of affairs in the sense that they are bound by moral duty, but for a non-blameworthy reason. A common view on the morality of commercial life argues that commercial agents cannot and ought not to assume the status of bystander, when confronted with child labor, pollution, or other overwhelmingly big morally bad states of affairs (oMBS). According to the common view, the agent will get overdemanded. In this paper, the overdemandingness charge is interpreted as a criticism of the liberalist position. According to this charge, bystander status must be given up in the market because otherwise the right (or duty) to pursue a personal life is crushed. In this paper, we demonstrate that the overdemandingness charge fails. It does not make sense if bystander status is grounded in the duty of beneficence. It would make sense if the status were grounded in the duty of rescue but that duty does not apply in relation to oMBS. The condition of ‘subjective urgency’ is not fulfilled. Hence, liberalist thinking can withstand the charge of overdemandingness and commercial agents cannot assume a right never to acknowledge bystander status (on account of the overdemandingness argument).

KW - Beneficence

KW - Bystander

KW - DISTANCE

KW - DUTY

KW - Morally bad states of affairs

KW - OBLIGATIONS

KW - Overdemandingness

KW - Personal morality

KW - RESPONSIBILITY

KW - Rescue

KW - Subjective urgency

U2 - 10.1007/s10551-016-3109-7

DO - 10.1007/s10551-016-3109-7

M3 - Article

VL - 149

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - Journal of Business Ethics

JF - Journal of Business Ethics

SN - 0167-4544

IS - 1

ER -