The Rawlsian Critique of Utilitarianism: A Luhmannian Interpretation

被引:0
作者
Vladislav Valentinov
机构
[1] Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies,
来源
Journal of Business Ethics | 2017年 / 142卷
关键词
Economic system; Justice; Niklas Luhmann; John Rawls; Societal environment; Utilitarianism;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The present paper builds on the Rawlsian critique of utilitarianism in order to identify the moral implications of Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory. While Luhmann aptly discerned the pervasive problems of the precarious system–environment relations throughout the modern society, he took moral communication to be person-centered and thus ill-equipped to deal with these problems. At the same time, the Rawlsian possibility of sacrificing fundamental liberties for the sake of economic gains not only exemplifies the Luhmannian precariousness of the relations of the economic system to its societal environment, but also shows this precariousness to be a moral problem. Thus, from the systems-theoretic perspective, the Rawlsian idea of justice denotes the moral dimension of the capacity of the societal environment to carry the economic system. More generally, the proposed complementarity between Rawls and Luhmann allows to see the precariousness of system–environment relations, for any type of social system, as a moral problem. Two implications follow. First, the morally problematic manifestations of the precarious system–environment relations are not limited to the Rawlsian case of the discrimination of the least advantaged groups but rather include a broad range of social costs and damaging effects of business on society and nature. Second, and related, the proposed systems-theoretic perspective explicates the moral value of sustainability of the economic as well as other social systems in their environment, societal and ecological alike.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / 35
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Agafonow A(2013)Toward a positive theory of social entrepreneurship: On maximizing versus satisficing value capture Journal of Business Ethics 125 709-713
[2]  
Beckmann M(2014)Commitment strategies for sustainability: How business firms can transform trade-offs into win–win outcomes Business Strategy and the Environment 23 18-37
[3]  
Hielscher S(1997)The autopoiesis of administrative systems: Niklas Luhmann on public administration and public policy Public Administration 75 417-439
[4]  
Pies I(2015)Linking market orientation and environmental performance: The influence of environmental strategy, employee’s environmental involvement, and environmental product quality Journal of Business Ethics 127 479-500
[5]  
Brans M(2015)Tensions in corporate sustainability: Towards an integrative framework Journal of Business Ethics 127 297-316
[6]  
Rossbach S(1994)The fascination of amorality: Luhmann’s theory of morality and its resonances among German intellectuals Theory, Culture & Society 11 69-99
[7]  
Chen Y(2014)The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic re-conceptualization of an Aristotelian idea Business and Society 53 226-259
[8]  
Tang G(2009)Moral commitments and the societal role of business: An ordonomic approach to corporate citizenship Business Ethics Quarterly 19 375-401
[9]  
Jin J(2015)Enlightened shareholder maximization: Is this strategy achievable? Journal of Business Ethics 127 683-694
[10]  
Li J(2015)Inclusive and exclusive social preferences: A Deweyan framework to explain governance heterogeneity Journal of Business Ethics 126 473-485