Not exactly a masterpiece of photographism--it was cold, and I was in a hurry--but it at least shows why I'm home from school today. My wife, on the other hand, still had to trek over to Evergreen, where they don't cancel classes unless the power's out.
Just wait until tomorrow, when all this slushy mess freezes solid.
2 comments:
I read your older posts about the newest LD topic, "The actions of corporations ought to be held to the same standards as the actions of individuals," and I'm hooked. All of those entries have definitely stimulated me, and I have some ideas. I'd love some feedback.
Kant says: "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
I'm not quite sure what that means . . . Something along the lines of: Principles are only moral if all humans can be held bindingly to them. If I'm about to lie to avoid the consequence of my action, I should ask myself if "lying to avoid consequences" as universal principle is moral. Obviously it isn't, so my action is immoral.
Well, the actions of corporations are so much more complex than the actions of individuals and are almost never based on a pure, or moral, motive. Corporations, in almost every situation, are based around profit (they are not ALL based around profit, as some are charity organizations.) Corporations don't exist to do what is "right," they don't exist to fulfill their moral duty. Human life, on the other hand, is centered around becoming MORE human, and we exist to find a deeper humanity. We do this by doing what is right, without question. Humans can be held to moral standards because we exist to become more moral, more human. Corporations exist for a different purpose than to be moral and/or more human, therefore their actions can't be held to those same moral standards that dictate the actions of individuals.
Hm . . . Humans strive to be more human. Corporations strive to make a profit. A corporation cannot take an action because the members of the corporation decide that the action is "right." The actions of corporations always take into account their shareholders, profit, budget, etc.. They are never and can never be pure. Therefore, the actions of a corporation can't be moral, so they ought not to be held to the same moral standard as the actions of individuals. Or something.
I understand that all of what I wrote was incoherent and lacked any sense of cohesion, but I'm just brainstorming.
Any ideas?
euan, thanks. Since your post is "off-topic," I'm going to put it in a place more accessible to others, and link it back to the other posts I've written, and also respond to your hypotheses. Coming soon!
Post a Comment