The strongest argument for the conclusion that corporations should be held morally responsible for their actions has been advanced by Philip Pettit. Pettit’s argument proceeds in two steps: arguing first that corporations are fit to be held morally responsible, and second that, given this fitness, they should be. This chapter assumes that Pettit has established his first point—that corporations can bear moral responsibility—but argues that nevertheless, they should not. The argument for this conclusion is based on the twin observations that: 1) attributing moral responsibility to corporations has no useful practical value—it does not supply any desirable end that is not achievable without corporate moral responsibility; and, 2) attributing moral responsibility to corporations is incompatible with the basic values of a liberal society.
The Phantom Menace of the Responsibility Deficit
The Phantom Menace of the Responsibility Deficit
Recent Publications
- Common Law Liberalism: A New Theory of the Libertarian Society (Oxford University Press, 2024)
- “Diversity and Group Performance,” Encyclopedia of Diversity, Springer, 2024
- “Evading and Aiding: The Moral Case Against Paying Taxes,” with Christopher Freiman and Jessica Flanigan, Extreme Philosophy, ed. Stephen Hetherington, Routledge (2024)
- “Online Sports Betting Giants Place Their Bets Against Growing Rivals”
- “Liberal Tolerance for an Illiberal, Intolerant Age”
Recent News
- Business as a Force for Good: MBA Students Support Hurricane Helene Victims Through Ethics Project
- Advocacy group concerned pay-for-plasma clinics expanding to Ontario will hurt voluntary donations
- Jason Brennan and Hélène Landemore, Debating Democracy (University of Zurich’s UBS Center, 2024)
- Jason Brennan “Everything Wrong with Democracy” on the Alex O’Connor Podcast (January 28, 2024)
- On the affirmative action ruling, the Supreme Court got it half right