Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:50:23.043Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Business Ethics and Postmodernism: A Dangerous Dalliance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Clarence C. Walton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Postmodernism, a poorly defined term, is nevertheless influencing art, architecture, literature and philosophy. And despite its definitional ambiguities, some philosophers see in postmodernism a reason for the rise and interest in business ethics. This view is chailenged on two grounds: (1) its philosophical source in Europe; and (2) its vocabulary. Martin Heidegger, one of the major forces in postmodernism’s rise, left a confusing legacy. In his early years, Heidegger advocated moral subjectivism; in his later years, he argued that moral standards could be found in the lives of human gods whose pronouncements would replace the precepts of a Western Civilization he found decadent.

Contemporary postmodernism seems to take inspiration from the views of both the younger and older Heidegger even though he, himself, saw contradictions between them. The confusion is compounded by incorporation of Neitzsche's God-is-dead thesis into Heideggerian thought, thereby, confronting philosophers with a dilemma: if God is out of the picture, and if objective rules derived from human nature do not exist, what human gods can lead us? Will they come from a political or cultural elite? How should we know them? Why should we trust them? Unless—and until—these questions are answered, it is unwise to build business ethics on a postmodern foundation.

Another—and seemingly insignificant—reason for rejecting postmodernism ethics is the esoteric vocabulary used by its expositors to advance it. More jargon will not help philosophers who try to respond to moral questions raised by business managers themselves.

Type
Response Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , July 1993 , pp. 285 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 George, Balandier, “La demand d’éthique,” Cahiers Internationau de Sociologie 88 (January-June 1990), p. 5.Google Scholar Many citations are from French sources because considerable research was carried out during the summer of 1992 in the libraries of the University of Geneva and the University of Fribourg.

2 Ronald, Green, “When Is ‘Everybody’s Doing It’ a Moral Justification?” Business Ethics Quarterly, 1 (January 1991), pp. 75–88.Google Scholar

3 Ronald, Green, “Business Ethics As a Postmodern Phenomenon,” Business Ethics Quarterly, 3 (July 1993), pp. 219–25.Google Scholar

4 Albrecht, Wellmer, The Persistence of Modernity: Essays on Aesthetics, Ethics, and Postmodernism (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991), p. 38. David Midgley, Tr.Google Scholar.

5 Ralph, Cohen, “Do Postmodern Genres Exist?” in Marjorie Perloff, ed., Postmodern Genres (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1989), p. 11Google Scholar.

6 Hayden, White, Topics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), p. 69Google Scholar.

7 Frederic, Jameson, Post Modernism, Ory The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Durham: Duke University Press, 1991), p. 342Google Scholar.

8 Cornel, West, “Postmodern Culture,” in Emory, Elliot, ed., Columbia History of the American Novel (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), p. 115Google Scholar.

9 David, Harvey, “Looking Backwards on Postmodernism” in Post-Modernism On Trial (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990), p. 10. Ed. Andreas, C. PapadakisGoogle Scholar. For an expansion of Harvey’s views see his The Condition of Postmodernity (Cambridge: Basil Blackwell, 1989).

10 Christopher, Norris, “What’s Wrong with Postmodernism?,” Critical Theory and the Ends of Philosophy (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

11 Jean-François, Lyotard, Difference: Phrases in Dispute (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), pp. 163–66. Georges van dem Abeeele, Tr.Google Scholar.

12 ”Discussion between Jean-François, Lyotard and Richard, Rorty,” Critique, 41 (1985), pp. 582–84Google Scholar. Readers who seek a broader appreciation of Lyotard’s thoughts on the persuasion-coercion difference may wish to consult Richard Bernstein, J., “Habermas and Lyotard” in Habermas and Modernity (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1980), pp. 582Google Scholar et seq.

13 Dale, Jamieson, “The Poverty of Postmodernist Theory,” University of Colorado Law Review, 62 (No. 3, 1991), p. 456Google Scholar.

14 Being and Time, (New York: Hoyer and Rowe, 1962), No. 9. John, Macquarrie Tr. and Robinson, E.Google Scholar

15 John, D. Caputo, Radical Hermeneutics: Repetition, Deconstructiony and the Hermeneutic Project (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1987)Google Scholar. The flavor of Caputo’s essential position may be gotten from his article, “The Difficulty of Life: A Reply to Ronald, H. McKinney,” The Journal of Value Inquiry, 26 (1992), pp. 561–64Google Scholar.

16 Thomas, L. Prangle, The Ennobling of Democracy: The Challenge of the Postmodern Era (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), pp. 208–9Google Scholar.

17 Ibid., p. 208.

18 Immanuel, Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals (New York: Harper and Row, 1964)Google Scholar.

19 Isaiah, Berlin Sir, “Reply to Ronald McKinney’s ‘Toward a Postmodern Ethics: Sir Isaiah Berlin and John Caputo,’” The Journal of Value Inquiry, 26 (1992), pp. 557–60Google Scholar.

20 Ronald, H. McKinney S. J., “Toward a Postmodern Ethics: Sir Isaiah Berlin and John Caputo,’” Journal of Value Inquiry, 26 (1992), pp. 395–407. McKinney teaches at the University of ScrantonGoogle Scholar.

21 McKinney, p. 398.

22 Jean-François, Lyotard, Postmodernism Explained to Children (Paris: Editions Galilee, 1986), pp. 33ffGoogle Scholar. The original title appeared in France as Le Postmoderne expliqué aux enfants. See also Lyotard, , The Postmodern Condition—A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984)Google Scholar. Interestingly enough, very few of Lyotard’s books were on the library shelves of the University of Geneva, prompting an interesting question: Is Lyotard lionized too much in the United States?

23 This second point recalls Daniel, Bell in The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (New York: Basic Books, 1970)Google Scholar.

24 See Gillies, Lipovetsky’s essay on Lyotard, “Travail et désir,” Critique (July 1973), pp. 615–35Google Scholar.

25 Jean-Paul, Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism (London: Methuen, 1982). Phillip Mariet, Tr.Google Scholar.

26 Dominick, Lacapra, A Preface to Sartre (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978)Google Scholar. For an exhaustive bibliography on Sartre see Francois, H. Lapointe, Jean-Paul Sartre and His Critics: An International Bibliography 1938–1980(Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University, 1981)Google Scholar.

27 Jean-Paul, Sartre, What Is Literature and Other Essays (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), p. 37. Steven Ungas, Tr.Google Scholar.

28 Ibid., pp. 68–69.

29 Michael, Murray, ed., Heidegger and Modern Philosophy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1978), p. vii.Google Scholar Other good commentaries on Heidegger include Charles, Scott, Heidegger and the Question of Ethics: Nietzsche, Foucault, Heidegger (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1990)Google Scholar; Peter, Blum, Heidegger and Rorty; and the End of Philosophy; and David, J. Wood, Heidegger after Derrida: The Deconstruction of Time (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanistics Press International, 1985)Google Scholar.

30 Victor, Farias, Heidegger and Nazism (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989)Google Scholar, Tr. Paul Burrell and Gabriel Ricci. See also Tom, Rockmore, On Heidegger’s Nazism and Philosophy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992)Google Scholar. The ferocity of the argument over Heidegger’s Nazism became clear when Jacques Derrida threatened to sue the Columbia University Press if his pro-Heidegger statements continued to be published in Richard, Wolin’s collection, The Heideggerian Controversy: A Critical Reader (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991 )Google Scholar. For a crisp account of this issue none is better than Thomas, Sheehan, “A Normal Nazi,” The New York Review of Books (January 14, 1993), pp. 30–35Google Scholar.

31 Richardson, W. J., Heidegger (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1967), pp. 359Google Scholar et seq.

32 Quoted by Centore, F.F., Being and Becoming: A Critique of Post-Modernism (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), p. 17Google Scholar.

33 Martin, Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays (New York: Harper & Row, 1977), pp. 27–35Google Scholar. William Lovitt, Tr.. See also Heidegger’s book, Poetry, Language, and Thought (New York: Harper & Row, 1971). Albert Hofstadter, Tr.Google Scholar.

34 Jerry, Weinberger, “Politics and the Problem of Technology: An Essay on Heidegger and the Tradition of Political Philosophy,” American Political Science Review, 86 (March 1992), pp. 112–27Google Scholar. See also Harold, Alderman, “Heidegger’s Critique of Science and Technology” in Murray, Heidegger and Modern Philosophy, pp. 35–50Google Scholar. In his celebrated Being and Time, Heidegger stated one of the identifying themes of postmodernism is that science does not expose the nature of external realities but is rather the result of communications and discourses. Truth is found within the thinker. Heidegger, , Being and Time (New York: Harpers, 1962). Macquarrie, Tr. J. and Robinson, E.Google Scholar.

35 Edith, Wyschogrod, Saints and Postmodernism: Revising Moral Philosophy (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

36 Tom, Rockmore, On Heidegger’s Nazism and Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), p. 283Google Scholar.

37 Ballard, G. and Scott, C. E., Martin Heidegger in Europe and America (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1973)Google Scholar. See also the general study by Frederick, C. Copleston, Contemporary Philosophy (London: Search Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

38 Martin, Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1973). James Churchill, Tr.Google Scholar.

39 Jeffrey, Andrew Barash, “Martin Heidegger in the Perspective of the Twentieth Century: Reflections on Heidegger’s Gesamtausgabe,” The Journal of Modern History, 64 (March 1992), pp. 52–78Google Scholar.

40 On the Nietzschean thesis about God’s death see the thorough study by Walter, A. Kaufmann, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Anti-Christ (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968)Google Scholar, 3rd ed. A companion piece is Joseph, P. Stern, A Study of Nietzsche (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979)Google Scholar.

41 Charles, E. Scott, The Question of Ethics: Nietzsche, Foucault, Heidegger (Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

42 Jacques, Derrida, Of Grammatology (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1970). See also Positions (London: Athlone Press, 1984 and Margins of Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

43 Richard, Rorty, “Overcoming the Tradition: Heidegger and Dewey” in Murray, op. cit., ch. 1Google Scholar. Those who wish to begin the journey into Heidegger’s thought might find a starting point in Heidegger, , What Is Called Thinking (New York: Harper & Row, 1972)Google Scholar. Tr. J. G. Gray and F. D. Wieck. Excellent commentaries have been written by George, Steiner, Heidegger (Hassocks, Sussex: Harvester Press, 1973)Google Scholar, and the already cited Ballard, and Scott, book, Martin Heidegger In Europe and America (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1973)Google Scholar.

44 Wayne, C. Booth, A Rhetoric of Irony (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974), pp. ix and 177Google Scholar. Richard Rorty also noted how irony is characteristic of (and appropriate for) postmodern expression. Contingency, Irony; and Solidarity (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989).

45 David, Kolb, “Postmodern Sophisticates,” Post-Modernism On Trial, pp. 15–16Google Scholar.

46 Gilbert, Lascault wrote: “Une pensée rûse est difficile à apprender et elle souhaite maintainit cette difficulté.” “Les complots et la ruse,” L’ARC, No. 15 (1973), p. 3Google Scholar.

47 Susan, Small, “Preserving the Humanities.” Address to the Washington Center Conferenee on the Humanities. Washington, DC, 1989.Google Scholar Italics mine.

48 Roland, Barthes, Mythologies (New York: The Noonday Press, 1922), p. 111Google Scholar. Tr. Editions du Seul, Paris.

49 Charles, E.Lindblom, , Inquiry and Change: The Troubled Attempt to Understand and Shape Society (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), pp. 114Google Scholar and 136.

50 Lester, J.Cappon, , ed., The Adams-Jefferson Letters (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), p. 388Google Scholar.

51 George, W. F. Hegel, Philosophy of Right (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976). Knox, T. M. Tr.Google Scholar.

52 Carl, K. Y. Shaw, “Hege’s Theory on Modern Bureaucracy,” American Political Science Review, 86 (June 1992), pp. 381–89Google Scholar.

53 Byrne, E. F. emphasized this last point in his book, Work Inc.: A Philosophical Inquiry (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990), p. 281Google Scholar.

54 Jean-François, Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), p. xvivGoogle Scholar.

55 Ketu, H. Katrak, “Colonialism, Imperialism, and Imagined Homes,” Columbia History of the American Novel (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), pp. 654–55Google Scholar. General editor Emory Elliot.

56 Karl, Marx and Frederich, Engel, On Britain (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishers, 1962), p. 529Google Scholar. Karl Mannheim reminds us that emphasis on Marxism as the one socio-economic form of organization ignores “all other forms of social aggregation.” Structure of Thinking (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1982), pp. 96-97.

57 Kritzman, L.D., ed., Michel Foucault: Politics, Philosophy, Culture (New York: Routledge Chapman and Hall, 1988)Google Scholar.

58 Derek, Sayer, “A Notable Administration: English State Formation and the Rise of Capitalism,” American Journal of Sociology, 97 (March 1992), pp. 1382–1415Google Scholar.

59 Norris, , What’s Wrong with Postmodernism?, p. 465Google Scholar.

60 Frederic, Jameson, Post Modernism—Or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Durham, Duke University Press, 1991), p. 297Google Scholar. Because of his complex syntax, it is difficult to know precisely what Jameson means. Typical of his writing is the following: “It is true that Lachau and Mouffe are less and less attentive to the tendency to differentiation and separatism, infinite fission and nominalism,’ in small-group politics (it does not seem quite right to call it sectarianism any longer, but there is certainly a group parallel with the various existentialism on the level of individual experience), for they see the passion for equality’ from which the small groups spring as the mechanism which will also forge them—by way of the Chain of Equivalents,’ the expansive power of the equations of identity—into alliances and reunified Gramscian hegemonic blocs.”

61 Jameson,“Secondary Elaborations.”

62 Ibid., p. 206.

63 Ibid., p. 273.

64 Patricia Werhane made this point in her thoughtful study, Adam Smith and His Legacy for Modern Capitalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 178.

65 Incidentally, these important points have been ignored in the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, especially Art. 17.

66 This suggests that The Wealth of Nations and the Theory of Moral Sentiments should be read as a single text. Both books have been published in New York by the Oxford University Press in 1974.

67 Milton, Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950)Google Scholar.

68 Thomas, L. Prangle, The Ennobling of Democracy: The Challenge of the Postmodern Era (Baltimore: The Johnson Hopkins University Press, 1992), p. 74Google Scholar.

69 Daniel, Statman, “A New Argument for Economic Moral Dilemmas?” The Journal of Value Inquiry, 26 (1992), pp. 565–75Google Scholar.

70 Ayer, A. J., Philosophy in the Twentieth Century (New York: Random House, 1982)Google Scholar.

71 This drift was especially marked during the July Monarchy (1830-1848) of Louis Philippe when the bordello culture took hold. See Alain, Corbin, Women for Hire: Prostitution and Sexuality in France after 1850 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992). Tr. Alan SheridanGoogle Scholar.

72 Centore, , Being and Becoming, pp. 62–63Google Scholar. This does not mean, as Heidegger once reminded us, that the entire truth ever shines clearly in the heavens and falls fully made into people’s laps.

73 Eric, Voegelin, Science, Politics and Gnosticism (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1968), pp. 107–10Google Scholar.

74 One point is important to stress in the postmodern God-is-dead debate: Nietzsche and Heidegger may have recoiled at the pain of European peasants who lived under a massive imputation of guilt in a siege mentality, fostered especially by a pastoral pedagogy of fear and guilt. The two great realities were an angry God and a busy Satan. This pedagogy led to a horror of sin, an obsession with damnation, and negative images of oneself as a sinner. From pulpits pastors thundered the same message. While catechisms presented a more optimistic view of individuals blessed by grace, the more pervasive themes were like those found as late as 1914 in the funeral liturgy of God the avenger, not God the savior. See Jean, Delumeau, Sin and Fear: The Emergence of a Western Guilt Culture: 13th-18th Centuries (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990)Google Scholar.

75 Rorty voiced a common postmodern view when he said that philosophers from Socrates and Aristotle to Descartes and Locke have trapped us with metaphors passed on as ideas.

76 Frederick, Crews, The Critics Bear It Away: American Fiction and the Academy (New York: Random House, 1992)Google Scholar.

77 On an earlier occasion I defended business ethics against charges that it was “useless,” “irrelevant,” “dangerous” and “confused.” There is little hope that postmodernism rhetoric helps to refute the allegations. Clarence, C. Walton, ed., Enriching Business Ethics (New York: Plenum Press, 1990), p. 3Google Scholar.

78 Postmodernism is concerned with humanity’s need for a new dwelling for a new time and a new space. Unfortunately, its theory does not provide a reliable architecture for such a structure. A return to David Harvey’s already noted essay justifies this point.

79 Terry, Eagleton, Criticism and Ideology: A Study in Marxist Literary Criticism (London: Verso, 1982)Google Scholar.

80 Michael, W. Hoffman, “Business and Environmental Ethics,” Business Ethics Quarterly, 1 (April 1991), pp. 169–84Google Scholar.

81 Gertrude, Himmelfarb, “Tradition and Creativity in the Writing of History,” First Things (November 1992), p. 33Google Scholar.

82 Idem.