On utilitarianism vs virtue ethics as foundations of economic choice theory

Jonsson, Petur O.

doi:10.1108/08288661111110150

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Normatif etik teorilerin temel sınıflandırılması: Teleolojik etik (sonuçsalçı), Deontolojik etik ve Erdem etiği şeklinde yapılmaktadır (Jonsson, 2011) (Belak & Rozman, 2012) (Whetstone, 2001) (Hartman & DesJardins, 2011). Normatif teoriler belli bir durum hakkında yapılacak eylemler ile ilgili yol gösteren, eylemin iyi-kötü, doğru-yanlış ya da yükümlülük olup olmadığı ile ilgili yargıda bulunmayı sağlayan yaklaşımlardır (Kart, 2006, s. 52).…”

Section: Normatif Etik Teorilerunclassified

Bir Muhasebe Meslek Odasında 2008-2013 Yıllarında Verilen Disiplin Cezalarının Yapısal Analizi

Karabinar¹,

Çevik²

2018

Muhasebe Ve Finansman Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dünyada muhasebe meslek örgütleri, mesleğin itibarını ve mesleki davranışların yüksek standartlarını korumayı amaç edinmiştir ve bu sebeple yönetmelikler ve tebliğler yoluyla düzenlemeler yapmaktadırlar. Bu çalışmanın amacı, meslek örgütünün yerel teşkilatlanması olan meslek odaları tarafından, yönetmelikler çerçevesinde 2008-2013 yılları arasında verilen disiplin cezalarını incelemektir. Bu amaçla, bir SMMM odasının vermiş olduğu disiplin cezalarının türü ve hangi etik yaklaşımına aykırı olduğu örnek vakalar üzerinden incelenmiştir.

show abstract

Section: Normatif Etik Teorilerunclassified

Bir Muhasebe Meslek Odasında 2008-2013 Yıllarında Verilen Disiplin Cezalarının Yapısal Analizi

Karabinar¹,

Çevik²

2018

Muhasebe Ve Finansman Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In truth our habits define us and are critical to our identity, happiness, and well-being (Jonsson 2011).…”

Section: On the Language And Semiotics Of Choice Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Name? On Language, Concept Formation, and the Definition Disputes in the Entrepreneurship Literature

Jonsson

2014

Cultural Science Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When it comes to entrepreneurship, the conceptual framework of economics is disjointed: On the one hand almost everyone agrees that entrepreneurial initiative and creativity are critical for economic progress. On the other hand neither initiative, nor creativity, plays any role in formal models of choice and economic behavior. This creates a blind spot on the behavioral aspects of entrepreneurship. It has also spawned a dichotomy between the functional and behavioral aspects of entrepreneurial actions in the economics literature. Most importantly, it prevents economists from developing a coherent unifying theoretical framework for making sense of entrepreneurs. The problem is reinforced by the language and semiotics of economics and is reflected by the lack of behavioral research on entrepreneurs in the literature. As suggested by Baumol (1968 and 2010) initiative and creativity are the obvious defining traits of entrepreneurship. Even so, the literature has spawned a variety of different and occasionally nonsensical definitions of entrepreneurship that obscure and divert our attention away from these defining characteristics. The divergent definitions in the literature are further exacerbated by discordant conceptual structures and ideas that cannot easily be translated from one field to another. In the absence of a unifying framework, different fields have focused narrowly on entrepreneurship from dissimilar angles. The bottom line is that researchers in different fields sometimes rely on such incompatible definitions of what constitutes entrepreneurship that interdisciplinary dialogue is impossible. The end result is akin to the problem of radical translation between different languages. The paper concludes that the definition debates will not be resolved without a unifying structure that focuses on initiative and creativity as the defining attributes of entrepreneurship. This calls for some new tools and behavioral models that can explicitly account for initiative and creativity as integral aspects of human choices and actions. JEL Classifications: B41, L26, Y90, Z1 1 The author would like to thank John Hartley and an anonymous referee for Cultural Science for insightful comments that helped improve this article. Of course, all the usual disclaimers still apply.

show abstract

“…Values are socially constructed and develop early in childhood (Hofstede 2001); they depend on the context and change over time. Authors that study aspects of moral ethics in international corporations distinguish such values as honesty, responsibility and fairness (McCloskey, 1998;Bertland, 2009;Jonsson, 2011;Moore, 2013). Ethical reasoning in this framework assesses positive or negative traits that can provide motivation in each situation.…”

Section: The 'Right' Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Traditional ethical theories are often broadly divided into three types: 1) consequentialist or teleological theories, which are primarily concerned with the result, 2) non-consequentialist or deontological theories, which are primarily concerned with the intent, and 3) agent-centred or virtue ethics, which consider characters of individuals rather than morality of actions (Boatright, 1997;Fisher and Lovell, 2009;Jonsson, 2011;Belak and Rozman, 2012). Here we would also like to note that ethics is just one of the socio-cultural systems affecting decision-making, along with others systems, such as the legal system or religion, which could also play a role determining the 'right' way.…”

Section: The 'Right' Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

Managing workplace diversity: Ethical reasoning in a socio-cultural context

Apsalone

2017

PROSOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workplaces are becoming increasingly diverse, and businesses constantly face the challenge of ensuring work ethics to strengthen competitiveness. Workplace ethics is affected not just by potential gains and losses of unethical action but also by employee morale, values and self-concept. The ethical reasoning process depends on both perception of what is ethical and the ability to justify unethical action in a given situation. In this study, we explore the role of individual, organisational and situational factors influencing the perceived degree of unethical behaviour at work. Individual socio-cultural factors include personal values, such as honesty, and socio-demographic factors, such as age, gender, education and tenure. Organisational factors are assessed through espoused values of honesty and responsibility. Finally, three situational factors are randomly introduced – low wage, boredom and perceived injustice. Two hundred and eight retail employees were surveyed to assess their personal values and the perceived degree of unethical behaviour at work. We found that honesty as a personal value changes ethical reasoning, especially when situational factors, such as low wage are introduced. Moreover, older employees tend to report more ethical behaviour in the workforce. We also concluded that declaring honesty and responsibility as organisational values could have a minor positive impact on ethical behaviour mitigating the impact of the introduced situational factors. Keywords: Socio-cultural factors, values, workplace diversity, business ethics, ethical reasoning

show abstract

On utilitarianism vs virtue ethics as foundations of economic choice theory

Cited by 15 publications

References 49 publications

Bir Muhasebe Meslek Odasında 2008-2013 Yıllarında Verilen Disiplin Cezalarının Yapısal Analizi

Bir Muhasebe Meslek Odasında 2008-2013 Yıllarında Verilen Disiplin Cezalarının Yapısal Analizi

What’s in a Name? On Language, Concept Formation, and the Definition Disputes in the Entrepreneurship Literature

Managing workplace diversity: Ethical reasoning in a socio-cultural context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About