In article
<a1deaf00-d18c-4ff3-bb27-69f565c17515@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
johan.g.larson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> An interesting comment was made recently over on BoingBoing:
>
> "I strongly object to people, like you, attempting to impose a moral
> duty for individuals in their relation****p with cor****ations.
>
> "Lents may, or may not, have a legal duty to Wa****ngton Mutual, but he
> has no moral duty to that entity.
>
> "Cor****ations are not moral actors. That is the fundamental genius,
> and evil, of their existence. They do what they do out of a 'pre-
> conventional' morality. They work to avoid punishment and seek their
> own self interest.
>
> "A contract with a cor****ation is a legal agreement, not a moral
> agreement. That contract comes with its own rewards and punishments,
> but it is vital that we kill the myth that contracts impose upon an
> individual a moral duty."
>
> (from
>
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/26/derivates-shellgame.html#comment-133094
> )
>
> I don't really know what to make of that, myself.
I would have said that there can be no moral duty towards a cor****ation,
strictu sensu, because a cor****ation is not a moral actor--it's a
fictitious person, not a real one. But a contract with a cor****ation
imposes moral duties towards various real people, since the cor****ate
form is simply a way of simplifying real relation****ps among real
people.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of _Harald_, a fantasy without magic.
Published by Baen, in bookstores now
|
