Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T14:10:50.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding the Separation Thesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Joakim Sandberg
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many writers in the field of business ethics seem to have accepted R. Edward Freeman’s argument to the effect that what he calls “the separation thesis,” or the idea that business and morality can be separated in certain ways, should be rejected. In this paper, I discuss how this argument should be understood more exactly, and what position “the separation thesis” refers to. I suggest that there are actually many interpretations (or versions) of the separation thesis going around, ranging from semantic, empirical and reformative to some which are straightforwardly normative. While it is generally agreed that the separation thesis should be rejected, then, there is not as much agreement on what this thesis actually says. I suggest that whether or not we should reject the separation thesis, however, ultimately must depend on how we understand it more exactly—on certain interpretations, the thesis comes out as more or less trivially false, but we should demand more evidence or argument to reject it on certain other interpretations. This result presents a challenge for all those writers who are committed to the rejection of the separation thesis.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , April 2008, pp. 213 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2008

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abela, A. 2001. “Adam Smith and the Separation Thesis,” Business and Society Review 106(3): 187–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowie, N. E. 1999. Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
Chryssides, G.. and Kaler, J. 1996. Essentials of Business Ethics (London: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
Cummings, L. S. and Guthrie, J.. 2004. “Managerial Attitudes toward Stakeholder Salience within Selected Western Pacific-Rim Economies,” MGSM Working Papers in Management, Macquarie Graduate School of Management.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De George, R. T.. 2006. Business Ethics, 6th edition (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall).Google Scholar
Dunfee, T. W. 1999. “Corporate Governance in a Market with Morality,” Law and Contemporary Problems 62: 129–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E.. 1994. “The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions,” Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 409–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E.. 1999. “Response: Divergent Stakeholder Theory,” Academy of Management Review 24(2): 233–36.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E. 2000. “Business Ethics at the Millennium,” Business Ethics Quarterly 10(2):169–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C. and Parmar, B. 2004. “Stakeholder Theory and ‘The Corporate Objective Revisited,’” Organization Science 15(3): 364–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 1966. “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in Essays in Positive Economics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Friedman, M.. 1970. “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits,” New York Times Magazine (13 September).Google Scholar
Helgesson, G.. 2002. “Values, Norms & Ideology in Mainstream Economics.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, W. H. 2005. “The Nature of Man,” in Corporate Governance at the Crossroads, ed. Chew, D. H. Jr. and Gillan, S. L. (New York: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
Kaler, J.. 2002. “Morality and Strategy in Stakeholder Identification,” Journal of Business Ethics 39: 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1984. “Does Applied Ethics Rest on a Mistake?” The Monist 67(4): 498–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolis, J. D. and Walsh, J. B 2001. “Misery Loves Companies: Whither Social Initiatives by Business?” Harvard Business School Working Paper.Google Scholar
Martin, K. E. and Freeman, R. E. 2004. “The Separation of Technology and Ethics in Business Ethics,” Journal of Business Ethics 53: 353–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroth, F.. 2005. “Through the Eye of the Needle: The Profit Motive’s Effect on Managerial Moral Reasoning.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Salve Regina University.Google Scholar
Solomon, R. C.. 1992. Ethics and Excellence: Cooperation and Integrity in Business (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Sonenshein, S.. 2005. “Positive Organizational Scholarship and Business Ethics,” in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Management: Business Ethics, 2nd edition, ed. Werhane, P. H. and Freeman, R. E. (Oxford: Blackwell), 410–14.Google Scholar
Tebbit, M.. 2000. Philosophy of Law: An Introduction (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Werhane, P. H. and Freeman, R. E. 1999. “Business Ethics: The State of the Art,” International Journal of Management Reviews 1(2): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wicks, A. C. 1996. “Overcoming the Separation Thesis: The Need for a Reconsideration of Business and Society Research,” Business & Society 35(2): 89–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar