Discourse ethics
In Kantian or Rawlsian ethics the moral judgment is made by a “ monologue ”. However, in reality we usually have dialogue of disagreed parties who need to reach an agreement.
A rule of action or choice is justified, only if all those affected by the rule or choice could accept it in a reasonable discourse.
Presuppositions for a reasonable discourse: • Everyone use the same linguistic expressions • No relevant argument is suppressed or excluded by the participants • No force except that of the better argument is exerted • Everyone is motivated only by a concern for the better argument • Everyone would agree to the universal validity of the claim thematized
• Everyone is entitled to participate and to introduce new topics or express attitudes needs or desires • No validity claim is exempt in principle from critical evaluation • etc.
Other Approaches Postmodern Ethics
“Modernism” is a scientific, rational approach to explanation. “Postmodernism” believes that this is too abstract and reductionist. The world is much more complex.
Z. Bauman (1993): • Rational approaches to morality are dangerous, because they deny real source of morality, which is based on emotional “moral impulse” towards others. • There are no universal norms, but many local ethical truths that are based on inner feelings of the participants. • It is impossible to teach business ethics on the basis of abstract argumentation but only with personal example.
2.17
|
