Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T14:06:21.046Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the Machine Need a Ghost? Corporate Agents as Nonconscious Kantian Moral Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2018

KENDY M. HESS
KENDY M. HESS*
Affiliation:
COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSSkhess@holycross.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Does Kantian moral agency require phenomenal consciousness? More to the point, can firms (and other highly organized collectives) be Kantian moral agents—bound by Kantian obligations—in the absence of consciousness? After sketching the mechanics of my account of corporate agents, I consider three increasingly demanding accounts of Kantian moral agency, concluding that corporate agents can meet each successively higher threshold. They can (1) act on universalizable principles and treat humanity as an end in itself; (2) give such principles to themselves, treat their own ‘humanity’ as an end itself, and act out of respect for the law; and (3) to the extent necessary, draw on empathically generated information and insights to inflect their performance, all in the absence of phenomenal consciousness. I close by rejecting two further arguments that phenomenal consciousness is nonetheless conceptually or practically necessary for Kantian moral agency.

Keywords

corporate moral agencycollective intentionalitycollective responsibilityKantian ethicsbusiness ethicsphenomenal consciousness
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , Spring 2018 , pp. 67 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © American Philosophical Association 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

I would like to thank BJ Strawser, Norm Bowie, Robert Rupert, and two anonymous referees for the Journal of the American Philosophical Association for written comments on earlier versions of the text. The paper has also benefited from audience questions and comments at the 2013 Rocky Mountain Ethics Congress and a symposium session at the 2015 Central Meeting of the American Philosophical Association.

References

Albertzart, Mieke. (2017) ‘Monsters and their Makers: Group Agency without Moral Agency’. In Goldberg, Zachary J. (ed.), Reflections on Ethics and Responsibility: Essays in Honor of Peter French (New York: Springer International Publishing), 21–35.Google Scholar
Altman, Matthew C. (2007) ‘The Decomposition of the Corporate Body: What Kant Cannot Contribute to Business Ethics’. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 253–66.Google Scholar
Anderson, Ray. (2011) Business Lessons from a Radical Industrialist. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Block, Ned. (1995) ‘On a Confusion about a Function of Consciousness’. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18, 227–47.Google Scholar
Björnsson, Gunnar, and Hess, Kendy. (2017) ‘Corporate Crocodile Tears? The Reactive Attitudes of Corporate Agents’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 94, 273–98.Google Scholar
Bratman, Michael. (2013) Shared Agency: A Planning Theory of Acting Together. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David J. (1996) The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Copp, David. (1984) ‘What Collectives Are: Agency, Individualism and Legal Theory’. Dialogue, 23, 249–69.Google Scholar
Copp, David. (2006) ‘On the Agency of Certain Collective Entities: An Argument from “Normative Autonomy”’. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 30, 194–221.Google Scholar
Copp, David. (2007) ‘The Collective Moral Autonomy Thesis’. Journal of Social Philosophy, 38, 369–88.Google Scholar
Dretske, Fred. (1988) Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dretske, Fred. (1993) ‘Mental Events as Structuring Causes of Behavior’. In Heil, John and Mele, Alfred (eds.), Mental Causation (Oxford: Clarendon Press), 121–36.Google Scholar
French, Peter A. (1979) ‘The Corporation as a Moral Person’. American Philosophical Quarterly, 16, 207–15.Google Scholar
French, Peter A. (1984) Collective and Corporate Responsibility. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. (1992) On Social Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goodpaster, Kenneth E. (2007) Conscience and Corporate Culture. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. (2016) ’What is a (Social) Structural Explanation?’ Philosophical Studies, 173, 113–30.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2013) ‘“If You Tickle us”: How Corporations Can Be Moral Agents without Being Persons’. Journal of Value Inquiry, 47, 319–35.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2014a) ‘Because They Can: The Basis for the Moral Obligations of (Certain) Collectives’. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 38, 203–21.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2014b) ‘The Free Will of Corporations (and other Collectives)’. Philosophical Studies, 168, 241–60.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2015) ‘De-humanizing Morality’. In Crane, Jonathan (ed.), Beastly Morality: Animals as Moral Agents (New York: Columbia University Press), 31–51.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2018a, forthcoming) ‘Who's Responsible? (It's Complicated.): Assigning Blame in the Wake of the Financial Crisis’. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 42.Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2018b, forthcoming) ‘The Peculiar Unity of Corporate Agents’. In Hess, Kendy, Isaacs, Tracy, and Igneski, Violetta (eds.), Collectivity: Ontology, Ethics, and Social Justice (London: Rowman & Littlefield International).Google Scholar
Hess, Kendy. (2019, forthcoming) ‘(Almost) all Roads lead to Rome: Converging Approaches to Corporate Agency.” In Tollefsen, Deborah and Bazargan, Saba (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Collective Responsibility (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Hindriks, Frank. (2008). “The Status Account of Corporate Agents. In Schmid, Hans B., Schulte-Ostermann, Katinka, and Psarros, Nicos (eds.), Concepts of Sharedness: Essays on Collective Intentionality (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter), 119–44.Google Scholar
Hindriks, Frank. (2014) ‘How Autonomous are Collective Agents? Corporate Rights and Normative Individualism’. Erkenntnis, 79, 1565–85.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. (1993) Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Ellington, James Wo.. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. (1996) Metaphysics of Morals. In Practical Philosophy, translated by Gregor, Mary J. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 353–604.Google Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline. (2014) ‘Debunking Confabulation: Emotions and the Significance of Empirical Psychology for Kantian Ethics’. In Cohen, Alix (ed.), Kant on Emotion and Value (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 146–65.Google Scholar
List, Christian, and Pettit, Philip. (2011) Group Agency: The Possibility, Design, and Status of Corporate Agents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
List, Christian. (2018) ‘What is it Like to be a Group Agent?’ Noûs. 52(2), 295–319.Google Scholar
Manning, Rita C. (1984) ‘Corporate Responsibility and Corporate Personhood’. Journal of Business Ethics, 3, 77–84.Google Scholar
McKenna, Michael. (2006) ‘Collective Responsibility and an Agent Meaning Theory’. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 30, 16–34.Google Scholar
Miller, Seumas. (2001) Social Action: A Teleological Account. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Seumas, and Mäkelä, Pekka. (2005) ‘The Collectivist Approach to Collective Moral Responsibility’. Metaphilosophy, 36, 634–51.Google Scholar
Rönnegard, David. (2015) The Fallacy of Corporate Moral Agency. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Rovane, Carol A. (1998) The Bounds of Agency: An Essay in Revisionary Metaphysics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Paul. (2010) ‘Responsibility and the Condition of Moral Sense’. Philosophical Topics, 32, 287–305.Google Scholar
Schwitzgebel, Eric. (2015) ‘If Materialism is True, the United States is Probably Conscious’. Philosophical Studies, 172, 1697–1721.Google Scholar
Sherman, Nancy. (1995) ‘Reasons and Feelings in Kantian Morality’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 55, 369–77.Google Scholar
Sherman, Nancy. (2014) ‘The Place of Emotions in Kantian Morality’. In Cohen, Alix (ed.), Kant on Emotion and Value (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 11–32.Google Scholar
Silver, Kenneth. (2018) ‘Can a Corporation be Worthy of Moral Consideration?’ Journal of Business Ethics. doi.org/10/1007/s10551-018-3787-4.Google Scholar
Tollefsen, Deborah. (2002) ‘Organizations as True Believers’. Journal of Social Philosophy, 33, 395–410.Google Scholar
Tollefsen, Deborah. (2015) Groups as Agents. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Wallace, R. Jay. (1994) Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Werhane, Patricia Hogue. (1985) Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Wringe, Bill. (2014) ‘May I Treat a Collective as a Mere Means?’ American Philosophical Quarterly, 51, 273–84.Google Scholar