Hegel's theory of warfare occupies an interesting space between realpolitik and Christian philosophy, as explicated here by Andrew Fiala's "The Vanity of Temporal Things: Hegel and the Ethics of War," Studies in the History of Ethics, February 2006.
A partnership between The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention will allow students to pursue a modular Ph.D. in Christian ethics with an emphasis in public policy, with classes beginning in spring 2015.
*FREE* shipping on qualifying offers
140 BUSINESS ETHICS QUARTERLY her words literally we shall end up actively caring for hundreds, even thousands of people, wearing ourselves out and possibly having no energy left for those we should care about most, those in our immediate circles. This must be avoided, and the solution is to limit those for whom we care ^not to our immediate circle, but to those for whom we can reasonably care while at the same time caring for ourselves. Feminist Thought and Stakeholder Theory It is evident that stakeholder theory and the ethics of caring put forward by Gilligan and Noddings have many points of contact. In fact, in one sense it might be said that traditional, economics-based approaches to management have concentrated on the legalistic, contractual, masculine side of human existence. As Wicks et al. imply, stakeholder theory might then be said to be the feminine counterpart to traditional management, as the ethics of care are the feminine counterpart to traditional moral theory. Stakeholder theory posits the firm as contractually related to any number of stakeholders. This is inherent in Freeman's definition of a stakeholder as any entity that can affect or be affected by the firm's actions (1984, p. 46). Only a firm that does not act will not have stakeholders under this definition, so part of being a going concern is that one must have stakeholders. Wicks et al. point out that this view forces us to see the firm in a different way. Traditional management views the firm as being in competition with other firms, protecting and seeking to further its own interests almost always at another's expense. Legal, contractual relationships are formed to prevent the worst forms of exploitation from occurring. Williamson notes that such contractual relationships are a surrogate for "trust" in the relationship, thereby reducing the possibility of "opportunism," defined by Williamson as "self-interest seeking with guile" (Williamson, 1975, p. 255). Stakeholder theory, on the other hand particularly considering Freeman's plea for voluntarism in dealing with stakeholders seems to promote a more cooperative, caring type of relationship. Firms should seek to make decisions that satisfy stakeholders, leading to situations where all parties involved in a relationship gain. The inherent relatedness of the firm under stakeholder theory forces firms to examine the effect of their decisions on others, just as the inherent relatedness of humans in feminist theory forces us to examine the effect of our decisions on others. Feminists may call humans "second persons"; stakeholder theorists could call firms "second enterprises." Stakeholder theory also deals with concrete relationships. Traditional management theory discusses "competitors," "suppliers," "buyers," and other firms in abstract terms. Universal rules for dealing with other organizations may be set. Rationality is also a key part of traditional theory. Even those who turn from "optimizing" to "satisficing" (e.g., Simon, 1958), or discuss "cognitive limits" on rational decision making (e.g., Schwenk, 1984), do so in an implicit climate of rational thinking. Stakeholder theory has the potential to make stakeholders