Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

Fall 2015
SYLLABUS
Course Title:

PHIL 295-01: Business Ethics

Meeting Times:

MWF 10:00-10:50AM in BCH 305

Instructor:

Dr. Tobey Scharding

Email: tschardi@bloomu.edu
Office Location: BCH 217A
Office Hours: MWF 9-9:50AM, MW 1-1:50PM

Course Description:
Business strives to make a profit. Ethics counsels that people should avoid acting in
ways that are greedy, deceptive, or unjust. But some greedy, deceptive, or unjust
business practices are quite profitable. This dilemma is the foundation of business
ethics. The course sets forth three central strategies for arbitrating dilemmas in business
ethics: arguing via ethical theories, via claims about political economy, and via accounts
of the metaphysics of business. We then address specific business ethics dilemmas
concerning employment, advertising, finance, the environment, and globalization.
Course Objectives:
By the end of the course, students will be able to:
1. Describe in detail what is at stake in five major business ethics
controversies: concerning employment, advertising, finance, the environment,
and globalization;
2. Use philosophical theories to interpret business ethics controversies:
ethical theories, theories of political economy, and theories of the
metaphysics of business;
3. Use philosophical tools to evaluate business ethics controversies:
understanding argumentative structure, explaining a philosophical claim,
raising an objection to a philosophical claim, offering a response on behalf of
the philosopher, using a concrete example to support an abstract position,
and using a concrete example to challenge an abstract position;
4. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of arguments for each side of five
business ethics controversies; and
5. Argue for a position in a business ethics controversy.
Course Prerequisites: None. This course is suitable as a first course in philosophy.
1

Course Organization:
We meet for 50 minutes, three times a week, for 15 weeks. Monday and Wednesday
classes are lecture: the instructor presents an interpretation of the assigned readings
and introduces philosophical skills. Friday classes are discussion or testing. On
discussion Fridays, students will discuss an assigned topic in small groups. Each group
will have an opportunity to present its conclusions to the class as a whole.
Evaluation Criteria:
Students will be evaluated on the basis of three in-class examinations (given: 9/18,
10/9, and 11/13), six short written exercises, completed in class in small groups (given:
9/2, 9/11, 10/2, 10/23, 10/30, and 11/6), in-class pop quizzes, and a final examination
(given: 12/11 10:30AM - 12:30PM). The three in-class examinations count for 100
points, or 10% of the final grade, each (all three are 30% of the final grade); the six
short written exercises are 50 points each (30% of the final grade for all six); the final is
300 points (30% of the final grade); the pop quizzes total 100 points (10% of the final
grade).
There is one opportunity for extra credit. Students may write a five-page paper (due:
11/30) about a contemporary business ethics controversy to replace the lowest grade
they earned on an examination. Students who are interested in writing the paper must
notify the instructor (via email) by no later than 11/23. Students may give an in-class
presentation (on 12/2 or 12/4) about a contemporary business ethics controversy to
replace the lowest grade earned on a group exercise. Students who are interested in
doing the presentation must notify the instructor (via email) by no later than 11/23.
Evaluation of In-Class Examinations:
The in-class examinations test your knowledge of the main topics covered in the course.
Each examination consists of 25 multiple-choice questions (worth 4 points each) on
material taken from the assigned readings and/or the instructors presentations. The inclass examinations are closed book, closed notebook.
Evaluation of Short Written Exercises:
The short written exercises will test your ability to use particular philosophical tools:
offering an interpretation of a philosophical argument, explaining a philosophical claim,
raising an objection to a philosophers argument, offering a response to an objection on
behalf of the philosopher, using a concrete example to support a philosophical position,
and using a concrete example to challenge a philosophical position. They will be
completed in class in small groups (about five students per group). Students will be
assigned randomly to their groups on the day that the exercise will be completed.
Students will receive a different group assignment for each of the six short exercises.
All group members will receive the same grade for the short exercise.
Evaluation of In-Class Pop Quizzes:
The in-class pop quizzes test whether students have completed the assigned reading.
They consist of 2-8 multiple choice, true/false, and/or short answer questions (worth two
points each). They will be given throughout the semester, about one per week.
2

MAKE-UP EXAMINATIONS, EXERCISES, AND QUIZZES WILL BE GIVEN ONLY IN

THE CASE OF A DOCUMENTED MEDICAL OR FAMILY EMERGENCY.
DOCUMENTATION MUST BE PRESENTED WITHIN ONE WEEK OF THE
STUDENTS RETURN TO CLASS. MAKE-UP EXERCISES MUST BE COMPLETED
INDIVIDUALLY.
Evaluation of Final Examination:
The final examination consists of three essay questions in which students will use
philosophical theories to analyze the business ethics case studies covered in the
course. Students will receive the essay questions in advance of the final examination.
The final is open book, open notebook.
Grading System:
Grade

Points

Grade

Points

Grade

Points

Grade

Points

A+

98-100%

B+

87-89%

C+

77-79%

D+

67-69%

93-97%

83-86%

73-76%

63-66%

A-

90-92%

B-

80-82%

C-

70-72%

D-

60-62%

A+ A, A- are awarded to excellent work; B+, B, B- to good work; C+, C, C- to fair work; D
+, D, D- to poor work, as determined according to the evaluation standards set forth
above (pp. 2-3). There are 1000 total points possible for the course: for an A+, you
need 980 points, 930 for an A, 900 for an A-, 870 for B+, 830 for B, 800 for B-, 770 for C
+, 730 for C, 700 for C-, 670 for D+, 630 for D, 600 for D-. Anyone who earns fewer
than 600 points receives an F.
Academic Honesty:
Students are expected to adhere to the highest standards of academic work. In all of
your assignments, you may use words or ideas written by other people only with proper
attribution. This includes the assigned readings, any supplemental readings that
students employ, and the instructors presentations. Proper attribution means
that you fully identify the original source, including the authors name and page number.
Any questions about permissible academic conduct should be directed to the instructor.
Plagiarism or cheating may result in an F for the assignment.
Coursebooks:
AVAILABLE AT THE BLOOMSBURG UNIVERSITY BOOKSTORE:

Thomas Donaldson and Patricia H. Werhane, eds., Ethical Issues in Business:

Eighth Edition (ISBN: 0131846191).

Other materials are available on the BOLT page for PHIL 295.

Course Schedule:
Part I:

Foundations of Business Ethics.

A. What are Businesss Social Responsibilities?

8/24/15

Case Study: Coca-Cola India. [BOLT]

8/26/15

Milton Friedman on the Social Responsibilities of Business:

8/28/15

Milton Friedman, The Social Responsibility of Business is to

Increase Its Profits. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 34-38]

R. Edward Freeman on the Social Responsibilities of Business:

R. Edward Freeman, Managing for Stakeholders. [Donaldson,

et al. pp. 39-53]

8/31/15

Discussion 1: Businesss Social Responsibilities. Construct an

argument, using two premises and a conclusion, about what Freeman
would advise Coca-Cola India to do in the case study. Discuss one
possible problem with each of the premises and with the conclusion.

9/2/15

Case Study: The Ford Pinto. [BOLT]

B. Ethical Theories and Business Ethics Controversies.

9/4/15

Duty-based Approaches to Business Ethics.

Norman A. Bowie, A Kantian Approach to Business

Ethics. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 56-65]

9/7/15

Class does not meet.

9/9/15

Class does not meet.

9/11/15

Discussion 2: Kantianism. Use FUL and FH to evaluate one ethical

issue in the Ford Pinto case. Explain why you think that Kantianism
would evaluate the case in the way you claim it does.

9/14/15

Efficiency-based Approaches to Business Ethics.

Andrew Gustafson, Utilitarianism and Business

Ethics. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 78-88]

9/16/15

Virtue-based Approaches to Business Ethics.

9/18/15

Robert C. Solomon, Corporate Roles, Personal Virtues: An

Aristotelian Approach to Business Ethics. [Donaldson, et al. pp.
66-77]

First in-class examination.

C. Political Economy and Business Ethics Controversies.

9/21/15

Discussion of first test and first graded assignment.

Case Study: Facebook [BOLT]

9/23/15

A Theory of Private Property.

John Locke, The Justification of Private Property. [Donaldson,

et al. pp. 158-162]

9/25/15

Class does not meet.

9/28/15

Case Study: Countrywide Financial. [BOLT]

9/30/15

Criticizing Private Property.

John Rawls, Distributive Justice. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 222-231]

10/2/15

Discussion 3: Private Property. Paraphrase one claim from Lockes

view and explain the reasoning behind it. Then, say how Rawls could
object to the view. Next, paraphrase one claim from Rawlss view and
explain the reasoning behind it. Finally, say how Locke could object to
the view.

10/5/15

A Theory of the Division of Labor.

10/7/15

Adam Smith, Benefits of the Profit Motive. [Donaldson, et al. pp.

163-166]

Criticizing the Division of Labor.

Karl Marx, Alienated Labor. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 167-171]

10/9/15

Second in-class examination.

Part II:

The Metaphysics of Business.

5

10/12/15

Case Study: Enron. [Donaldson, et al. pp. 294-316]

10/14/15

The Moral Personhood of Corporations.

Peter A. French, The Corporation as a Moral Person. [BOLT]

10/16/15

Discussion of second test and second graded assignment.

10/19/15

Challenges to the Moral Personhood of Corporations.

10/21/15

Robert Jackall, Moral Mazes (selections). [BOLT]

The Moral Non-Personhood of Corporations.

Matthew C. Altman, The Decomposition of the Corporate Body:

What Kant Cannot Contribute to Business Ethics. [BOLT]

10/23/15

Discussion 4: The Metaphysics of Business. Use Frenchs, Jackalls,

or Altmans view to analyze one of Enrons business decisions. Raise
an objection to the analysis and consider the philosophers response.

Part III:

Topics in Business Ethics.

A. Employment.

10/26/15

Case Study: Walmart [Donaldson, et al. pp. 368-377].

10/28/15

Employment at Will.

10/30/15

Tara J. Radin and Patricia H. Werhane, Employment at Will,

Employee Rights, and Future Directions for
Employment [Donaldson, et al. pp. 378-387]

Richard A. Epstein, In Defense of the Contract at

Will [Donaldson et al. pp. 388-395]

Discussion 5: Employment at Will. Paraphrase one claim from Radin/

Werhanes or Epsteins paper and explain what the philosopher means
by the claim. Then, discuss an original example that supports the claim.
Finally, explain why your example supports the claim.
B. Advertising.

11/2/15

Case Study: 4Loko. [BOLT]

11/4/15

Persuasion vs. Manipulation.

11/6/15

Tom L. Beauchamp, Manipulative Advertising. [BOLT]

Discussion 6: Advertising. Paraphrase one claim from Beauchamps

paper and explain what he means by the claim. Then, discuss an
original example that challenges the claim (a counterexample).
Finally, explain why the example challenges the claim.
C. Finance.

11/9/15

Case Study: Lehman Brothers. [BOLT]

11/11/15

The Ethics of Risk.

11/13/15

Tobey Scharding, Imprudence and Immorality: A Kantian

Approach to the Ethics of Financial Risk. [BOLT]

Third in-class examination.

D. The Environment.

11/16/15

Case Study: Alcoa. [BOLT]

11/18/15

Garrett Hardin, The Tragedy of the Commons. [BOLT]

11/20/15

Discussion of third test, discussion of final examination.

E. Globalization.

11/23/15

Case Study: iPhone [BOLT].

11/30/15

Sweatshops

Denis G. Arnold and Norman E. Bowie, Sweatshops and

Respect for Persons. [BOLT]

12/2/15

Student presentations.

12/4/15

Student presentations.

FINAL EXAM: WED 12/9/15 10:30AM - 12:30PM in BCH 305