首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Business Ethics >The Business of Boycotting: Having Your Chicken and Eating It Too
【24h】

The Business of Boycotting: Having Your Chicken and Eating It Too

机译:抵制的生意:吃鸡也要吃

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

We assume that there are certain causes that are morally wrong, worth speaking out against, and working to overcome, e.g., opposition to same sex marriage. This seems to suggest that we should also be boycotting certain businesses; particularly those whose owners advocate such views. Ideally, for the boycotter, this will end up silencing certain views (political or otherwise), but this seems to cause two basic problems. First, it appears initially to be coercive, because it threatens the existence of the business. Second, it runs counter to the intuition that we should not force unpopular opinions out of the marketplace of ideas. Boycotting is by its very nature a coercive act, and thus we have to carefully consider what types of actions may warrant this type of coercive action. In this paper, we will argue that an organized boycott is justified if and only if the actions taken by the company have negative consequences that outweigh the negative outcome of the boycott.
机译:我们假设存在某些道德上错误的原因,值得大声疾呼并努力克服例如反对同性婚姻的原因。这似乎表明我们也应该抵制某些企业。特别是那些拥有者主张这种观点的人。理想情况下,对于抵制者而言,这将最终使某些观点(政治或其他观点)变得沉默,但这似乎引起两个基本问题。首先,它最初看起来是强制性的,因为它威胁着企业的生存。第二,它与直觉相反,直觉是我们不应该将不受欢迎的观点强行排除在思想市场之外。抵制本质上是一种强制性行为,因此,我们必须仔细考虑哪些类型的行为可能需要这种强制性行为。在本文中,我们将辩称,当且仅当公司采取的行动产生的负面后果大于抵制的负面结果时,有组织的抵制才是合理的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号