Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How Would Confucian Virtue Ethics for Business Differ from Aristotelian Virtue Ethics?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Confucianism is potentially relevant to business ethics and business practice in many ways. Although some scholars have seen Confucian thought as applicable to corporate social responsibility (Wang and Juslin in Journal of Business Ethics 88(3):433–451, 2009) and to corporate governance (Low and Ang in International Journal of Business and Management 8(4):30–43, 2013), only a few business ethicists (Koehn in Local insights, global ethics for business. Amsterdam, Rodopi, 2001a; Business Ethics Quarterly 11(3):415–431, 2001b; Journal of Business Ethics 116(4):703–715, 2013; Romar in Journal of Business Ethics 38(1–2):119–131, 2002; Lam in The Analects, Penguin Classics, London, 2003; Chan in Journal of Business Ethics 77(3):347–360, 2008; Woods and Lamond in Journal of Business Ethics 102(4):669–683, 2011) have taken seriously the possibility that Confucius may have important insights to offer regarding virtue ethics, which has now become the most popular normative theory as evidenced by the number of recent articles published in business ethics journals (Alzola in Business Ethics Quarterly 25(3):287–318, 2017). This paper aims to help rectify this oversight. The paper focuses on several distinctive aspects of Confucian ethics, discussing both how Confucius’ approach differs from Aristotelian virtue ethics in significant ways and how these key differences suggest numerous directions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It could even be argued that Confucius makes some points that Aristotle might have endorsed if he had thought to discuss these topics. However, dealing with this logical possibility would take us into more speculative areas beyond the scope of this paper.

  2. From this point on, all citations to Confucius’ Analects include only the chapter and verse references. I have included the specific Analects because it is important that other scholars be able readily to confirm the validity of claims made about Confucius’ point of view.

  3. Rawls thinks that in a liberal society, the state cannot legitimately embrace any single conception of justice but that we can conceptualize justice as fairness and agree upon two fundamental principles; (1) that every person has a claim to equal basic liberties insofar as these are consistent with everyone else sharing these same liberties; and (2) that social and economic inequalities are permissible only if all offices and positions are open to everyone under terms that constitute equality of opportunity and only if such inequalities most greatly benefit the least-advantaged members of society. These principles provide some substantive content to the notion that justice is fairness. Aristotle gives no indication in the Politics that he thinks that democrats and oligarchs would ever come to stable agreement on these sorts of principles.

  4. A practically wise person might factor into his or her judgment relevant role responsibilities, but these would not be dispositive. It would be up to the wise agent to decide upon the relevance of any such duties.

  5. Deng, Mingying, “Restructuring Rationality and Modern Confucian Values.” In Yu Xuanmeng, Lu Xiaohe, Liu Fanton, Zhang Rulan, and Georges Enderle (eds.), Economic ethics and Chinese culture, Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, vol. 14, ch. 2. Washington, D.C.

  6. I owe the sports analogy to Graham Parkes, "Climate Change and China: How Chinese Philosophy Can Enhance the Global Conversation.” Presentation given at Philosophy Symposium, April 17, 2015.

  7. He does say in Book VI, ch. 5, 1140b7-10 of the Nicomachean Ethics, that “we think Pericles and men like him have practical wisdom….” However, Aristotle does not himself hold out Pericles as practically wise, nor does he treat Pericles as morally virtuous. Another candidate for ethical virtue—Thales—is ruled out because he has no interest in the human things that are the center of politics and ethics. Ronna Burger, Aristotle's Dialogue with Socrates: On the "Nicomachean Ethics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), pp. 111–112, 120.

  8. However, I hasten to add that Aristotle thinks many kinds of nonscientific knowledge are truthful, useful and valuable as well.

  9. Hartman is one of the few business ethicists who has made a credible, serious attempt to illustrate what Aristotelian good choice might look. He does so by using the case study of a corporate decision to send a female employee into a hyper-masculine environment (Hartman 2013). But, as far as I know, Hartman never suggests that this sort of good choice is commonplace or even well understood by many managers or employees.

References

  • Allen, F., Carlotta, E., & Marquez, R. (2009). Stakeholder capitalism, corporate governance and firm value. Wharton Financial Institutions Center Working Paper #09-28. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=968141 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.968141.

  • Alzola, M. (2015). Virtuous persons and virtuous actions in business ethics and organizational research. Business Ethics Quarterly,25(3), 287–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alzola, M. (2017). Character-based business ethics. In N. Snow (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of virtue. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ames, R. (1981). The art of rulership. Philosophy East and West,31(2), 193–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angle, S. C., & Slote, M. (2013). Virtue ethics and Confucianism. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co.

  • Aristotle. (1988) Politics (C.D.C. Reeve, Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co.

  • Benefit Corporation. (2017). Retrieved from http://benefitcorp.net/businesses/benefit-corporations-and-certified-b-corps.

  • Burger, R. (2009). Aristotle’s dialogue with Socrates: On the “Nicomachean ethics”. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, G. K. Y. (2008). The relevance and value of Confucianism in contemporary business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics,77(3), 347–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, C. Y. (2013). Recognizing two modes of thinking and living: Kierkegaardian and Confucian. Journal of Chinese Philosophy,40(1), 9–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, T. (2016). Virtues and roles in early Confucian ethics. Confluence,4, 272–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, M., Dacin, P., & Tracey, P. (2011). Social entrepreneurship: A critique and future directions. Organization Science,22(5), 1203–1213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, M. Y. (1997). Restructuring rationality and modern Confucian values. In X. Yu, X. Lu, F. Liu, R. Zhang, & E. Georges (Eds.), Economic ethics and Chinese culture (Vol. 14). Washington, D.C: Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feloni, R. (2015). Here’s how the “self-management” system that Zappos is using actually works, Business Insider, June 3. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/how-zappos-self-management-system-holacracy-works-2015-6#ixzz3c3xIJHQv.

  • Fox, R. A. (1997). Confucian and communitarian responses to liberal democracy. The Review of Politics,59(3), 561–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garver, E. (2014). Aristotle’s politics: Living well and living together. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, D., & Ames, R. (1987). Thinking through Confucius. Albany, NY: State University Press of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, S. J. (1999). On the prospects of Confucian values contributing to a global shared ethic: The case for the postcolonial appropriation of an East Asian tradition. Paper delivered on the Occasion of the UNESCO International Conference on Universal Ethics and Asian Values, Seoul, October 5.

  • Hansen, C. (1983). Language and logic in ancient China. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, E. M. (2013). Virtue in business: Conversations with Aristotle. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanhoe, P. (2007). Filial piety as a virtue. In R. Walker & P. Ivanhoe (Eds.), Working virtue: Virtue ethics and contemporary moral problems (pp. 297–312). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanhoe, P. (2008). The shade of Confucius: Social roles, ethical theory, and the self. In M. Chandler & R. Littlejohn (Eds.), Polishing the Chinese mirror: Essays in honor of Henry Rosemont (pp. 34–39). San Francisco: Association of Chinese Philosophers in America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanhoe, P. (2013). Virtue ethics and the Chinese Confucian tradition. In D. C. Russell (Ed.), Virtue ethics (pp. 49–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D. (2001a). Local insights, global ethics for business. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D. (2001b). Confucian trustworthiness and the practice of business in China. Business Ethics Quarterly,11(3), 415–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D. (2013). East meets west: Toward a universal ethic of virtue for global business. Journal of Business Ethics,116(4), 703–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, G. (2006). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam, K. J. (2003). Confucian business ethics and the economy. Journal of Business Ethics,43(1–2), 153–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau, D. C. (1998). The Analects. London: Penguin Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, S. B. (2017). Toward a basic mutual understanding between Confucian and Aristotelian Virtue Ethics. Business and Professional Ethics Journal,36(3), 273–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Low, K. C., & Ang, S. L. (2013). Confucian ethics, governance and corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Business and Management,8(4), 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (1991). Incommensurability, truth, and the conversation between Confucians and Aristotelians. In E. Deutsch (Ed.), Culture and modernity: East-West philosophical perspectives (pp. 104–122). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, L. (1989). Philosophers and political responsibility. Social Research,56(4), 877–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (1999). Virtue ethics: A misleading category? The Journal of Ethics,3(3), 163–2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puett, M., & Gross-Loh, C. (2016). The college of Chinese wisdom. Wall Street Journal, April 1. Retrieved June 1, 2016, from http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-college-of-chinese-wisdom-1459520703?cb=logged0.2642755131237209.

  • Riegel, J. (2017). Confucius. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/.

  • Romar, E. J. (2002). Virtue is good business. Confucianism as a practical business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics,38(1–2), 119–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemont, H., Jr. (1991). Rights-bearing individuals and role-bearing persons. In M. I. Beckoner (Ed.), Rules, rituals, and responsibilities: Essays dedicated to Herbert Fingarette. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemont, H., Jr. (2014). Reply: Truth as truthfulness. Confluence: Online Journal of World Philosophies,1, 205–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sangren, P. S. (1984). Traditional Chinese corporations: Beyond kinship. The Journal of Asian Studies,43(3), 391–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuman, M. (2015). Confucius and the world he created. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sennett, R. (2012). Together: The rituals, pleasures and politics of cooperation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, J. (2013). Confucius. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/.

  • Sim, M. (2007). Remastering morals with Aristotle and Confucius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sivan, N. (1980). The theoretical background of laboratory alchemy. In J. Needham (Ed.), Science and civilization (pp. 210–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slingerland, E. (2001). Virtue ethics, the Analects, and the problem of commensurability. Journal of Religious Ethics,29, 97–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanton, C. (2003). Virtue ethics: A pluralistic view. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, L., & Juslin, H. (2009). The impact of Chinese culture on corporate social responsibility: The harmony approach. Journal of Business Ethics,88(3), 433–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong, D. (2017). Chinese ethics. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/ethics-chinese/.

  • Woods, P. R., & Lamond, D. A. (2011). What would Confucius do? Confucian ethics and self-regulation in management. Journal of Business Ethics,102(4), 669–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xing, Y., & Sims, D. (2012). Leadership, Daoist Wú wéi and reflexivity: Flow, self-protection and excuse in Chinese bank managers’ leadership practice. Management Learning,43(1), 97–112.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The author has received no external funding for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DePaul University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Daryl Koehn

Authors
  1. Daryl Koehn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daryl Koehn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Daryl Koehn declares that she has no conflicts of interest to disclose in connection with the research embodied in this paper or the paper itself.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the author.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koehn, D. How Would Confucian Virtue Ethics for Business Differ from Aristotelian Virtue Ethics?. J Bus Ethics 165, 205–219 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04303-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04303-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation