Advertisement

The Ordonomic Approach to Order Ethics

  • Ingo PiesEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The ordonomic approach to order ethics contains four elements: (a) a diagnosis of modernity, which identifies the core problems and directs the research strategy to solving them; (b) a rational-choice analysis of social dilemmas, i.e., positive theorizing which informs about the un-intended consequences of intentional inter-action; (c) the idea of orthogonal positions, i.e., normative theorizing that aims at providing reform orientation while at the same time systematically avoiding controversial value statements; (d) a scheme of three social arenas that helps to understand the interplay between institutions and ideas in societal learning processes.

Keywords

Ordonomics Order ethics Institutional ethics Individual ethics Orthogonal position Social dilemma Modern society Growth 

Kurzfassung

Der ordonomische Ansatz zur Ordnungsethik besteht aus vier Elementen: (a) einer Diagnose der Moderne, die die Kernprobleme identifiziert und die Forschungsstrategie auf Problemlösungen ausrichtet; (b) eine Rational-Choice-Analyse sozialer Dilemmata, also eine positive Modelltheorie, die über die nicht-intendierten Effekte intentionaler Interaktionen informiert; (c) das Konzept orthogonaler Positionierung, also eine normative Modelltheorie, die auf intellektuelle Orientierungsleistungen abzielt und dabei strittige Werturteile systematisch vermeidet; (d) eine Drei-Ebenen-Analyse, die das für gesellschaftliche Lernprozesse konstitutive Zusammenspiel von Ideen und Institutionen verständlich werden lässt.

Schlüsselwörter

Ordonomik Ordnungsethik Individualethik Institutionenethik Orthogonale Positionierung Soziale Dilemmata Moderne Gesellschaft Wachstum 

References

  1. Beckmann, Markus, and Ingo Pies. 2008a. Ordo-responsibility—conceptual reflections towards a semantic innovation. Corporate Citizenship. In Contractarianism and ethical theory. eds. Jesús Conill, Christoph Luetge, and Tatjana Schönwälder-Kuntze, 87–115. Farnham, Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  2. Beckmann, Markus, and Ingo Pies. 2008b. Sustainability by corporate citizenship. The moral dimension of sustainability. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship (31), autumn 2008, 45–57.Google Scholar
  3. Beckmann, Markus, Stefan Hielscher, and Ingo Pies. 2012a. Commitment strategies for sustainability: How business firms can transform trade-offs into win-win outcomes. Business Strategy and the Environment. doi: 10.1002/bse.1758.
  4. Beckmann, Markus, Ingo Pies, and Alexandra von Winning. 2012b. Passion and compassion as strategy drivers for sustainable value creation: An ordonomic perspective on social and ecological entrepreneurship. Economic and Environmental Studies 12(3), 191–221.Google Scholar
  5. Bowles, Samuel. 2004. Microeconomics. In Behavior, institutions, and evolution. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Buchanan, James M. 1989. The relatively absolute absolutes. In Essays on the political economy. eds. James M. Buchanan, 32–46. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  7. Buttkereit, Sören, and Ingo Pies. 2008. Social dilemmas and the social contract. In Corporate citizenship, contractarianism and ethical theory. eds. Jesús Conill, Christoph Luetge, and Tatjana Schönwälder-Kuntze, 135–147. Farnham, Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, Gregory. 2007. A farewell to alms. A brief economic history of the world. Princeton, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Galor, Oded. 2011. Unified growth theory. Princeton, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Hardimon, Michael O. 1994. Hegel’s social philosophy. The project of reconciliation. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hardin, Garrett. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science, New Series 162(3859): 1243–1248.Google Scholar
  12. Hielscher, Stefan, Ingo Pies, and Vladislav Valentinov. 2012. How to foster social progress: An ordonomic perspective on progressive institutional change. Journal of Economic Issues (JEI) XLVI(3):779–797.Google Scholar
  13. Lippmann, Walter. 1929, 2009. A preface to morals, 6th ed. New Brunswick, London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Ostrom, Elinor. 2012. The future of the commons: Beyond market failure and government regulation. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.Google Scholar
  15. Petrick, Martin, and Ingo Pies. 2007. In search for rules that secure gains from cooperation: The heuristic value of social dilemmas for normative institutional economics. European Journal of Law and Economics 23(3): 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pies, Ingo. 2000. Ordnungspolitik in der Demokratie. Ein ökonomischer Ansatz diskursiver Politikberatung. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck.Google Scholar
  17. Pies, Ingo, and Claudia Schott. 2001. Heroin: The case for prescription. In High time for reform: drug policy for the 21st century. eds. Selina Chen, and Edward Skidelsky, 113–126. London: Social Market Foundation.Google Scholar
  18. Pies, Ingo, and Stefan Hielscher. 2009a. The international provision of pharmaceuticals: A comparison of two alternative argumentative strategies for global ethics. Journal of Global Ethics 7(1): 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pies, Ingo, and Stefan Hielscher. 2009b. The role of corporate citizens in fighting poverty: An ordonomic approach to global justice. In Absolute poverty and global justice. eds. Elke Mack, Michael Schramm, Stephan Klasen, and Thomas Pogge, 233–247. Aldershot, London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  20. Pies, Ingo, Stefan Hielscher, and Markus Beckmann. 2009. Moral commitments and the societal role of business: An ordonomic approach to corporate citizenship. Business Ethics Quarterly 19(3):375–401.Google Scholar
  21. Pies, Ingo, Markus Beckmann, and Stefan Hielscher. 2010. Value creation, management competencies, and global corporate citizenship: An ordonomic approach to business ethics in the age of globalization. Journal of Business Ethics 94: 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pies, Ingo, Markus Beckmann, and Stefan Hielscher. 2011. Competitive markets, corporate firms, and new governance—an ordonomic conceptualization. Corporate citizenship and new governance—the political role of corporations. eds. Ingo Pies, and Peter Koslowski, 171–188. Dordrecht u.a.O.: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Pies, Ingo, and Stefan Hielscher. 2012. Gründe versus Anreize? Ein ordonomischer Werkstattbericht in sechs Thesen. In Welt der Gründe, Deutsches Jahrbuch für Philosophie. eds. Nida-Rümelin Julian, and Elif Özmen, Band 4, 215–230 (XXII. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie, 11–15. September 2011 an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Kolloquienbeiträge), Hamburg.Google Scholar
  24. Pies, Ingo, Markus Beckmann, and Stefan Hielscher. 2013a. The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic concept of corporate citizenship developed in comparison with the aristotelian idea of individual citizenship. Business & Society 0007650313483484, first published on April 17, 2013 as doi: 10.1177/0007650313483484.
  25. Pies, Ingo, Matthias Georg Will, Thomas Glauben, and Sören Prehn. 2013b. Hungermakers?—Why futures market activities by index funds are promoting the common good, Diskussionspapier Nr. 2013–19 des Lehrstuhls für Wirtschaftsethik an der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle.Google Scholar
  26. Pies, Ingo, Matthias Georg Will, Thomas Glauben, and Sören Prehn. 2013c. The ethics of financial speculation in futures markets. Diskussionspapier Nr. 2013–21 des Lehrstuhls für Wirtschaftsethik an der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle.Google Scholar
  27. Rawls, John. 1971. A theory of justice. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rawls, John. 1993. Political liberalism, (Columbia University Press), New York.Google Scholar
  29. Rawls, John. 2001. Justice as fairness. A restatement. ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge, MA, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1911, 2006. Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Nachdruck der ersten Auflage von 1912 [eigentlich 1911, I.P.], herausgegeben und ergänzt um eine Einleitung von Jochen Röpke und Olaf Stiller, Berlin.Google Scholar
  31. Zagorin, Perez. 2003 How the idea of religious toleration came to the west. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Economic EthicsMartin Luther University Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany

Personalised recommendations