Skip to main content
Log in

Polestar refined: Business ethics and political economy

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

Abstract

Although Friedman's ‘The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits’ is widely read, the central argument is rarely identified. Stone's discussion of Friedman in Where the Law Ends, is often used as a companion piece. Stone claims that the most important argument in Friedman is the Polestar argument but never succeeds in explaining what it is. This paper shows that Friedman's position must be read in the context of his theory of political economy, and that at least four distinct utilitarian arguments are required to account for his views. Specifically, Friedman relies upon what I describe as Realistic Rule Utilitarianism in which utility is understood in terms of actual preferences. The weaknesses of this theory are then explained.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

John R. Danley is Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophical Studies at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. Danley has published pieces on Rawls and Nozick in Mind and Philosophical Studies and in applied ethics in The Journal of Business Ethics and The Journal of Business and Professional Ethics.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Danley, J.R. Polestar refined: Business ethics and political economy. J Bus Ethics 10, 915–933 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383797

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383797

Keywords

Navigation