Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-2jdt9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-26T04:09:01.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Ethics is not the Only Thing that Matters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

David M. Messick
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ethics surely matters to people, but to ignore the fact that other things matter as well is to oversimplify human motivation and behavior. Human action is often the ungainly resolution of conflicts between ethical and egotistical impulses, and the challenge for moral psychology is to understand these conflicts and their resolution.

Information

Type
Response Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , April 1996 , pp. 223 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bazerman, M. H., Schroth, H. A., Shah, P. P., Diekmann, K. A. & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (1994). “The Inconsistent Role of Comparison to Others and Procedural Justice in Reactions to Hypothetical Job Descriptions: Implications for Job Acceptance Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 60, pp. 326–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bies, R. J. & Moag, J. S. (1986). “Interactional Justice: Communications Criteria of Fairness.” In Lewicki, R., Sheppard, B., & Bazerman, M. H. (eds.), Research on Negotiations in Organizations (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press).Google Scholar
Frank, R. H. (forthcoming). “Can Socially Responsible Firms Survive in a Competitive Environment?” In Messick, D. M. & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (eds.), Behavioral Research and Business Ethics (New York: Sage Publications).Google Scholar
Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice (New York: Plenum Press).Google Scholar
Messick, D. M. & Bazerman, M. H. (in press) “Ethics for the 21st Century: A Decision Making Perspective.” Sloan Management Review.Google Scholar
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1994), The Adaptive Decision-Maker (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Thibaut, J. W. & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum).Google Scholar
Tversky, A., Satta, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). “Contingent Weighting in Judgment and Choice,” Psychological Review, vol. 95, pp. 371–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van, Avermaet. (1974). “Equity: A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis.” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Discussed in Messick, D. M., & Sends, K. P. (1983). “Fairness, Preference, and Fairness Biases.” In D. M. Messick & K. S. Cook, Equity Theory (New York: Praeger).Google Scholar