IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v12y2002i03p351-369_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Corporation as Actual Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Sollars, Gordon G.

Abstract

In contrast to “social contract” theories of the corporation, a moral justification of the corporation as actual, not hypothetical, agreement is presented. Central to the justification is the idea of personal projects, as developed by Loren Lomasky. The key idea is the role that corporations can play in the construction and advancement of personal, value-creating projects. The concept of the corporation as actual agreement, as a type of “right of association” theory, is defended against influential criticism of such theories by Thomas Donaldson.

Suggested Citation

  • Sollars, Gordon G., 2002. "The Corporation as Actual Agreement," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 351-369, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:12:y:2002:i:03:p:351-369_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00001895/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dirk Gilbert & Michael Behnam, 2009. "Advancing Integrative Social Contracts Theory: A Habermasian Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 215-234, October.
    2. Gregory Wolcott, 2015. "The New (Old) Case for the Ethics of Business," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 127-146, November.
    3. Marc Cohen, 2010. "The Narrow Application of Rawls in Business Ethics: A Political Conception of Both Stakeholder Theory and the Morality of Markets," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(4), pages 563-579, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:12:y:2002:i:03:p:351-369_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.