Morality, Money, and Business

Norman Bowie raises several thought-provoking points in his article “Morality, Money, and Motor Cars” (P471). Combined with the case of Ford (P493), from which, the concept of Role Division between businesses, government and consumers can be generalized. It is unfair to attribute pollution to producers. As main social stratums, they are mutual influencing and mutual constraining, in older to really implement energy conservation and pollution control.

Few years ago when environmentalists were accusing businesses for absence of social responsibility, polemics raised a new topic of “eco-terrorism”. A film called The Great Global Warming Swindle, which pointed out the contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence supporting man-made ecological disruption, especially global warming, was broadcasted on UK's Channel 4. They accused that the interested motive of ecological crisis theory was involved with financial and political interests. It sounded ridiculous, but fully demonstrated both businesses’ responsibilities and governments’ functions and management patterns in preserving and protecting environment. During this process consumers also play an important role.

There is no doubt that businesses directly harmed environment through producing and operating process. Though there are certain environmental laws, which set by government to detect and punish business frauds, businesses should still honor other standard of moral obligation initially, in order to reflect their moral consciousness and social responsibility. From this perspective government is more than a lawmaker, but she is still a supervisor. She has to observe business and properly adjust business activities through administrative measure. So flat refusing of being intervened by business interests will be government’s moral obligation. From view of ethics, Ford’s lobby was a typical example of unethical intervention in the political arena. But under the pressure of existence, business activities will...