caa a22 4500 388074280 CHVBK 20180307125156.0 cr unu---uuuuu 161130e199910 xx s 000 0 eng 10.2307/3857947 doi S1052150X00004711 pii (NATIONALLICENCE)cambridge-10.2307/3857947 Palmer Daniel E. Upping the Stakes: A Response to John Hasnas on the Normative Viability of the Stockholder and Stakeholder Theories [Elektronische Daten] [Daniel E. Palmer] This essay responds to Hasnas's recent article "The Normative Theories of Business Ethics: A Guide for the Perplexed” in Business Ethics Quarterly. Hasnas claims that the stockholder theory is more plausible than commonly supposed and that the stakeholder theory is prone to significant difficulties. I argue that Hasnas's reasons for favoring the stockholder over the stakeholder theory are not as strong as he suggests. Following Hasnas, I examine both theories in light of two sets of normative considerations: utilitarian and deontological. First, I show that utilitarian considerations clearly favor the stakeholder theory. I then argue that though Hasnas rightly accents the basic deontological constraint at the core of the stockholder theory, he is wrong to think that acknowledging such a constraint necessarily counts against the stakeholder theory. Here, I develop Ross's notion of prima facie obligations to show how a viable stakeholder theory might be developed within a deontological framework. Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1999 Business Ethics Quarterly Cambridge University Press 9/4(1999-10), 699-706 1052-150X 9:4<699 1999 9 BEQ https://doi.org/10.2307/3857947 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.2307/3857947 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 100 1- Palmer Daniel E. NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- Business Ethics Quarterly Cambridge University Press 9/4(1999-10), 699-706 1052-150X 9:4<699 1999 9 BEQ CC0 http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 nationallicence BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-cambridge