Profits do not seem directly justified. The best route for business ethics is to see its value indirectly…aka profit-maximization to promote market efficiency.
Carr is pursuing the same strategy…that there is a conflict between general and role morality. It is morally wrong to lie. Poker analogy to say that business is like a game. For example, lying in poker is expected and lying is expected in business which means it is not wrong. Is this a persuasive analogy? What is an analogy? Does the analogy give us similarities? Poker and business both have rules, competitive, strategy, winners/losers. Differences: business has many different players (negative externalities, not just affects you). Stakes are different (magnitude of the consequences). Voluntary/ possibility of exit (economy is a closed system you cannot exit). Common knowledge that it is a game. Is lying/bluffing efficient? One of the conditions of market efficiency is perfect knowledge.
Machan’s Article
2 Views on ethics of advertising:
1.Traditional view: advertisers act unethically if they fail to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
2. Machan’s revisionist view: advertisers are not morally required to tell the whole truth (supressio very) -difference between lying (wrong) and concealing part of the truth (not wrong)
Machan’s critique of the traditional view:
(1)This view departs from much of our ordinary behavior—we highlight the good things. Good impression
(2) This view