E-Collection
LOGIN
PRODUCTS
All Products
Online Resources
Journals & Series
Digital Media
Books & Reference Works
E-Collection
About
Alphabetically
By Category
By Type
Price Lists
Terms and Conditions
MEMBERSHIPS
Societies & Associations
Conference Registrations
SERVICES
Conference Exhibits
Conference Registrations
Electronic Publishing
Journal Advertising
Mailing Lists
Marketing Services
Membership Services
Production Typesetting
Subscription Fulfillment
ABOUT
About us
Contact
FAQs
Order Info
Privacy
Support
This Title
All Titles
Browse
>
Volume
>
3
>
Issue: 4
>> Go to Current Issue
Business Ethics Journal Review
Volume 3, Issue 4, 2015
Table of Contents
Already a subscriber? -
Login here
Not yet a subscriber? -
Subscribe here
Browse by:
Volume
Year
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Issue: 4
Issue: 3
Issue: 2
Issue: 1
Overview
Editorial Team
RSS Feeds
E-mail Updates
Indexing / Abstracting
Submission Guidelines
Rights & Permissions
Results per page:
20
50
100
Sort by:
Page Number - ascending
Page Number - descending
Date - recent first
Date - oldest first
Title
Author
<< additional functions
Displaying: 1-1 of 1 documents
1.
Business Ethics Journal Review:
Volume
>
3
>
Issue: 4
Matthias Hühn
Adam Smith: 18th Century Sentimentalist or 20th Century Rationalist?
abstract
|
view
|
rights & permissions
|
cited by
David Bevan and Patricia Werhane try to enlist Adam Smith’s support in countering the neoclassical narrative in business ethics and CSR. While I applaud their goal and also completely agree with their argument that Smith has been radically misinterpreted by the economics mainstream, I am not completely in agreement with how they argue. In short, I believe they also have uprooted Adam Smith and transformed him in parts into a 20th century philosopher. The 18th century Adam Smith would be a much more powerful advocate for ethics in business if he were accepted as the very eclectic 18th century philosopher that he was.