Modernism, Christianity, and Business Ethics
Introduction
Modern definitions of good standards in the workplace or business ethics remain scattered and subjective. Many scholars and business researchers have attempted to come up with a universal definition as well as standardized group, but the process has not succeeded in clearing the dissent. Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s article is part of the ongoing endeavor to provide effective alternatives where they suggest the Christian worldview as a viable option. This essay reviews their article using a review and evaluation approach that seeks to identify their arguments and evaluate their merit.
Literature Review
Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s article begins with an extensive outline of the current lack of standardized ethics and good practices that everyone can use in the professional or business environment. They point out how the current state of affairs is such that there is a distinct lack of consensus among stakeholders on the ethical standards applicable in the entire business or professional spectrum (Kim, Fisher, & McCalman, 2009). Part of the reasons both authors speculate could be the subjective nature of most of the suggestions. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
The ensuing chaos and confusion that characterizes the business world due to lack of standardized ethics has attracted considerable scholarly attention. Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s suggestion of the Christian worldview aligns with this status quo as well as the serious need for effective business ethics. They propose this worldview in their article based on its continued success in providing effective religious, moral, and social ethics to the Christian community. One of their main arguments is that the word view could work for the business community due to the lack of subjectivity present in modern worldviews and its general attributes that neither favor nor single out anyone. Additionally, they demonstrate how modernism erodes the ethical framework of business.
Evaluation
Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s article argues that current ethical standards are not effective in providing an efficient ethical backbone to modern business and professional environments. Their argument is based on modernism, which has been demonstrated to be detrimental to most ethical frameworks (Kim, Fisher, & McCalman, 2009). Part of this effect stems from the increased competitiveness in modern professional environments. Viewing the state of affairs from this perspective makes the authors’ argument viable because modern worldviews are subjected meaning a religious one could work.
Further investigating their arguments, it is evident that the current set of suggested ethical standards has failed. Continued reliance on standards that have proven unsuccessful repeatedly while there are ethical frameworks such as the Christian worldview that remains untested is retrogressive. The current state of affairs in business demands a new set of ethical standards, which justifies Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s arguments and suggestions.
The three authors have also identified several shortcomings of modernism as a basis for formulating ethical standards. Consequently, all current ethical standards remain ineffective as demonstrated by the increased cases of fraud, embezzlement, employee harassment, and theft. Their argument that proposes trying the Christian worldview has the potential of success because it shuns all forms of oppression, theft, and unethical financial gain.
Conclusion
Fisher, Kim, and McCalman’s article introduced the current lack of effective ethical standards in the business environment by stating the ineffectiveness of all previous ones. It justified the need for alternative using examples of how modernism has failed all attempts to formulate effective ethical standards. Therefore, their suggestion that the business society adopts the Christian worldview is fully justified and wise.