Robert E. Allinson

S. Prakash Sethi, President, International Center for Corporate Accountability, Inc., University Distinguished Professor, Baruch College, City University of New York, writes: "Saving Human Lives gives a step by step account of how management systems can be built that can prevent hitherto "unpreventable" disasters. Professor Allinson weaves convincing arguments from original linguistic, literary and ethical analyses and shows how these arguments apply to highly detailed and well documented case studies. Those of us in the field of business ethics are grateful for this creative combination of philosophical argumentation and the marshalling of widespread, empirical evidence that persuades us that, notwithstanding commonly held beliefs, most industrial crises are preventable through sound management structures and decision-making processes only when they are rooted in ethical values and beliefs on the part of top management." This is a pioneering work. Recent disasters such as the tsunami disaster continue to demonstrate Professor Allinson’s thesis that valuing human lives is the core of ethical management. His unique comparison of the ideas of the power of Fate and High Technology, his penetrating analysis of the very concept of an "accident", demonstrate how concepts rule our lives. His wide-ranging investigation of court cases and government documents from the seventeenth through the twentieth centuries, and from places as diverse as the USA, UK and New Zealand provide ample supporting evidence for the universality and the power of explanation of his thesis. Saving Human Lives will have an impact beyond measurement on the field of management ethics.

This chapter describes how Buddhist economics can proactively contribute to the concept of conscious capitalism by importing Buddhist ethical principles to give concrete content to the aspirational idea of conscious capitalism. Conscious capitalism becomes ethically conscious capitalism with its Buddhist complement. For Buddhism, the central motivation for human behavior is deep compassion for all sentient beings. In Buddhist economics, compassion is translated into compassion for the poorest. Hunger, thirst, homelessness, lack of medical care and education are the needs of a huge percentage of the human population on earth who exist in continuing poverty. The argument of this chapter is that poverty is not a cause; it is an effect. It is only by altering our economic motivations and practices that we can apply Buddhist ethics to addressing the problem of world inequality. Seeing ourselves as consumers is a key to the problem. If we identify ourselves as consumers, we cannot be thinking of others. We are thinking of what we can acquire and accumulate for ourselves. It is this primal attitude that is the source of the philosophical problems that are at the root of inequality and inequity in the world. A frequent interpretation of Buddhist economics is to counsel us to be minimalist in our consumption needs. In this chapter, it is argued that we need to focus on ourselves as ethical producers. We should focus on producing economic goods and services that better the life conditions of the global poor. Such a focus considers the consequences of our economic production of goods and services and meets the definition of practicing capitalism with mindful awareness. Such an alteration of economic motivation and action fulfills the principal ethics of Buddhism and gives concrete design and purpose to the idea of conscious capitalism. Ethically conscious Buddhist economics enables universal compassion to reach all human beings.

From publisher: This is a pioneering work. Recent disasters such as the tsunami disaster continue to demonstrate Professor Allinson’s thesis that valuing human lives is the core of ethical management. His unique comparison of the ideas of the power of Fate and High Technology, his penetrating analysis of the very concept of an "accident", demonstrate how concepts rule our lives. His wide-ranging investigation of court cases and government documents from the seventeenth through the twentieth centuries, and from places as diverse as the USA, UK and New Zealand provide ample supporting evidence for the universality and the power of explanation of his thesis. Saving Human Lives will have an impact beyond measurement on the field of management ethics.

For the purpose of this analysis, risk assessment becomes the primary term and risk management the secondary term. The concept of risk management as a primary term is based upon a false ontology. Risk management implies that risk is already there, not created by the decision, but lies already inherent in the situation that the decision sets into motion. The risk that already exists in the objective situation simply needs to be “managed”. By considering risk assessment as the primary term, the ethics of responsibility for risking the lives of others, the environment and future generations in the first place comes into the forefront. The issue of risk heeding is especially important as it highlights the need to pay attention to warnings of danger and to take action to redress problems before disasters occur. In this paper, the decision making that led to the choice of technology utilized and the implementation of such technology in the case of the space shuttle Challenger disaster will be used as a model to illustrate the need to take ethical factors into account when making decisions regarding the safety of technological systems and the heeding of danger warnings. While twenty-five years separates the decision to launch the Challenger and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster, the lessons of the Challenger disaster are still to be learned.

Anthony C. Yu, Carl Buck Distinguished Professor in Humanities, Chairman, Division of East Asian Languages, University of Chicago, Divinity School, writes: "Robert Allinson's book represents tremendous thoughtfulness, originality, and erudition. Its wide-ranging and lucid discussions cover a huge terrain, from ancient metaphysics to quantum mechanics. The enlistment of certain classical Confucian concepts and themes at critical junctures to advance the book's argument also provides luminous comparison. His interpretation of the Confucian emphasis on life as social and self-preservation is both humane and interesting, much as his analysis of the Mencian notion of compassion deserves our attention." This title was first published in 2002: In Space, Time and the Ethical Foundations ideas about space and time are developed, unique to the history of philosophy, that match the new physics. A well grounded metaphysics is presented which offers a safe haven between stifling scepticism and wild imagination, and an original philosophical method is demonstrated which sharply demarcates philosophy from the empirical sciences. A new foundation is laid for ethics by grounding ethics on the author's psycho-biological deduction of the emotions that offers a progressive model to replace the Freudian paradigm. An originally designed trans-cultural ethics, doubly grounded on both Eastern and Western thought, presents an antidote to the contemporary retreat into relativism. Insights from biology, psychology, evolutionary theory and ethics are brought together in a unique and fruitful synthesis. At the same time, human barbarisms such as the Holocaust are pointed to as reminders that there are just limits to compassion. This book presents a sophisticated text for metaphysics, epistemology and systematic ethics.

Paul A. Vatter, Lawrence E. Fouraker Professor of Business Administration, Harvard University, writing of Global Disasters: Inquiries into Management Ethics, ‘In my view one of the most important things that can be done to improve ethics in management is, through cases, to sensitize managers to ethical issues in situations in which they did not perceive themselves as being involved. His well-documented and detailed cases stimulate great interest. His diagnosis of the process through which ethical behavior could have prevented each disaster is provocative and sensitising.’ A. L. Minkes, Fellow, Royal Society of Arts, Emeritus Professor of Business Organization, University of Birmingham, in writing of Global Disasters: Inquiries into Management Ethics, ‘Dr. Allinson has very substantially enlarged the whole nature of the discussion of crisis, disaster and safety. The powerful and highly apposite phrase that he has coined, ‘The Buck Stops Here and It Stops Everywhere Else As Well’, illustrates the significant contribution of his philosophical analyses to a wide range of applied managerial problems in organizations. S. Prakash Sethi, Director, Center for Management Development and Organization Research, Baruch College, City University of New York, writing of Global Disasters: Inquiries into Management Ethics, ‘Global Disasters is a thought-provoking book and provides excellent insights into how management systems can be built that would prevent hitherto “unpreventable” disasters. Professor Allinson makes a convincing argument and an intriguing suggestion that, notwithstanding commonly held beliefs, most industrial crises are preventable through sound management structures and decision-making processes only when they are rooted in ethical values and beliefs on the part of top management.’ This book, by a professor of philosophy at Soka University of America, former professor of philosophy at The Chinese University of Hong Kong and former Visiting Fellow of Business Ethics at the University of Oxford argues that major disasters can be prevented. He shows how corporate management must accept its moral responsibility to create a corporate ethos that recognizes the basic principle that people matter most.

This book review outlines and comments on the ten sections of Robert Allinson’s edited collection, Understanding the Chinese Mind: The Philosophical Roots. It begins with John E. Smith, whose essay presents three types of intercultural scholarly occurrences: parallels and agreements, divergences, and conflict. Next is Robert Neville, who discusses common ontological and cosmological themes in Confucianism, Daoism, and Sinicized Buddhism. General themes are then tied to Plato and the mystical side of Western monotheistic religions. In the following essay, Chad Hansen discusses his interpretation of the Chinese theory of language, suggesting that the prescriptive and socializing nature of the Chinese language make for a radically different conceptions of language and mind from Western theories (except functionalist theories), one in which concerns for truth are secondary. In response to Hansen, Christoph Harbsmeier draws on Chinese classical philosophy to argue that a concern for truth is central in the Chinese canon. The reviewer then comments on the limitations of Harbsmeier’s critique, which adopts Tarski’s ‘T schema’ of truth to assess notions of truth in Chinese classical philosophy. Continuing with the essays, Chung-ying Cheng compares Chinese and Western metaphysics on the Parmenidean problem of change. Drawing mainly from Xunzi, Antonio Cua sets up a dialogue between Confucianism and Anglo-American moral philosophy on the function and justification of ritual code. Kuang-ming Wu compares and contrasts prominent Chinese and Western approaches to the apprehension of beauty in the arts, the former being heavily analytical and prone to universal generalizations and the latter being more adumbrative and contextualized. The reviewer then comments on Wu’s apparent omission of the difference between a Western experience of beauty and Western philosophizing about the experience of beauty. The last essay, Lao Sze-kwang suggests that the difference between the practical, “orientative” direction of Chinese philosophy which aims at effecting change in the self or the world and the highly theoretical slant of Western philosophy as an absolute difference between the two canons, a difference which the reviewer welcomes but at the same time pulls back from any claims of absoluteness. Finally, the book review turns to Allinson’s introduction, which reflects on the multiplicity of perspectives in both Western and Chinese mind and, like Sze-kwang, draws attention to the higher degree of emphasis that Chinese philosophy places on practice, explaining the difference in part in terms of the propensity of Chinese philosophers to envision humanity as in or capable of regaining fundamental harmony with the cosmos. The reviewer concludes with suggestions for further dialogues.

Lewis Hahn, Editor of Library of Living Philosophers, including Quine, Gadamer, Davidson, Ricoeur, writes: "Professor Allinson’s work [A Metaphysics for the Future] is impressive. I do not remember when in recent years I have read a more exciting systematic study. With a new phenomenology, a distinctive method and unique modes of validation for philosophy, and an extraordinary command of both Eastern and Western philosophy, Professor Allinson develops his own bold, imaginative and challenging system of philosophy". This title was first published in 2001. This work is intended to serve not only as an expression of a new idea of a philosophy, but as an "apologia" for philosophy as a legitimate and independent discipline in its own right. It argues that in the 20th century, truth has not been abandoned, but merely modified. The text proposes a return to truth and suggests that it is only after apprehending the truths of consciousness that the philosopher's mirror may become a kaleidoscope through which reality may be contemplated. First order truth lies in the realm of discovery, and discovery takes place only within the moment of subjective re-enactment.

This short essay reviews Robert Allinson’s edited collection, Understanding the Chinese Mind: The Philosophical Roots. It begins with remarks on the hegemonic stance of Western philosophy in the arena of what ‘philosophy’ means. It then draws attention to the need for Chinese (and, more broadly, Asian) society to occupy a new position in global conversations, philosophical or otherwise. The review then turns to brief synopses of each of the articles that feature in the collection, returning the conversation to the broader question of how to promote the dialogue for which Allinson’s volume calls. The reviewer suggests that, in addition to setting up collaborative organizations, Western philosophers should think more seriously about what and how to learn from their Eastern counterparts, and Eastern philosophers should begin writing ethical and political works which translate their pragmatic concerns into real conclusions about the values of our global culture.

Fallacious anthropomorphic attributions such as 'risky technology' take ethical accountability out of the hands of managers and relegate it to the deterministic or accidental outcomes of complex 'high risk technology'. Equally fallacious mechanistic terms such as 'organisational inertia' are borrowed from physics to apply to human organisations. The responsibility for ethically accountable decision-making is taken out of human hands and either ascribed to the mythological entity "Technology" or to the mythological bureaucratic organisation which functions as if it follows the laws of physics. I argue in contrast that disasters can be prevented by demythologising the belief systems that pervade risk management literature. Risk management must reclaim ethical accountability by replacing notions such as 'risky technology', 'high risk technology', 'risky work' and 'bureaucratic drift' with 'risky assessment', 'risky management', 'risky choice' and 'multiple responsibility'.

While theoretically, egoism may be considered one kind of ethics, generally speaking, egoism, defined as self-interest at the expense of others, is contrary to the central principles of ethics, which are, in the main, other-directed. While Adam Smith's economics is famously argued to serve both self and other, the core thesis of this chapter is that Adam Smith's position is seriously flawed. The chapter argues that self-interest economics is fundamentally flawed and needs to be replaced by an objective, value-based economics. It is shown that Adam Smith's notions of humans as simultaneously ethical beings and beings who pursue their self-interest are contradictory. Economics cannot exist for the sake of itself: it must exist for the sake of a higher end.