Albert Carr and Business Bluffing

Carr’s own words give the gist of his work: “The essential point . . . is that the ethics of business are game ethics, different from the ethics of religion. . . ” He is not suggesting that there are two moral/ethical codes to which a businessperson owes allegiance. He simply noticed that folks in business often seem to operate under one set of moral principles at home and another in the business world. The business world appears, on the whole, much less moral than the world of home and church. Attempting to resolve this discrepancy, he writes: “. . . I think it is fair to sum up the prevailing attitudes of businessmen on ethics as follows: we live in what is probably the most competitive of the world’s civilized societies. Our customs encourage a high degree of aggression in individuals striving for success. . .” His proof is largely anecdotal rather than logical. He gives stories illustrating his points but does not try to attain philosophical consistency of argument. He exempts business behavior from normal, moral judgments by calling business a “game” and arguing that it is played by its own, normal rules established by governmental regulatory code books rather than religious tenets of virtue. He writes:

“. . . Business is our main area of competition, and it has been ritualized into a game of strategy. The basic rules of the game have been set by the government, which attempts to detect and punish business frauds. But as long as a company does not transgress the rules of the game set by law, it has the legal right to shape its strategy without reference to anything but its profits. . . “ Hence, bluffing, misleading and concealing are terrible daily practices but commendable business ones. They are fully within the law, up to a certain extent. Even where business decisions seem to be moral, morality never has anything to do with the matter. “. . . If it [business] takes a long-term view of its profits, it will preserve amicable relations, so