Verzeihen bedeutet Verzicht. Als ein zeitlicher Verzicht auf Tilgung von Schuld entzieht sich das Verzeihen dem Machtbereich normativ regulierbarer Handlungen. Es bildet die Grundlage für eine Ethik der Urteilsenthaltung.
Verena Rauen weist das Verzeihen als Quellpunkt der ethischen Zeit aus. Das Verzeihen interveniert in den Schuldzusammenhang der kontinuierlichen Zeit der Geschichte und ermöglicht ethische, d.h. neue, nicht durch vorherige Schuld bestimmte Handlungen. Eine zeitliche Unterbrechung der Kausalverkettung der Schuld kann sich nur durch einen Verzicht auf das moralische Urteil ereignen, der einen Wiederanfang in der Beziehung mit dem Anderen ermöglicht. So eröffnet das Verzeihen den ethischen Zeitraum des Zusammenlebens angesichts der Schuld der Vergangenheit und der Ungewissheit der Zukunft – es bildet den konstitutiven Ursprung der Ethik.
Corruption should be understood as illustrative of an ethical problem that runs deeper than specific immoral actions. This Article sees corruption as an unethical exchange, a view that can shed light on the economic structure of normative morality (as distinguished from ethics which is the theoretical field that underlies normative morality)—a structure that enables the possibility of exchanging moral values against marketable prices in the first place. To go beyond normative morality, this Article will discuss two profound philosophical concepts and their relation to corruption: (1) a non-economic justice as founded by Aristotle’s principle of épieikeia (equity), and (2) Levinas' notion of the Third with the ethical responsibility that is connected to it. In addition, the discussion of the Third will be informed by philosophical theories of gift exchange as proposed by, among others, Marcel Hénaff, who examined the connections between gift exchange, monetary exchanges and corruption. Based on this, a way of thinking about the suspension between ethics and corruption is developed that avoids falling back into the logic of economic exchange which is constitutive for corruption. Instead, an ethical perspective is suggested as the fundamental ability to adequately balance universal normative claims with the individual case. This kind of just balancing opens up new spaces of reflection to confront corruption.
Increasingly, global businesses are confronted with the question of
complicity in human rights violations committed by abusive host governments.
This contribution specifically looks at silent complicity and the way it challenges conventional interpretations of corporate responsibility. Silent complicity implies that corporations have moral obligations that reach beyond the negative realm of
doing no harm. Essentially, it implies that corporations have a moral responsibility to help protect human rights by putting pressure on perpetrating host governments involved in human rights abuses. This is a controversial claim, which this contribution proposes to analyze with a view to understanding and determining the underlying conditions that need to be met in order for moral agents to be said to have such responsibilities in the category of the duty to protect human rights.
Zuerst erschienen unter dem Titel "Gier und Angst sind keine tauglichen Leitmotive - Eine Wirtschaft, die den Menschen dient, braucht eine ethische Grundlage" in der SonntagsZeitung, Nr. 19, 11. Mai 2008, S. 72-73. Wiederabdruck in: Zeit-Fragen, 16. Jg., Nr. 44, 27. Oktober 2008, S. 5-7.
Das Manifest wurde unterzeichnet von 339 Personen.
