Consider the question of why someone would want to teach you this subject, when you are combative at every turn. I did not assert corporations are moral agents. This is not a debate beyond an invitation to adopt intellectual humility on this subject, about which you do not claim to know anything.
> Consider the question of why someone would want to teach you this subject, when you are combative at every turn.
i do not post opinions as invitations or expectations to lecture. only to discuss.
if i disagree with you, it is a mistake to interpret that as combative.
> I did not assert corporations are moral agents.
my OP was saying that companies have no morals. your initial response was to tell me i'm ignorant of the field of business ethics (a statement not entirely without merit, i concede). i did not interpret that as an agreement, just a rude disagreement. and if you disagree with the statement "corporations are not moral agents" this implies (to me) that you are asserting the opposite, i.e, they are.
> This is not a debate beyond an invitation to adopt intellectual humility on this subject, about which you do not claim to know anything.
at the risk of sounding rude (and i have no intention of sounding that way), you're suggesting i adopt intellectual humility - i have already claimed to know little, all i have asked is that you justify why you disagree with what i am saying. if you are suggesting that you are a field expert, and that i should agree with you for that reason alone, well, that's essentially a "proof" by authority[1].
