NALANDA NEERAJ
PHIL-315
13609044


FINAL

1)

Explain Friedman’s arguments about social responsibility?

In 1970 Milton Friedman wrote that "there is one and only one social responsibility of business--to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud." That's the orthodox view among free market economists: that the only social responsibility a law-abiding business has is to maximize profits for the shareholders.
Friedman’s article also contains a much less discussed point that deserves more attention. In particular, I believe it should be taken more seriously by people ideologically opposed to the values associated with Friedman. The simple point is how Friedman argues that acceptance of CSR(Corporate
Social Responsibility) “involves the acceptance of the socialist view”.
For Friedman, the logical step from CSR to socialism means that companies should not engage in CSR. For me, it means that now that the companies are making CSR claims all over the place, socialists might want to point out the ideological dilemmas of this practice.
As the power of big corporations has become increasingly evident, their legitimacy may erode if they stop making claims about their social responsibility. The dilemma is that if and when they continue making these claims, they implicitly accept that capitalist corporation is no longer immune to social and moral claims by others.
5) Explain the safety concerns in the 2010 Toyota Prius and Lexus
Hs250h models. Are the design engineers morally responsible for the resulting accidents? Why or why not?

Toyota is to recall almost half a million hybrid cars worldwide, including
8,500 of its Prius model in the UK, in the latest blow to the