1) We have studied a number of conceptual frameworks for understanding corporate social responsibility in the course. In your paper, focus either on the article from Joseph Heath or Lynn Stout. Whichever one you choose, describe the view or views that they argue against. What are their primary objections to the view or views? Then consider the view of corporate social responsibility that that they themselves offer. Come up with at least two criticisms of this view. How would Heath or Stout respond to these criticisms? All things considered, do you think their view of corporate social responsibility is plausible? Why or why not? 2) John Rawls and Robert Nozick present opposing views on the morality of taxation. Think about the relevance of these views to the use of tax loopholes and other forms of tax avoidance that corporations sometimes engage in. How would Rawls and Nozick morally assess these practices? Explain their views in the course of answering this question. Then critically evaluate their views. Who is right about tax avoidance, and why (one, the other, or both of them)? Give reasons to support your answer and consider what someone who disagreed with you would say in response to them, and respond to these possible responses. 3) In “International Business, Morality, and the Common Good,” Manuel Velasquez argues that multinational corporations (MNCs) are in a situation resembling a prisoner’s dilemma. What does this mean, and how does it reflect their responsibilities regarding the common good, according to Velasquez? What is Velasquez’s proposed solution to this problem? Critically evaluate both whether Velasquez is right in likening the situation of MNCs to a prisoner’s dilemma and his proposed solution to this problem, considering what he might say in response to each of your points, and explaining what you think is the most argumentatively solid position on each issue, all things considered.
