Fallacies of corporate social responsibility essay

Businesses do not exist in isolation of their immediate community and beyond, they create products and services to serve their needs for the purpose of profit making. However, as they carry out their industrial and commercial activities for profit making the need to inculcate a sound Corporate Social Responsibility CSR in their core business strategy has become critical to their long term sustainability and commercial success. This has become even more imperative with the growing sophistication and demands of consumers in Western countries like the United Kingdom UK for brands that are socially and environmentally responsible for without which their continued patronage may be stalled. The COP21 Global Environmental summit held in Paris in Novemberwhich brought together politicians, scientists, investors, numerous non-governmental organizations and many others, clearly indicate the urgency in reversing the long years of environmental despoliation that the global environment has been subjected to with much of it caused by industrial pollutions of business entities.

Fallacies of corporate social responsibility essay

First, it purports to explain what we should think about the future, but never makes a real argument for it. It starts by suggesting there are two important axes on which futurists can differ: So you can end up with utopian singularitarians, dystopian singularitarians, utopian incrementalists, and dystopian incrementalists.

Therefore, the last group is right, there will be no singularity, and the future will be bad. The author ignores the future almost completely, in favor of having very strong opinions on which futurist movements include the right or wrong sorts of people.

The author never even begins to give any argument about why the future will be good or bad, or why a singularity might or might not happen.

Automatic Bibliography Maker

Third, the article wants to classify some technologies as inextricably associated with privilege, but it has a pretty weird conception of which ones they are. So much so that of five slots for potentially worrying technology, you filled all five with the same one?

Helping sick people improve their quality of life? Do gross male nerds from the outgroup support that or oppose that? Fourth, the article presupposes a bitter conflict between the four quadrants, whereas actually people tend to be a lot more on the same side than she expects.

Her pessimists are concerned about algorithmic bias making banks less likely to extend credit to poor people. But her optimists just care about flashy new things like cryptocurrency. But one possible application for cryptocurrency is peer-to-peer microfinance via smart contracts — ie one of the most promising solutions to bias in big financial institutions.

But cryptocurrency enthusiasts are working on it, and it seems weird to deny this matters or that the whole reason behind developing some of these flashy new technologies is to solve recognized societal problems.

And her singularitarians are strategizing how to deal with far-future advanced AI algorithms, while her nonsingularitarians are strategizing how to deal with near-future primitive AI algorithms.

These seem like…not entirely the opposite of each other? Imagine you were writing an article on the different kind of climatologists studying global warming. Is this a reasonable distinction? Which kind should you be?

But to try to turn these two positions into arch-enemies would be ridiculous and destructive. The scientists involved may have different research interests and skillsets, but not necessarily different opinions.

Obviously we should have some people working on near-term problems and other people laying the groundwork to work on long-term problems. In real life, this is what futurists are doing too. The Asilomar Conference on Beneficial AI was organized by people whose main interest was far-future Singularity scenarios, but it included some of the top experts on algorithmic bias, gave the subject a lot of airtime, and ended up with all participants signing onto a set of principles urging more work both on near-term AI problems like algorithmic bias and long-term AI problems like the development of superintelligence.

Again, I feel like this is the kind of error you could only make if you totally missed that futurism was a real subject, and you just wanted to make it into a morality play for your particular political opinions.

Fifth, another quote from the article: There will be no difference for the average person between a positive or negative post-singularity world and the world now? Listen up, average person. Because you will be very, very dead. So will all the rest of us, rich and poor, old and young, black and white.

I would promise you infinite wealth, but that sort of thing kind of loses its meaning in a post-scarcity society. I would promise you bread and roses, but they would be made of hyperintelligent super-wheat and fractal eleven-dimensional time blossoms.

Fallacies of corporate social responsibility essay

And the triumphs of science have always been triumphs for common people, whether it was the Green Revolution saving hundreds of millions of lives in the Third World, or the advent of antiparasitic drugs that are wiping malaria from Africa.

This is the only true thing. And the patron saint of the latter category is Samuel Madden. Madden was an Anglican clergyman in 18th-century Ireland, and maybe the first futurist.

Inhe published Memoirs of the Twentieth Centurya novel about people in sending letters back through time to tell their 18th-century predecessors what the future would hold.

How did the prognosticators of imagine the future? Actually, it was none of those things. It was exactly like in every way, and the future people were just writing back to remind everyone how much Catholics sucked.

I am serious about this. Book-World had no technological advances over The important thing, the thing that they invented time travel to tell the past, was that Catholics were still bad.Comments → Why Ben Shapiro Is A Total Fraud. Ezekiel May 6, at am. Okay – a lot to take in, for someone who just recently started taking politics seriously, but damn.

Fallacies of corporate social responsibility essay

This is an evisceration. We are NOT "sovereign citizens" or any other convenient stereotype or label a corrupt government uses to slander those whistleblowers such as us who insist on a law. leslutinsduphoenix.com has been an NCCRS member since October The mission of leslutinsduphoenix.com is to make education accessible to everyone, everywhere.

Students can save on their education by taking the leslutinsduphoenix.com online, self-paced courses and earn widely transferable college credit recommendations for a fraction of the cost of a traditional course. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is without doubt a key feature of national and global corporate citizenship in a much more competitive marketplace where the need to be responsive to needs of the society is even much more pronounced with the growing demand for environmental protection as a result of continued human despoliation of .

Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for Race, Wrongs, and Remedies: Group Justice in the 21st Century (Hoover Studies in Politics, Economics, and Society) at leslutinsduphoenix.com Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users. Social responsibility is defined as a business firm's obligation, beyond that required by the law and economics, to pursue long time goals that are good for society.

Over the decades, there have been numerous controversial reports of social and ethical issues business organizations faced.

BibMe: Free Bibliography & Citation Maker - MLA, APA, Chicago, Harvard