Following from the aesthetic analysis of business cartoons in the previous post, here’s another old chestnut on the same theme.
(This comic is reposted without permission and will be removed upon request.)
Search this blog
-
Join 51 other subscribers
Bloggers
-
Categories
- academia
- advertising
- agriculture
- American politics
- business
- cable news
- cheating
- college football
- Conference
- crime
- deliberately adversarial institutions
- democracy
- democratic politics
- diving
- education system
- ethics
- everyday ethics
- fellowships/jobs
- football recruiting
- gamesmanship
- gaming the rules
- Harbaugh
- institutional design
- international trade
- intra-institutional competition
- invisible hand
- justice
- legal ethics
- markets
- nationalism
- NCAA Recruiting Rules
- negotiations
- non-adversarial institutions
- political philosophy
- politics
- professionalism
- race to the bottom
- regulation
- role morality
- sports
- sportsmanship
- sumo
- UGA
- Uncategorized
- unwritten rules
- war
Other Blogs
Blogroll
Archives
Blog Admin
Top Clicks
- None
Ethics for Adversaries 
This cartoon is a true commentay on the ethics of the legalilty. Lawyer are supposed to be the enforcers of what is deemed legal by our goverment/ regulatory system. How can we begin to think about ethics on law, when their are overt loopholes in the structure? In the particular case, as in most cases, the legal department is supposed to act as a filter for what is appropriate and inappropriate. What happens when the legal department lowers their standards to appease other, whether the outcome is detrimental or not? What does it say about a company to be aware of the bad ethics of their legal department, but conceals that fact because it could possibly be benficial for them?