Unsurprisingly given its nomenclature, there exists within the ethical investment industry an implicit assumption that its investment practices and products are - by their very nature -...Show moreUnsurprisingly given its nomenclature, there exists within the ethical investment industry an implicit assumption that its investment practices and products are - by their very nature - intentionally ethical. This thesis challenges this assumption, refuting the notion that the Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) ‘movements’ are always ethical. I justify this refutation through concluding that actions within these movements may only be deemed as truly 'ethical' if they are: (i) underpinned by ethical motives and (ii) have an ethical impact. I go on to argue that investors and/or companies choosing to engage in these ethical investment movements have, by definition, heightened ethical obligations, which are only satisfied if both aforementioned conditions are met. Throughout the paper, I challenge the ethical validity of these movements by investigating instances where either the motive or the impact can be called into question, ultimately concluding that 'ethical' investment practices are not always as ethical as initially portrayed.Show less
The principle of reciprocity has been the essence of many different reciprocity arguments against the unconditional basic income (UBI). In brief, this entails that one who enjoys the benefits of...Show moreThe principle of reciprocity has been the essence of many different reciprocity arguments against the unconditional basic income (UBI). In brief, this entails that one who enjoys the benefits of social cooperation, should also contribute to the social cooperation. In this essay I introduce three perspectives on the reciprocity objection against basic income that reflect current societal tendencies. I also counter the objections against the basic income these perspectives pose. First the libertarian perspective combines the principle of reciprocity with a strong focus on self-ownership, private property and the minimal state. Second, the societal perspective entails that UBI undermines the political, economic and social structures of society through the lack of a reciprocity element in its program. Third, the market perspective shows that UBI poses a threat to the market mechanism, which pursues the common good, because there is no need for reciprocating the basic income. If these objections are true, this poses a serious problem for UBI. Yet, I demonstrate that the underlying arguments of these objections are flawed and inconsistent, so that it is fair to conclude that these reciprocity objections do not hold in relation to UBI.Show less
ABSTRACT One of the approaches to problems regarding immigration and border control is to ask the question if the right to immigration ought to be a human right. Although the human right to...Show moreABSTRACT One of the approaches to problems regarding immigration and border control is to ask the question if the right to immigration ought to be a human right. Although the human right to immigration does not exist in law of morality, border control policies still need to be morally justified by self-determination and be free of the coercion of personal autonomy.Show less
