Many students will find it useful to be provided with an examination of the assumption that businesses
have a responsibility to customers beyond making a profit, which is a common assumption found in this
chapter. Shaw and Barry argue that businesses have a responsibility to refrain from deception, to sell safe
products, to sell products of adequate quality, and to sell products at fair prices based on this assumption.
This assumption is justified early in the chapter, but we should consider if it is compatible with Nozick‘s
libertarian theory of justice. If it‘s not, we have to decide if we should reject such corporate responsibility
or if we should reject a libertarian theory of justice.
Being responsible to consumers is often profitable because customers want to buy the best products at the
best prices. However, there are at least three considerations in favor of a moral responsibility towards
consumers beyond making a profit:
a. When we buy something, there’s an implied warranty (contract) that we’re buying something of
adequate quality and safety that can be used for a certain function. If you bought a TV set only to find out
it contained a time bomb, you would have a right to seek compensation for the damage it caused. If you
bought a TV and found out it was broken, you‘d rightly seek compensation for being duped.
b. Consumers depend on the unusual expertise of manufacturers to assess the quality and safety of the
products they produce and it would be unreasonable to expect them to be able to assess the quality and
safety of the products they buy. For example, drugs require thorough testing to know their effectiveness
and side effects and consumers have neither the time, resources, nor expertise to find out the effectiveness
and side effects on their own.
c. Consumers depend on the products and services of businesses. There might have been a time when
consumers were self-sufficient and could survive in isolation. However, that‘s no longer the case.
Consumers need the food, clothing, and homes produced by others. Consumers therefore have little
This issue raises the question—Is it morally permissible for companies to exploit the vulnerability and
dependence of consumers? If so, what should we say about companies that sell unsafe or deadly products
without warning?
6-3