COULD "ENLIGHTENED SELF-INTEREST" MAKE A CASE FOR ETHICAL BUSINESS?

At first glance, game theory could support with logical, ideologically neutral arguments, the rationale of acting ethically in business. Apparently, this is what we learn from the Prisoner's Dilemma, the Peasant's Dilemma, Tit for Tat, and other strategic games, suggesting that the winning business strategies combine the competitive aggressiveness and a disposition for cooperation with other players of the economic game. Consequently, it is only rational to adopt an ethical behaviour in business activities, respecting the legitimate rights and interests of different categories of stakeholders. Nevertheless, this view is arguable, since game theory is grounded on the obsolete concept of homo economicus and ultimately suggests that the best strategy in business is the cooperation of the competitors. On the other hand, except utilitarianism, the rest of the major ethical theories deny the moral character of those actions that are motivated by self-interest. This study concludes that game theory cannot offer a solid ground for business ethics.