Building on past constructive criticism, the present study provides further methodological development focused on the elimination of bias that may occur during first-person observation. First, various sources of errors that may accompany introspection are distinguished based on previous critical literature. Four main errors are classified, namely attentional, attributional, conceptual, and expressional error. Furthermore, methodological recommendations for the possible elimination of these errors have been determined based on the analysis and focused excerpting of introspective scientific literature. The following groups of methodological (...) recommendations were determined: 1) a better focusing of the subject’s attention to their mental processes, 2) providing suitable stimuli, and 3) the sharing of introspective experience between subjects. Furthermore, the potential of adjustments in introspective research designs for eliminating attentional, attributional, conceptual, and expressional error is discussed. (shrink)

The evolving dynamics of the marketplace, coupled with concerns regarding the finite capacity to meet increasing demands, have led to the emergence of new phenomena and practices. These developments, while heralding significant changes in the perception and selection of products and services, also elicit substantial concerns. Greenwashing is defined as the strategic practice by which corporations create a misleading impression of their environmental initiatives. This paper examines the theoretical foundations and multifaceted nature of greenwashing, identifying key deceptive strategies such as (...) hidden trade-offs, lack of verifiable evidence, vagueness, irrelevance, and false labels. It explores the motivations behind greenwashing, which often stem from the pressure to appear environmentally responsible without incurring the costs associated with genuine sustainability. The analysis underscores the broader implications of greenwashing, including its impact on consumer trust, corporate governance, and environmental policy. Additionally, the paper addresses the emerging issue of "machinewashing," wherein companies make exaggerated claims about the ethical aspects of their AI technologies. Furthermore, the concept of environmental vices is explored, illustrating how greenwashing perpetuates unethical behaviors and undermines authentic sustainability efforts. To address these practices, the study advocates for a comprehensive approach that includes stricter regulations, increased transparency, and greater engagement from civil society. By promoting genuine sustainability and holding corporations accountable, it is possible to restore consumer trust and support authentic environmental initiatives, thereby fostering a more sustainable and ethical commerce. Keywords: greenwashing, environmental vices, ecology, machinewashing, business ethics, sustainability. (shrink)

ABSTRACTWhat is the source of the adulation of the rich-and-powerful? It cannot be benevolence. But then what is the criterion that delineates adulation from benevolence? This paper argues that the criterion resides in the set of inputs of the utility function: Does the set includes only interests, i.e. bundles of goods and resources? If so, the product is benevolence. But if the set includes aspiration, i.e. the desire to attain some imagined higher station, the product is adulation. Relying on Smith's (...) theory, aspiration first amounts to the immersion of the self with the desired higher station. Second, aspiration becomes supplanted with adulation, the basking under the achievements of the more successful rich-and-powerful as second best, i.e. when the decision maker fails to attain the aspired station. The proposed interests-aspiration distinction, as the ground of the benevolence-adulation distinction, has one important payoff. The origin of the adulation of higher rank, and the consequent stability of the political order, should be traced to aspiration-derived inputs, not exclusively to interests. (shrink)

Can rational choice theory justify hope and patience in dealing with calamities such as financial collapse or terminal illness? The Book of Job is a good entry-point. Three friends of Job counsel him to avoid hopelessness and bitterness arising from frustration regarding calamities. They do so on non-rational grounds. They argue that Job should ignore the evidence and instead blindly uphold the belief ‘God is just.’ However, such blindness permits magic, superstitions, and cultish beliefs. The specter of such beliefs is (...) probably what prompted the fourth friend, Elihu, to dismiss the arguments of the three friends. Elihu reasons that one should be rational, i.e., acknowledge the evidence. This need not entail the conclusion ‘God is unjust’ – as God cannot perform miracles on a daily basis. That is, given the evidence, one cannot sustain hopeful beliefs that God will interfere and reverse the course of natural catastrophes and shocks from which humans, as well as other living beings, suffer. One at best can be patient, accept suffering considering worse counterfactuals. Based on Elihu’s critique of the arguments of the three friends, and building on Maimonides’s interpretation, this paper concludes that standard rational choice theory can explain patience, but not hope. (shrink)