<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<title>Non-traditional Outputs</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11557" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle/>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11557</id>
<updated>2013-05-22T06:12:13Z</updated>
<dc:date>2013-05-22T06:12:13Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>Questioning Morals and Moral Questions in Organizations: Review and Response</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11604" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name>Clegg Stewart</name>
</author>
<author>
<name>Feldman S. P.</name>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/10453/11604</id>
<updated>2010-06-16T04:36:07Z</updated>
<published>2005-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Questioning Morals and Moral Questions in Organizations: Review and Response
Clegg Stewart; Feldman S. P.

Steven Feldman¿s introduction is prefaced by a short remark from William James extolling the importance of prayer to the establishing of a self that is responsible to the `higher tribunals¿. From there on it becomes increasingly clear that Feldman¿s task is to direct us toward such higher tribunals. In the preface Feldman advises us that he establishes a theory of moral tradition, designed to investigate the historical and cultural context of moral commitment. It should be clear that this is theorizing with definite auspices: the religious beliefs that Feldman `professes¿ (and Weber¿s caustic remarks on the professing of religion in his essay `Science as a Vocation¿ are, I think, worth recalling here) are as central to the enterprise as they are absent. They are central in the grounding of the book as a moral project while they are absent because they are never spelled out clearly as a set of specific commitments.
</summary>
<dc:date>2005-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
