ality  is  an integral characteristic  of CSR (Clarkson 1991: 349)  and of  such
fundamental  importance  that  it must be  included and clearly depicted  in any
proposed  CSR model. Carroll's  use of dotted  lines separating  the domains  does
not fully capture  the non-mutually  exclusive nature  of the domains,  nor does it
denote  two of the  critical  tension  points  among  them,  the  tension  between  the  eco-
nomic  and  ethical  and  the  economic  and  philanthropic  domains  (Carroll  1993:  34).
Use of a Separate Philanthropic Category
In addition  to the possible misunderstandings  inherent  in using a pyramid,
Carroll's  use of a "philanthropic/discretionary"  category  can be confusing and
may be seen as unnecessary  to some. Carroll  acknowledges  that  it may  in fact
be "inaccurate"  (1979: 500) or a "misnomer"  (1993: 33) to call such activities
"responsibilities"  due to their voluntary  or discretionary  nature.  Others  agree
that  philanthropy  cannot  be considered  a responsibility  in itself (L'Etang  1994;
Stone 1975). In this respect, philanthropy  is  not considered a duty or social responsibility  of business ti.e.  an expected act based on what Kantians  might
refer  to as a 4iperfect"  duty) but something  that  is merely desirable  or beyond
what duty requires  (e.g.,  a supererogatory  act based on what Kantians  might
refer  to as an "imperfect"  duty)*
The new model proposes  that such a categoryS  if  it were believed to exist7
would better  be subsumed  under  ethical and/or  economic responsibilities.  The
central  reasons  for  this placement  are  that,  first  it is sometimes  difficult  to dis-
tinguish  between "philanthropic'  and "ethical  activities on both a theoretical
and  practical  level7  and  second, philanthropic  activities might  simply be based
on economic  interests.
At the theoretical  levels  the ethical  principle  of utilitarianism  can be used to
justify many  philanthropic  activities,  including  all of the  examples  Carroll  (1993:
33) refers  to (e.g.  giving  to charity,  adopting  a school,  providing  a day-care  cen-
ter for working mothers,  conducting  in-house programs  for drug abusers).  For
example,  Shaw and  Post (1993: 746) argue  that  rule  utilitarianism  supports  cor-
porate  philanthropy  as a means  of complying  with a 4;rule"  which maximizes  the
public welfare.
In  this vein, it could be argued  that  philanthropic  activities  are  simply  an  ex-
ample  of an ethically motivated  activity.  One formulation  of Kant's  categorical
imperative  is that  one should  treat  people  as an  end  in  themselves  and  not merely
as a means  to an  end.  If a company  provides  a day-care  center  for working  moth-
ers  or  conducts  in-house  programs  for  drug  abusers,  is it not  possible  that  they  are 企业的社会责任英文文献和中文翻译(3):http://www.youerw.com/fanyi/lunwen_13151.html