No, Milton Friedman’s conclusion is not as unequivocal in the last paragraph as it first appears. In the conclusion, he just focuses on organizations that are established for earning profit in terms of money, which is intrinsically valuable for the society. While in his article he also talks about eleemosynary organizations, for example hospitals or schools, where the managers would not have money profit as his objectives but the rendering of certain services. In nutshell, I think while concluding he ignores the fact that all businesses cannot have only one purpose.
2 In the "Reason" interview, Friedman states that "the differences between John Mackey and me regarding the social responsibility of business are for the most part rhetorical. Strip off the camouflage and it turns out we are in essential agreement." Do you agree? Why or why not?
I disagree with Prof. Friedman’s that his views on social responsibility of business are rhetorical to John Mackey’s views. There are following reasons-
• Both of them are thinking business in different ways. For Friedman, profit is the sole purpose of firm to exist but for Mackey, profit is necessary for survival but other goals are also important to the firm.