IN SEARCH OF A POSSIBLE CRITERION FOR MANDATORY ETHICAL LABELING PRODUCTS

In recent philosophical research in Ethics and Moral Philosophy, scholars pay a significant amount of attention to the concept of ethical labeling products, especially to the problem of what kind of goods should be mandatory labeled. In their search for a possible criterion for mandatory ethically labeling goods, they mainly have focused on the moral issue of the consumption of products, ethical status of whose is not established in society. In this connection researches neglect the perspective where there is such consensus - human well-being. This perspective, which is not represented in philosophical studies in relation to the issue under consideration, could provide a clear benchmark for mandatory labeling goods. In this regard, the goal of the article is contributing to the philosophical understanding of the problem of ethical labeling goods by offering a possible criterion that can be used by regulators and manufacturers to label products whose consumption might be morally unacceptable for consumers. More specifically, the thesis is defended that mandatory ethical warning labels should be put on goods which production is associated with the harm to the well-being of employees of producing companies and third parties - individuals who are neither engaged in manufacturing nor in consuming such products. In this article in order to illustrate and defend our position on the selected research topic we use argumentative method and provide the necessary examples. Additionally, we show how proposed criterion might be used by regulators and manufacturers and provide possible objections that may be raised against the practice of mandatory ethical labeling goods.