Nowadays,Business leaders are increasingly being called upon to make decisions at the philosophical level.However, few people possess the skills needed to navigate this new reality.

withAITaking its rise as an example.AnthropicIt is one of the few companies that has meticulously documented its philosophical principles and code of conduct, which have shaped its flagship product.AIModelClaudeIts operational and decision-making processes.Claudeof/’s“Constitution”By a team of academically trained philosophers andAnthropicIt was jointly authored by technical experts and embedded philosophical premises into every interaction involving the model.

To date, more than30Ten thousand enterprises have deployed it.Claude, including eight of the ten largest U.S. companies. However, as we have observed, although an increasing number of organizations are integrating this model into their operations, there has been little discussion on whether business leaders truly understand and endorse it.AnthropicAssumptions Encoded in the Product——Or, if they do not agree, what should be done?

AIIt is not the only force to have brought philosophical questions to the forefront of modern business operations. At least in the United States, the social and political consensus surrounding history and core values has already disintegrated. On where the boundaries of free speech lie, what constitutes professional expertise, what responsibilities employers owe to their employees, and what it means to use technology responsibly.——These fundamental issues are now being openly and fiercely debated. At their root, they are all philosophical questions. Philosophy has long underpinned business decision-making at an implicit level, but in today’s society, there is no longer a shared, stable understanding of many fundamental questions, and leaders must now confront these issues more explicitly.

When business leaders engage with philosophy, they typically focus on how to leverage philosophical tools to achieve their existing business objectives.Critical Thinking——An ability rooted in philosophical reasoning——It has repeatedly been identified as one of the most sought-after skills among executives. A recently widely circulated article in the MIT Sloan Management Review argues that philosophical thinking is essential for organizations to…AIExtracting value is crucial in investing. However, the importance of philosophy to business extends far beyond enhancing thinking and strategy. Business leaders also need to address fundamental issues.——On the nature of things, what constitutes knowledge, and what is right. These are not the kind of business problems that happen to benefit from philosophical reflection. They are philosophical questions with direct commercial implications.

As practitioners, researchers, and educators at the intersection of philosophy and leadership, we have observed that these fundamental questions remain unresolved. This is not because leaders lack the wisdom or motivation to engage in such discussions, but rather because they rarely have access to the relevant frameworks for thinking. We believe that philosophical literacy——In other words, it is the ability to identify, question, and reflect on the fundamental assumptions that shape decision-making.——It is increasingly becoming, like financial literacy, a critical competency for effective leadership.

In this article, we will focus on three key areas of philosophy:Ontology, epistemology, and ethics.Business leaders often make critical decisions based on assumptions rooted in these three areas, yet they never pause to scrutinize those assumptions themselves. We will explain why it is crucial to uncover these assumptions and outline concrete strategies for cultivating the corresponding competencies in each domain. Furthermore, we will also present a set of practical methodologies for translating theoretical philosophical skills into the practical wisdom that leaders need in their daily work.

Ontology is the study of being. Originates from Greek"he is there", meaning““Existing things”。

Ontology investigates what the essence of things truly is. Most business leaders hold a set of unexamined ontological assumptions, such as what a company is, what constitutes a free market, or how to define an employee. These assumptions have a significant impact on practical decision-making.

Take a fundamental question as an example: What is the purpose of a corporation? Milton Friedman (Milton FriedmanThe answer is that a firm exists to maximize shareholder returns within the bounds of established social and legal norms, a perspective that has informed a host of downstream decisions regarding strategy, culture, and business processes. Peter·Drucker’s answer to this question is markedly different: he regards the corporation as a social institution through which people organize their collective lives. Leaders who align with Drucker’s perspective will approach the same subsequent decisions according to a completely different set of priorities.

These are not merely theoretical positions. They are the fundamental assumptions that determine how an organization operates at all levels. Most leaders have never consciously chosen between such perspectives, and even fewer organizations have reached consensus on these trade-offs within their senior leadership team. By contrast, decisions are made on the basis of unexamined default assumptions, which are often applied inconsistently across different decisions and among different individuals. However, these assumptions shape every practical decision made by the organization.

Apple’s approach to handling customer data serves as an example: the company has consistently grappled with a fundamental ontological question and has structured its strategy around the answer. What constitutes customer data has become one of the most important ontological questions in contemporary business. Treat customer data as the raw material generated by user activity.——Leaders who can extract, analyze, and monetize data will leverage it in one way or another. And regard customer data as the digital embodiment of customer relationships.——Leaders who treat entrusted company assets as something in which clients still hold an interest will leverage the same data in fundamentally different ways.

in Tim.·Under Cook's leadership, Apple has built part of its corporate image around the second view, which sees privacy as"a fundamental human right", and made product decisions that limit user data extraction and commoditization. This underlying assumption has far-reaching implications. It not only affects data policy, but also shapes product design, business models, and how companies, employees, and users see themselves. It is rooted in an ontological view of the source of the data:"You are not our product. You are our client."

To start dealing with ontological issues, choose something that is important to your business, such as your product, your customers, or your culture. Ask each member of the senior team to write down a one or two sentence definition of the thing. Where the answers diverge will indicate ontological inconsistencies in the team. The next step is to work towards a consensus definition.

Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Originates from Greek"Epistere", meaning“knowledge"。

Epistemology deals with what counts as knowledge, how beliefs can be justified, and how disagreements about what is true should be handled. Leaders constantly make epistemological judgments——Decide what evidence is sufficient to take action, which sources to trust, whose professional advice to follow, and how much uncertainty to accept.

The Pentagon2026year1Published in the monthAIstrategy, illustrates both the importance and difficulty of achieving epistemological clarity. the document states that,AIThe model may have an ideological bias, and its output may reflect the values and assumptions of the model developer. To avoid introducing these views into the work of the U.S. military, the strategy calls for the establishment of"Model objectivity"benchmarks, and procurement can produce""Objectively true"The answer is not polluted by ideology.AISystem.

This strategy document clearly addresses an important epistemological question: what answers are true. It also takes a clear stand: a“Common sense”The assumption that truth is both objective and direct and can be identified. But the problem is that this position has only been strongly thrown out, and it has not been clearly explained why it should be done. This is very troublesome, because philosophers have been criticizing this kind of truth for thousands of years.“Common sense”. Without any argument to back it up, the policy could easily be criticized as merely draping the political views of the ruling party.“higher-order cognition”The coat.

In contrast, candy companiesTony's ChocolonelyIts decision-making process is built around a clear set of cognitive commitments. The company was established in2005Year, from Dutch journalist Tern·Van der Kuken's investigation into the use of child labor and slavery in the cocoa supply chain. The company was founded with the goal of setting stricter ethical sourcing standards than vague claims or relying solely on certification. It has translated this objective into five procurement principles, which clarify how such statements should be reviewed and handled. These principles set up a framework in which any knowledge claim must be grounded, withstand scrutiny, and be tested according to how well the company currently knows and how accurately it can achieve in practice.

Toyota has long pursued"On-site things"Principle——It roughly means"Go and see for yourself"——represents a different but equally thoughtful epistemological commitment. The principle states that the best way to understand a problem is for leaders to go where the problem exists and confront it directly, rather than relying on reports, abstract concepts, or second-hand data. This is a formal epistemological norm embedded in the company's operating culture: it holds that direct empirical contact with physical reality is a more reliable basis for judgment than information collected and inferred remotely.

Toyota andTony's ChocolonelyThe approach taken suggests that epistemological literacy is not an abstract philosophical exercise. It is a skill that can be identified and put into practice in a successful business. Your leadership team can begin to develop epistemological literacy by reviewing past decisions. Identify a decision that has recently turned out poorly. Ask the team: What did everyone believe at the time that made the decision seem right? Where did that belief come from? If no one can tell the source of the belief, it has never been properly argued.——Just accepted without thinking. Next, take a decision with a good result and do the same exercise again.

Ethics is the study of moral or behavioral principles. Originates from Greek"ethos", meaning“Character"。

Ethics explores what is right and how conflicting obligations should be weighed. Ethical literacy here is not about corporate social responsibility, brand positioning, or efforts to bring companies into line with mainstream ethics. It is the ability to examine what is good. Exercising this competence means being familiar with different ethical orientations, understanding the ethical perspectives of the parties with which the business interacts, and being able to articulate and defend the company's own ethical position.

In recent years, some companies that have attracted much attention have stumbled. The root cause is that there is a gap between their ethical commitments and what they actually show.2023In 2010, AB InBev made an inclusive ethical gesture by partnering with a well-known transgender Internet celebrity to provide itsBud LightBrand to do publicity. As a result, this cooperation annoyed some consumers, and the company immediately changed direction. This, in turn, alienates other consumers who had a favorable impression of the initial campaign. The controversy, and subsequent retreat, is rooted in the failure of the AB InBev leadership to clearly define its ethical position. This failure means that AB InBev can't distinguish itself.——Nor can the public distinguish——Is it doing brand positioning, is there a real ethical commitment, or is it dealing with stakeholders.

AnthropicA contrasting example is provided.2026year2In January, the PentagonAnthropicAn ultimatum was issued: either accept permission for the U.S. military to use the company's technology for"any lawful use"the terms of the contract, or lose the contract.AnthropicAdhere to two specific restrictions——Not for mass domestic surveillance, not for fully autonomous weapons——And refuse to waive those restrictions. In response, the Pentagon terminatedAnthropicand reached an agreement with a competitor.

AnthropicThe overall record of ethical consistency is not blameless. But in this case, the company knew the specific boundaries of its ethical commitments, was able to articulate why those commitments existed, and held on to them at significant commercial cost.

To develop your ethical qualities, start with a simple test. Identify three positions your company currently holds that are based on (implicit or explicit) ethical values. To each one, ask: if it costs us10%If the answer is no, then it is not based on real ethical commitment. It's either a marketing gimmick or a fig leaf that leadership and teams use to hide their ugly——Cover up the important but uncomfortable facts. The ability to distinguish between the two is the first step in ethical literacy. The next step is to be able to explain why you're sticking to those promises and to be able to stand up when asked aggressively.

The three qualities described in this article provide you with the basic skills to help you discover and examine the key philosophical assumptions that influence leadership decisions. However, it can be seen that a problem is an ontological problem, that an epistemological standard needs to be defended, or that an ethical promise has never been tested.——This is completely different from knowing how to deal with specific situations and real pressure. The classical Greek philosopher Aristotle distinguished between theoretical knowledge——The kind of things that can be learned from textbooks——with practical wisdom, which he called"phronesis": Judgment that can only be developed through experience in handling real cases. And it is the ability to deliver real results that defines effective leaders.

How did this kind of judgment come from? It was practiced by competing with those inexplicable problems, stumbled, and then learned to see through the situation more and more accurately. Therefore, practical wisdom is not only a craft that can be used, but also a character that needs to be cultivated slowly. It relies both on actual experience and on the judgment of appropriate behavior in highly specific and sometimes unique situations. As with any ability that requires practice, it declines if it is not used. The following are two toolkits that ensure that philosophical judgments are always closely connected and functional with the actual world.

To create beneficial collisions.Create some structured moments for the leadership team to stop, think with your own philosophical judgment, and then fight each other on those fundamental issues. For example:

-When making any major strategic decision, attach a short description of the philosophical assumptions behind the decision.——It assumes what the nature of the business is, what it holds as truth, and what ethical commitments it acquiesces.

-Before launching a marketing campaign, stand on the opposite side and torture it with the company's philosophical commitment. Ask: Is the company really ready to defend this position under pressure?

-When evaluating a new technology or new partner, weigh what philosophical assumptions it will bring to your organization, and see if those assumptions work with your own.

Tracking philosophical deviations.The alignment between an organization's philosophical commitment and its tools, processes, and environment is always tentative. Market changes, social evolution, and technological advances will continue to pull the assumptions embedded in the system away from the original beliefs of the organization. The following three practices can help you find the problem early before the offset causes problems:

• Quarterly review of company keyAIThe assumptions embedded in the tool to assess whether these assumptions have deviated from the company's own assumptions. Deviations can arise from two reasons: either the assumptions embedded in the tool have changed, or the underlying assumptions of the company itself have evolved.

-Stress test a long-term policy with the organization's current ethical view.

-An annual comparison of the company's publicly stated philosophical commitments against the decisions actually made over the past year, looking for patterns of deviation that are not visible in any single decision.

The three philosophical qualities described in this paper are not abstract intellectual exercises. They are becoming essential for effective leadership in a world where old certainties are disintegrating. Organisational identity, strategy and values are increasingly being shaped by tools and mindsets introduced from third parties. This trend will only accelerate. Leaders who are now unable to articulate their own philosophical positions and challenge the views of others risk losing genuine leadership.

Keywords:#AI #