Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a collective noun for all kinds of alternative methods to formal dispute resolution. Business ethics attempts to theorize the different forms of normative coordination of corporate acts that remain within the lifeworld and outside the formal sphere of the legal system. In this context, business ethics could offer a positive approach to ADR, as ADR would be an effective, practical form of casuistry ethics. In this manner, concrete conflicts of interest and disagreements between economic actors could be resolved based on moral intentions and moral validity claims. This approach of ADR through business ethics is confirmed by many articles in business ethical journals. In two important aspects, namely justice and autonomy, law is contrary to ethics. ADR lacks exactly these ethical characteristics; thus the idea that ADR belongs to the discourse of business ethics is misleading. This article will argue that ADR is not in the realm of the ethical, but in the realm of the legal. This critical analysis of ADR will show a deeper dimension in the relationship between business ethics and law, namely the systematic colonization of ethical methods by law.

替代性争议解决（ADR）是所有形式化替代方法的统称争端解决。商业伦理试图对存在于法律世界范围内和法律体系范围之外的公司行为的各种形式的规范性协调进行理论化。在这种情况下，商业道德可以为ADR提供一种积极的方法，因为ADR将是一种有效，实用的礼仪道德。以这种方式，可以基于道德意图和道德有效性主张来解决经济行为者之间的具体利益冲突和分歧。商业道德中的这种ADR方法已被商业道德期刊上的许多文章所证实。在两个重要方面，即正义和自治，法律与道德相违背。ADR完全缺乏这些道德特征；因此，ADR属于商业道德话语的观点是一种误导。本文将论证，ADR不在道德领域，而在法律领域。对ADR的这种批判性分析将显示出商业道德与法律之间关系的更深层次，即法律对道德方法的系统化殖民化。