RSS
Home
What is an 'ethical' decision?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
"Ethics." A term which, over the last few years, seems to have lost its meaning, or at least its appeal, particularly in the USA where everyday brings news of new abhorrent and aberrant behavior from a business executive or government official.
The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (Encyclopedic Edition) defines the term "ethics", in part, as:
"the moral principles which determine the rightness or wrongness of particular acts or activities."
Furthermore, the term " ethical standards" as:
"conforming with an accepted standard of good behavior, e.g. in a profession or trade."
Now we all know, and perhaps can agree, that "good" and "bad" are highly dependent upon which side of the fence you are standing, or you are the one doing the "behavior" or on the receiving end of such behavior. Personally, I doubt many, of any, people wake up in the morning thinking: "Today, I'm good to do bad", or: "Today, I'm going to do wrong." Yet, every day "wrongs" are being committed, sometimes in the name of "rights."
The Greek philosopher Socrates (469-399BC) first posited that people will do what is "good" if they know what is "right." Since then, many different branches of ethics have been, and continue to be, explored. Yet, the issue remains what is "right" and what is "wrong."
We could focus on the "big" ethical dilemmas. For example, was it "right" or "good" of the US to invade Iraq? A question which remains foremost in most of the minds of Americans and Iraqis, and no doubt many others, but probably does not come up much in discussions among Balinese, Taiwanese, most people in Africa, etc. Whether it was "right" or "wrong" no doubt also depends on whether your son, husband, daughter, wife, mother, father, etc. was killed or injured while on duty, or while just being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Another example would be whether abortion, or refusing to perform an abortion, is ethical. Or whether the death penalty is ethical. This are mind-bogglingly complex ethical issues which too often get painted with broad strokes and reduced to mere simplicities for the sake of people seeking power.
In the end, the meaning of "ethics" is hard to explain because it is different things to different people. Clearly being "ethical" is not the same as being "lawful", nor is it following one's feelings or "one's heart." Despite advocating high "ethical standards", ethics is also not restricted to followers of any particular religion since we expect "ethical behavior" from atheist, agnostics, and religious individuals. Of course, ethical standards of one religion or religious group may be unethical behavior to another. We need not go further than the minority of individuals who believe "God" requires them to kill in his name (of course, unsaid is why an omnipotent God would require to be defended to begin with!). Finally, ethical behavior is also not doing something that is generally accepted in the society where one lives. If so, Nazism would have been ethical. So would be segregation, lynching, and slavery, all "ethical behavior" at certain points in the history of this still young nation.
In this blog, we will review everyday news events;with a particular emphasis on the decisions made by politicians and business executives; to explore the question of what is ethical. If done well, half of the readers will agree and the other half will disagree. Again, "right" and "wrong" are a matter of perspective. Hence, this blog does not intend to achieve consensus, but rather to activate a dialog. Hopefully, we can all reach a point where we can civilly agree to disagree. Then again, what is "civil" to one, may not be to another. We will just have to see. Here's hoping you join me in this journey of exploration.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
