|
SITUATIONAL ETHICS
Those who believe that ethics cannot be generalized but vary with every situation, come
up with justification and keep changing their ethics from situation to situation, and person
to person. This is called situational ethics. This is ethics of conveniences rather than
conviction.
BENCHMARKS
Page 165 of 175
Why do we have standards? They are a measure. One meter in Europe is one meter in
Asia. One kilogram of flour is one kilogram of flour wherever you go. People who do not
want to adhere to any moral standards keep changing the definition of morality by saying
nothing is right or wrong, your thinking makes it so. They put the onus on interpretation
rather than on their behavior. They feel "my behavior is OK, your interpretation was
messed up."
For example, Hitler could have believed he was right. But the big question is, "Was he
right?" Giving money to the hungry for food is right but at the same time giving money to
buy drugs is not right.
The generalization sets the benchmark, the exception is the situation. For example,
murder is wrong. That is a general statement and a generalized truth and ethical
standard. Unless it is in self-defense. This doesn't say that it is OK to murder if the
weather is good or if you feel like it.
A person's interests, other than his job, tells much about him. The way a person spends
his leisure time reflects on his performance at work. A drug addict if running short of
money would be more likely to embezzle than a person who is not an addict.
Our standard of ethics is revealed by the advisors we hire, the suppliers we pick, and the
buyers we deal with.
Opinions may vary from culture to culture. But values such as fairness, justice, integrity
and commitment are universal and eternal. They have nothing to do with culture. Never
has there been a time when society has not respected courage over cowardice.
Ethics and justice involve the following:
♦
Empathy
♦
Fairness
♦
Compassion for the injured
♦
The larger interest of society
Just because more people agree on something doesn't make it right. For example, if ten
perverts agree on a sadistic act to hurt an innocent, does that make it right? No. Just like
the laws of gravity, ethics are pretty universal. Just as freedom without discipline leads to
destruction, similarly, society without a set of principles destroys itself. If values were so
subjective, no criminals should be in jail. Why have a police force?
A society becomes good or bad, based on the ethical values of individuals. And what
gives society its strength is ethical values. Some people enjoy taking drugs--it makes
them feel good. Does that make it good?
People who believe in the theory of relativity, actually get stuck in their own paradox.
They say, "Everything is relative." That is the absolute truth. It is self-contradictory. The
distinction between right and wrong, dishonesty and honesty presupposes their
existence. Changing terminology does not change the meaning. Just like changing the
labels does not change the contents.
People are changing moral values by giving new names and it is glamorized by the
media. Liars are called extroverts with an imagination.
When Michael Sovern, the president of Columbia University resigned in 1993, a reporter
asked him if there was any task left incomplete. "Yes," replied Govern. "It sounds
complacent, but there is really only one." He referred to the lack of instructions in
ethics.... The average undergraduate, however, gets no training in these areas. Most
educators are afraid to touch the subject. Ethics are usually left to be addressed by
parents. The result is that in this country young people who need moral and ethical
Page 166 of 175
training more than ever are getting less than ever. Morals and ethics are not a religion.
They are logical, sensible principles of good conduct that we need for a peaceful society.
*
* Adapted from John Beckley, "Isn't It Time to Wake Up?" in The Best of. . . Bits ~U
Pieces, Economics Press, Fairfield, NJ, 1994, p. 129.
Page 167 of 175
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
