But, is it ethical?

[coberst]

But, is it ethical?

I came across this statement “for everything human beings do by intelligence rather than instinct, any course of conduct they choose when they might have chosen differently, is a moral action” in “The Metaphysical Club” by Louis Menand and it stopped me in my tracks. I had to study this statement and make a decision about its validity.

I consider the words ‘moral’ and ‘ethical’ to be interchangeable.

We all have the ability to do harm or to do good to other people; and we all are fully aware of that capacity. How can we know this? We can know this because we are capable of imaginatively placing our self into the boots of the other person?

Young children know this, as is evident by there shouts of condemnation:
“That’s not fair!”—“She won’t share!”—“He hit me and I didn’t do anything to him!”—“He promised!”—“Cheater, Cheater!”—“Liar, Liar!”—“It’s my turn!”

I suspect most of us, adults and children; learn these ‘ethical principles’ through social osmosis (without conscious effort). We ‘know’ these principles of ethical behavior but often fail to practice them because there are always so many other forces pulling us in another direction.

The forces pulling us into unethical behavior are many; for example, ego and social centric forces, self-delusion, selfishness, and especially because of our ignorance and the complexity of the problems we face.

Webster defines educate as—to develop mentally, morally, or aesthetically [beauty] especially by instruction. Webster defines indoctrinate as—to imbue [infuse] with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle.

I think that it is imperative for each adult to become conscious (aware plus attention) of the difference between these two terms--‘educate’ and ‘indoctrinate’--and also to recognize just how much of our attitude toward matters of ethics results from our education or from our indoctrination.

I agree with the statement in the first paragraph, do you? I find it I to be staggering to realize this to be a fact, do you?

 

[Rejected]

But, is it ethical?

I came across this statement “for everything human beings do by intelligence rather than instinct, any course of conduct they choose when they might have chosen differently, is a moral action” in “The Metaphysical Club” by Louis Menand and it stopped me in my tracks. I had to study this statement and make a decision about its validity.

I consider the words ‘moral’ and ‘ethical’ to be interchangeable.

We all have the ability to do harm or to do good to other people; and we all are fully aware of that capacity. How can we know this? We can know this because we are capable of imaginatively placing our self into the boots of the other person?

Young children know this, as is evident by there shouts of condemnation:
“That’s not fair!”—“She won’t share!”—“He hit me and I didn’t do anything to him!”—“He promised!”—“Cheater, Cheater!”—“Liar, Liar!”—“It’s my turn!”

I suspect most of us, adults and children; learn these ‘ethical principles’ through social osmosis (without conscious effort). We ‘know’ these principles of ethical behavior but often fail to practice them because there are always so many other forces pulling us in another direction.

The forces pulling us into unethical behavior are many; for example, ego and social centric forces, self-delusion, selfishness, and especially because of our ignorance and the complexity of the problems we face.

Webster defines educate as—to develop mentally, morally, or aesthetically [beauty] especially by instruction. Webster defines indoctrinate as—to imbue [infuse] with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle.

I think that it is imperative for each adult to become conscious (aware plus attention) of the difference between these two terms--‘educate’ and ‘indoctrinate’--and also to recognize just how much of our attitude toward matters of ethics results from our education or from our indoctrination.

I agree with the statement in the first paragraph, do you? I find it I to be staggering to realize this to be a fact, do you?

While I also agree with the initial statement I hardly find it staggering. For every action one makes by willful choice one should to weigh the consequences of all possible actions, including inaction, and choose the most favorable to the situation.

It becomes a moral action because every action one makes has an impact, irrelevant of magnitude, on some other human being. It is up to the individual to determine how his or her actions may affect the lives of others and to choose wisely and with forethought of those effects.

Likewise the responsibilities of those effects, since we all make willful decisions are upon all of us.

If when I walk into a gas station and I see a man coming out with an armful of goods and a small child, I have no obligation to hold the door for him. But I am partly responsible for whatever happens if I do or do not. If I choose to hold the door open and maybe even smile and say hello, then that may just brighten his day; a small impact, but an impact none the less, and a positive one at that. If I choose not the hold the door and the man struggles and drops his groceries, possible bought with the last of his money to feed his family, then I am responsible for the pains of hunger his children will experience.

We all have a responsibility, regardless of race, religion, or creed, to improve not just our station and status, but to aid in the advance of the human condition.

Like ripples in a pond…

 

[kateyes]

But, is it ethical?

I came across this statement “for everything human beings do by intelligence rather than instinct, any course of conduct they choose when they might have chosen differently, is a moral action” in “The Metaphysical Club” by Louis Menand and it stopped me in my tracks. I had to study this statement and make a decision about its validity.

I consider the words ‘moral’ and ‘ethical’ to be interchangeable...........

I wasn't staggered by this statement--there is a scientific law that states "for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction." I accepted this law a long time ago--in my mind it in essence makes the same statement. I think many of us prefer to think we stand alone and are only responsible for ourselves and ours. But the Earth as a whole is a community (yes broken into smaller subsets but a community none the less) every action we take or don't take has a reaction. That is why we need to think more and respond instinctively less--I like Cobest's example--holding the door is a purely optional action--and we frequently consider the results of taking an action--but how often to you think about the result of not taking an action--or even consider that the non-action is an action in and of itself-(oops am I getting too metaphysical here)--anyway everything in life is--------like ripples in a pond.