Ethics

[joreth]

tacit has written a post on ethics and I want to direct everyone's attention to it because it's a good thought-provoking post.  But I also wanted to repost my own response to add to my "me manual".

The entry is tacit's own response to a question about ethical considerations regarding relationship cheating.  For instance, most people agree it's unethical to cheat on your partner, but many people don't think it's unethical to be the person the cheater is cheating with.  tacit's journal entry includes a poll with several situations where you are supposed to give your opinion on whether or not that situation is "ethical".  Rather than repost the poll here, or the many many many responses to it that prompted my own response, I just suggest ya'll go and read it.  I'll wait.



I hadn't even made it all the way through question #2 when I came up with a "what if" to ask tacit.  These questions are very difficult to answer, especially if one is in the habit of asking "what if".  But I took the poll using the simplest assumptions, sort of the Occam's Razor method to poll-taking.  Then I read the responses, which are almost exclusively filled with "but what ifs". 

Here's my response:

First of all, I think that waffling on the "what ifs" defeats the purpose of this poll, which is to discover a person's overall ethical mindset. There are going to be fuzzy areas, grey areas and exceptions to EVERYTHING. I'm the queen of the what-ifs. That's not the point. The point is, where do I draw the line between ethical and unethical behaviour? If I think being the "other woman" is generally unethical but can think of some exceptions where it might be OK, that gives an indication of where my ethics lie. So the answer is "no" because *generally* I think it's bad.

(for the record, I can't think of any exceptions that make it "ethical" in my rule book, but that's a whole separate discussion).

I also had to go with "unethical" in the prepubescent sex questions even though I was a very sexual child and I believe that some individuals *are* capable of making those kinds of decisions at younger ages than others, because *generally* I think it violates the whole informed consent deal. The phrase "pre-pubescent" implies that the body is not yet developed for a sexual relationship, regardless of mental status and I think that helps to narrow down the "exceptions" a bit. Now, if we're talking 17 year olds ... that's a lot fuzzier. I think it's safe to assume that the intention of the question was not to make exceptions for a person who would naturally find it distasteful but is required to do so in order to prevent further or larger injustices (i.e. a cop collecting evidence) or by trickery and deceit.

Part of the problem, I think, has to do with varying definitions of "ethics". I like tacit's other post on ethics, where he describes how the "ethical" consideration has to do with the path of greater courage. For instance, *in general*, lying is wrong. But the neighbor hiding the Jewish family when the Nazis come knocking at the door and deliberately lying about their whereabouts takes greater courage than telling the truth and is therefore not unethical.  I would like to add that my definition of "ethical", in addition to being the courageous choice, also includes not deliberately harming other people by action or inaction and taking responsibility for my part in the law of unintended consequences.

I like to take the path of greater courage, even though I have faltered in the past and I'm sure will falter in the future. It's frightening and it hurts, but I think it makes me a more ethical person. When it comes to telling the truth, yes there are other considerations like "is it necessary". For instance, my mom really doesn't need to hear the details of my BDSM and sex life. But when it comes to courage, it is more courageous to stand up to my parents and be honest about who I am romantically involved with and how important they are to me then to hide behind a safety blanket of "they don't need to know". So I won't be telling my mom that I spent most of this morning shackled to zen_shooter's ceiling, but I also won't hide his existence from her because it might be "easier" than trying to explain why I'm dating him when I am already dating tacit.

Courage is difficult and terrifying. But in the end, I have very few regrets about my life, I sleep with an easy conscience, and I wrestle with very few demons or moral dilemmas. I genuinely like myself and who I have become. Not many other people can say that about themselves. 

Comments

[leora.livejournal.com]

I didn't want to put legality into it. If you prefer, take it into the past and make it a woman who looks white but has a black parent. By old-fashioned standards that is a black woman who can pass for white, and the hotel owner has the right to refuse the person a room. Does she have an obligation to disclose her "race"? Or, if you prefer, toss in a religion or country of origin that isn't liked.

With parents, I view them as special cases. I think parents owe their children a whole great big deal and their children owe them nothing. If they are good parents and don't manage to get unlucky enough to have a psychopath who really isn't affected by how s/he is raised, then they wil be treated well by their kids if they do a good job. But parenting is all about reaping what you sow. And I think parents should be helping their kids get an education if they have the means to do so, and that they do not have the right to place such restrictions on how their children use the education and life they gave them. Don't like it? Fair enough, don't have kids. Having kids is a huge mess of obligations, work, and effort for no reward other than knowing you did the best you could to help another person get a start on life. That's not for everyone. But if you have kids, suck up and deal. Oh sure, it's fine to complain about how hard it is, that's being human. But you signed up for it by having and keeping a child. I also strongly support access to birth control and abortion and open adoptions and other options so nobody is ever forced to take on such a task. It should be by choice, and then you should own that choice.

Doctors are weird for me. My health insurance is through the government and my options are limited. However, I'm also wasting that money if I let them run another useless test and not run something that may help. And yes, in some cases I do know better than they do. Although my insurance comes from disability insurance, which means it's actually from money I paid into the system in case I became disabled and then got because I did. This is a lot like any other insurance, it just happens to go through the government. So, there is a sense to which you can say it is my money. Although, of course, the money I paid in went to the people at the time who needed it and the money I get out comes from the people currently paying into it who don't need it, but that's a different matter.

I have badly understood problems and have even gotten one semi-diagnosis that I know is wrong. I don't think I should pass it on, although were I to share that info, it would probably affect the care that I received.

I'm rather used to a hostile world full of people who need to be manipulated for my general survival. I know that this isn't true with everyone, and I am sure many people don't run into that as much. But that's so much more what I am used to, which is part of why I take my obligations to friends so seriously - they get exceptions because they deserve them. it may not be the healthiest of ways to live, but it's hard to shake off the family and personal history of masses of people wanting to cause harm. I am the descendent of Jews who left Spain during the Inquisition, Russians who left because of pogroms, a Polish man who left before World War II but lost all of his siblings except one due to the Holocaust, and a family that was generally disliked in our neighborhood. It was shortly before I turned 4 that I learned that my peers would harass me because they could.

I do believe that people deserve a certain measure of respect based on being human. And they deserve for me to not assume they mean ill until they show some sign of it. But trust must be earned, and information I give can be used against me. And the fact that that info would affect their position is generally all the more reason not to tell them.

Now, if it's a friend and I want to convince him/her to go to a movie with me and I know s/he won't go if I mention the movie has a particular actor in it, I'll let them know. It's just pointless not to. But that's a friend who has earned that info. I have trouble thinking of situations where I want to persuade strangers of things where they'd have a right to info that would change their minds.