Honesty, Fairness and Justice

I have rented a few DVDs recently. My favorite title was Kingdom of Heaven directed by Ridley Scott. The show was simply… TERRFIC! From the show I have learnt a couple of lessons and while studying for ethics, the time could not have been more apt.

In the show, when the King of Jerusalem was addressing Balian (Orlando Bloom), a knight and son of Godfrey, he said this:

“A king may move a man, A father may claim a son. But remember that even when those who move you be kings or men of power,Your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God, you cannot say “but I was told by others to do thus”or that "virtue was not convenient at that time"This will not suffice.”

Which brings to mind the issue of ethics and morality- When Balian was asked by the King to marry Sibylla, and in so doing, would be the cause of a great number of deaths which include the villain, the next King of Jerusalem Guy, and all the knights of Guy who refuse to swear new allegiance to Balian. Balian refused promptly.

When questioned why: “Why do you protect Guy? He’s a man who insults you, hates you. He would kill you himself if he had the chance. For the further salvation of this Kingdom, is it so hard to marry Sibylla? Jerusalem has no need for a perfect knight”, Balian replied this “No. It is a Kingdom of conscience or nothing.”

Balian could have prevented a war against the Sacarens but because of Balian’s choice, Jerusalem fell. Thousands died trying to conquer Jerusalem or defend their home as predicted. I believe Balian's choice was a good one. I believe also that it should not be the predicted outcome that governs the choice of action but rather the virtue and goodness of the choice of that moment that should encompass our actions. But how often do we actually make decisions by rationalizing that virtue was not convenient at that time or that we have to simply follow orders?

What we are taught in school of ethics is this. We are taught of a model of Blanchard and Peale that before we make any decision making, we should precede by asking ourselves three questions.

The 1^st question is “Is it legal?”
2^nd: “Is it balanced?”
3^rd: “How does it make me feel?”

The Wall Street Journal Model has a similar field of thought. It poses similar questions:

1. Am I in compliance with the law?

2. What contributions does this choice of action make to the company, the shareholders, the community, and others?

3. What are the short- and long-term consequences of this decision?

Both models as we can observe have put law above everything else. This actually contradicts what we have been taught in the introduction and definition of ethics which describes ethics as such: “Ethic stands are not the standards of the law. They are a higher standard.” This being said, using the above definition of ethics, I feel that the above 2 models are inadequate. The question that should have been asked first is this: “How will it make others feel?” The second question to ask is “How will it make me feel?” Only by placing the feelings of others first, can you actually know how the decision you make will make you feel. It can be summed up in one word and that is “empathy”. Empathy will allow us to make decisions that do not go against the innate conscience that we are bestowed with.

Now do not misunderstand. When I say this I do not mean that we are above the law. What I am saying is that legislation may not be always right. The system is flawed because it is designed by people who are imperfect. If the law says that it will be a crime to not to follow the King's orders, and the King orders you to commit murder, does it make murder morally right? Think this does not apply to people of our time? Think again. When US soldiers were ordered to torture the Iraqi prisoners, by law, not following the order could lead to severe military punishment and even imprisonment. The system of following orders was designed for a good purpose but can be abused by people of authority in a myriad of ways. Simply put, sometimes being a good men does not necessarily mean that we are a good citizen.

A friend was telling me of a recent event in school, that a girl was “removed” from her present project group because she was under-performing and slowing the team down. I have worked with that group previously and do know for sure that it is true that this girl Angela is not the best team member/player you can have. But as a leader for one of their previous project business frameworks, I can confidently say that Angela do try her best, she has good working habits and she is also a sweet friend to have. I have also heard that after she got removed from the team she cried and cried till she was on the verge of becoming preserved plum.

My point here is that in making their decision, has Angela's team actually placed her feelings before their own? Is it so easy to conveniently remove a good friend when things get rough? I can pretty much guess that team would try to rationalize their action in this way: “Work is work, friends are friends. Its nothing personal” I say that is a bunch of crap disguised in florid prose because when feelings are involved it is personal. Once again the decision calls for one to be empathetic to others. Is there a better solution to the problem? Would I have done the same you ask? My answer is no. It must be a decision made of conscience or nothing. I chose to leave Angela’s team before I joined another. Sad to say, it is difficult for me to remain friends with them as of now but at least I chose not to toss another person’s feeling and trample on it for the sake achieving better grades.

Here's a conversation between my friend and I

I said this: “ethics is crappy because all you need is to know how to write well” and “it does not have to reflect your true values.” Ironically, I will be doing that in the examinations, quoting people like Peale and Blanchard and using the wall street journal model for it although it is not within the boundaries of my value system. To me ethics is not just about honesty, fairness and justice. Honesty, fairness and justice are simply what is required for a person to have a clear conscience, the means to an end. What about loyalty, friendship and love? There's so much more to ethics but the bottom line is this- Ethical behavior cannot exist in the absence of a clear conscience.