I went to a wedding on Saturday. My sister, Linda, married John Fricke. My sister is very pretty. Somehow my genetics failed in this particular area but if looks and genetics can be compared to gambling, Linda broke the house. John is tall and handsome. Since, his genetics are his own, I don’t feel quite so bad about that.
I’m not good at weddings. I am self conscious and worry a lot because my 17 year old son keeps saying, “Dad, you can’t say that.” He’s probably right.
So, what is the subject of which I write? Well, probably getting out of our (my) head once and a while would be a good thing. I deserve a little credit since I am a very fine listener. But there is one problem, I forget to turn it on.
Listening is a skill and a difficult one. I had the opportunity to practice almost every day as an adviser for a couple of years. But it’s still hard and I forget to turn it on. We would much rather coast through life than live it and I am not much of an exception. I have a serious problem with not living all the time. The ridiculous thing is that I tell my class that if they are awake and alive five percent of the time and they live to be a hundred years old, they’ve only actually lived five years. Than I call upon them to have some more life. As their teacher, I should not play such a hypocrite.
Is there a moral responsibility to pay attention to the group and try to take its tone? Well, Lord Chesterfield thought so. He used an example of a funeral as a place where high spirits would be out of place and made it a rule to take the same attitude of the group.
I only did that sota on Saturday. I suppose I could promise to do better but this would impose an intolerable burden on my sister. After all, I can’t ask my relatives to keep getting married until I get enough practice in.
What moral responsibility do we have to support and participate? I frankly am unaware of any rules. So, I am issuing a call. Are there any rules? And if so what are they?
All may participate!
James Pilant
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 
For a question like this, I normally turn to Thomas Hobbes. His social contract theory of ethics seems, to me, to be the most practical way of determining the who/what/when/where/why of our moral responsibility to society.
I believe our moral responsibility to support the group and participate in its endeavors only extend to those activities which help maintain the existence and integrity of the group. For instance, its our moral responsibility to vote because that is how we elect our leaders and how we keep our system of government/society going.
So, taking this further, it seems that the action itself is not important. What is important, and determines the level of moral responsibility, is the purpose for the action. Lets take listening as an example.
Hypothetically, say you are the President of the United States (or any elected official for that matter). Part of your job is to listen to the needs and wants of your constituents. This is how we function as a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people. If you, as an elected official, stop listening to the people, then the system cant work as designed, thus increasing the potential for the entire society to be put in jeopardy.
Next, consider any social event. In that setting, your ability or inability to listen to petty gossip and casual conversation is not overly detrimental to the group at all. You might not make any friends, but its not going to bring about the apocalypse either.
In the first case, I think its safe to say that it is your moral responsibility to listen. Whereas, in the second case, you are not morally obliged to listen.
LikeLike
I’m going to put this up as a blog post. You are as always thoughtful and intelligent.
LikeLike
Pingback: Andrew Adds Insight To One Of My Posts « Pilant's Business Ethics Blog