Ethics Continuously Created by Everyday Activities

Ethics Continuously Created by Everyday Activities

Anna Peterson when asked what the most important message is contained within her new book: Everyday Ethics and Social Change: The Education of Desire

That ethics is not disconnected from ordinary activities. This means a couple of things. First, almost nothing we do is “value neutral.” We can’t separate out the times we are acting “morally,” and the rest of our lives. Second, it means that ethics are not something constructed or articulated in the abstract and then applied, in a top-down fashion, to concrete circumstances. Rather, ethics are created in and through ordinary practices. This means we ought to think more carefully, perhaps, about the ethics we enact (or don’t) on a daily basis. In the end, I think, movements for social change seek to transform everyday life so it becomes safer, less oppressive, and more joyful for more people (and other creatures). So it makes sense that the roots of a radical ethic for social change can be found in the best parts of our everyday lives.

I have strongly professed such beliefs in my teachings on ethics. I strongly believe that the moral stance we have in place is the main factor in what we decided when the ethical dilemma arrives. It is obvious to me, that we create our ethics continuously, and the destruction of our ethical framework takes place in small daily increments. This is why traditional business ethics teaching has little effect. What the more foolish call the “real world” eats it up. The real world is the kind of person you are as opposed to the crawling maggot the world would prefer you become.

James Pilant

Who Is Responsible For Our Financial Crisis?

002-1Who Is Responsible For Our Financial Crisis?

Dylan Rattigan nails it (from the November 25, 2009 program, Morning Meeting):

Exactly and more importantly making sure that we identify who burned the house (the house being the American economy) down, who made themselves rich burning the house down, getting the money back from those who made themselves rich burning the house down, punishing those who burned the house down and then building a new house that doesn’t allow people who like to burn houses down to build them. And they’re acting like the house fire was an accident and I think that’s where you run into a lot of problems.

There has been a continuous failure of the Obama Administration to place blame or establish penalties for the long term financial wrong doing that created the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Without accountability what reason do those who have profited so much from hurting so many to stop their actions?

James Pilant

Does The Bottom Line Always Trump Ethics?

From Reuters, a comment from China Labor Watch:

“The case of Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, shows that corporate codes of conduct and factory auditing are not enough by themselves to strengthen workers’ rights if corporations are unwilling to pay the real price it costs to produce a product according to the standards in their codes.”

Acting ethically costs real money. It limits the return on investment. It complicates dealings with suppliers, competitors and often the government.

Doing the right thing is never cheap. The wrong thing can make you enormous sums of money in a world where this kind of behavior has no down side.

jp

What Moral Stance?

As I discuss the ethical implications of various business practices, I am troubled by the multiple possibilities of moral stances. Catholic Social Doctrine, Protestant Social Doctrine, the Southern Baptists’ total absence of any moral doctrine in regard to the business expressed as free market absolutism, Plato and Aristotles advocacy of the good life, the life examined and well lived, Kant’s categorical imperative, Friedman’s thinly veiled advocacy of Friedrich Nietzsche Superman, (the moral and ethical are weaklings who place limits on the “real” achievers because otherwise they couldn’t cut it); what do you advocate when examining the strange conduct of American business?

I will search for the best options, but it is not going to be easy. But doesn’t that fit with so much else?

The fight for justice, truth and honor is never won. The forces of evil rise again and again. There is no golden stake you can thrust into their heart to stop their depradations on the poor and helpless, their use of the levers of power to enrich themselves when they have contributed nothing and worst of all their continued recruitment of the young an a half wit philosophy of joining a group of “special” people, achievors, the real makers and shakers, an Ayn Rand doctrine that makes you special without any accomplishment or achievement save a twisted belief.

What is there but to fight, to struggle. Hear the words of Cyrano de Bergerac
in the last act of the play.

(He raises his sword):
What say you?  It is useless?  Ay, I know
But who fights ever hoping for success?
I fought for lost cause, and for fruitless quest!
You there, who are you!–You are thousands!
Ah!
I know you now, old enemies of mine!
Falsehood!
(He strikes in air with his sword):
Have at you!  Ha! and Compromise!
Prejudice, Treachery!. . .
(He strikes):
Surrender, I?
Parley?  No, never!  You too, Folly,–you?
I know that you will lay me low at last;
Let be!  Yet I fall fighting, fighting still!

Let us fall knowing that we acted with honor. Let us die with a curse on our lips for the sanctimonious, pompous evil doers among us. Let us die well.

Wisdom in Conduct

I have been reading Christopher Browne Garnett’s book, Wisdom in Conduct. He defines wisdom in conduct this way: Wisdom in conduct is, therefore, the habitual application to conduct of the fruits of knowing, discriminating, and evaluating, and this over a full span of years. (Page 13)

I find this a compelling definition and I intend to use it in my work.

Purpose

Why write this blog? I am on a search. I want to determine the best way to develope the thinking skills of my students in regard to ethics. This is going to be the story of that search.