People may wonder: Why be ethical?
In the following ten points I shall argue that being ethical has its benefits.
A good Ethical system, a logical theory, will deduce reasons for living ethically/morally. Those are merely systemic values. There are practical, extrinsic, advantages as well. Let us list a few of them now.
WHAT ARE SOME ADVANTAGES TO BEHAVING MORALLY?
An ethical life is a more trouble-free life. If one lives ethically, life goes smoother.
Next, being ethical makes it more likely that one will gain the benefits that come from cooperation. There are many advantages to gaining the cooperation of others who are willing to work together with you on achiieving a common, positive goal.
Furthermore, behaving morally, being nice, is the easiest way for an individual to be. If you try it you will find that it will suit your temperament, and that pleasing people will make it more likely that they will please you. It greases wheels and levels paths. It tends to make life pleasant. It pays forward to make this world better for all of us to live in, including yourself.
There is ancientt wisdom found in many cultures: the “Golden Rule.” One form of The Golden Rule is: ‘Do not do unto others what you do not want others to do unto you.’ In other words, do no harm: live ethically. Rules are Systemic values. As I argue in The Structure of Ethics booklet, a link to whhich you can find in the Signature below, and also see the other References to learn about the value dimension that form a spectrum.
…To be continued in the next post……
5. Being ethical is being human. It is the default position of a human being: We have empirical evidence for this claim; namely the innocence of a baby – until that innocence is perverted by the culture in which a child is immersed. And acting against our inherent nature results in causing ourselves internal strife. Being unethical and/or immoral is self-defeating and counterproductive, for we then experience needless stress. We cease to have peace of mind. We sacrifice our serenity.
6. We can also demonstrate this theoretically as well. We can test this default principle by assuming its opposite and seeing where that would lead us. What if no one could trust anything anyone else said or did because everyone behaved immorally all the time? Wouldn’t that society soon fall apart? Wouldn’t it soon self-destruct? If that legendary Dobu society ever existed, where is it today? We thus conclude that it is universal and necessary to behave morally. Although all humans are born with the potential to be unethical, one can learn to modulate one’s evil impulses and strive towards the highest good at all times in accordance with the ‘moral law’ i.e. with the theorems and deductions of a sound Ethical Theory based upon empirical facts and organized into a rigourous framework; these findings may serve as guidelines or suggestions for making wise ethical decisions. They are in no way absolutes!
7. Being ethical,having morality, endorses and promotes values such as compassion, democracy, the common good, empathy, and attaining a better world in which to live and thrive.
Here are some further points to consider regarding this topic. Also, tell us your ideas about it.
8. There are other reasons to be moral. For example, self-respect and its counterpart: other-respect, respecting the basic dignity of others
9. Furthermore, if you genuinely want to be, you can be morally good. Do you care at all about the welfare of others? If you care about others, then it makes sense to be nice to others. If you are uncaring, or indifferent, then you do not know your own self- oterest. Since people of good conscience, devoted to being good, know what is in their true interest, so they strive to be ethical all the time. Yet it is a fact that normally people are inclined to be kind to one another – just as people feel a need to eat and to sleep.
10. Ultimately moral goodness is only “good” insofar as it is harmonious with that which is smart, wise, and efficient. No one wants to be stupid, foolish, or inefficient. So if you conduct yourself morally, you will focus on being wise, efficient and effective. [Socrates was wise but not efficient and effective.] You will learn the basic principles of Ethics, the science, and will aspire to practice those principles, put them into action. Demonstrating loving goodness toward others will make you feel more fulfilled as a person.
For all these reasons, and more, being ethical and contributing to the morality of your society makes sense. Good reasoning will help us figure things out. In the new contemporary approach to ethics, and in an effort to get more people in the world to be ethical - and to know WHY they are ethical - the next logical question to consider is: What does it mean to “be ethical”? Possibly the References below may help to answer that inquiry.
Comments? Questions? Your views? Can you add more benefits to the list above?
In the face of dire circumstances, when one looks for reasons to persevere - the ability to ease the suffering & promote / support the welfare of others, can provide one with motivation and fortitude. It can be a source of self-value. One can look upon oneself and say, ‘I am beneficial to the world. Not just to myself, but to those around me. My life is valuable to others’. This too, empowers the self to be stronger - to grow and improve. A source for personal development. Where to give to the self, is also an act to the interests of those one loves.
[Similar to #6] Depending on one’s beliefs: Karma.
If hypothetically you believe the world you create, is the one you will need to inhabit, then creating a healthier world ensures a healthier world for you to inhabit. To help others in this regard, would be to help your future self. It’s a long term investment, with many short term benefits too. (In this case short term being, one’s current lifetime)
Thank you, Ben, for a good enhancement to that list of benefits and advantages.
Earlier, an attempt was made, in the first three posts above, to answer the question: Why be ethical? Now I’d like to address the next logical question: What does it mean “to be ethical”? How analyze and clarify the concept “being ethical”?
And, furthermore, since ethics not practiced, not put into action, is mere idle intellectual play, how can a project, even an active campaign, be set up and go to work do something to educate people about the desirability and importance of ‘spreading the word,’ and actually do something to implement the relevant concepts?
Therefore in the next post, I’ll take up the question: According to the latest modern perspective - What does “being ethical” mean?
Please give us some feedback as to the ideas it presents. Credit goes to Professor of Phillosophy, Robert S. Hartman for teaching the first point, paart A, to his students.
-------- continued in next post – Be sure to watch for it !
What does “being ethical” mean?
Here in Part Two we will briefly summarize. To be ethical means understanding, and being devoted to practicing daily, the following ABCs of the modern approach to Ethics:
A) individuals having a personality are highly valuable … even more: uncountably-valuable. Until we have evidence otherwise, we are to regard them as unique and precious.
B) Therefore to harm them would be a sad mistake. Hence, we arrive at an early moral guide. It reads: “Do- others no harm nor injury” – and why not apply this to yourself also. This moral standard, Do no harm, may serve as a good principle to live by. Another is: be a role model by setting a good example.
[[When the term “Moral” is used here it refers to humans rather than, or more than, to other living organisms.]
Living ethically creates moral value. In fact, ethics is about creating value in human interactions. The emphasis on character, both Good and Bad, shows the influence of Socrates, in her this lectures, as he explained what ethics means to him. He concluded that goodness of character is prerequisite to attaining well-being and happiness, i.e., the good life.
C) Aware members of society, who know their Ethics, and who know clearly why they are ethical, will want to impart some good news to their friends and neighbors: would want to share with them how well these positive, useful guides can make things better.
They may pass along to their friends – for their attention and possible adoption – any further moral principles that they found to have worked well in their own life.
iIn the course of conversation with those in their circle, they would then be informing their contacts the news “It works for me!”
In this way influencers will help make a good list of moral standards a part of society’s ethos. [The ethos of society is is the conventional understanding of the word “morality.”]
What is the modern interpretation of “morality”?
People devoted to goodness, and who know the benefits, want to be ethical and moral, and to clearly understand what moraality means in practice. Therefore, in what follows, we present the modern perspective explaining the term “morality.” There are two components to it. The first is this:
One has morality if one lives up to a set of positive moral standards (also known as moral principles.) This set, which forms part of one’s self-image, ideally would be added to, throughout life, as one grows in moral awareness and insight.
The second component is what was offered, in the section labeled “C” above, when we explained what would be taught in the high- school course. Then influence your contacts (and the other members of your in-group) to do for themselves what you did in compiling such a list. Some suggestions as to what guides or standards might be in this list of ethical/moral principles are offered to you in the section, in the middle of Chapter Three, of The Structure of Ethics booklet, which is the first Refence selection listed below. Click on the link. Some dozen-or-so suggested moral standards that you may care to adopt are to be found there.
All of the above diccssion of what “being moral” means are incorporated in a paper by Dr. Marvin Katz entitled “The Ethics Project.” It then, in addition, gives ideas on how to be an influencer - in the final part of the concise 9-page paper. A link to it will soon be made available, perhaps in a future post here; or at the Government & Economics forum site.
Being ethical is intimately tied into being conscious and intelligent. Ethics derives from ontology, from what we are and why/how we are what we are. What we call ethics is a sub-set of the broadest scope of intelligence and consciousness.
Intelligence involves identifying truths. Ethics is one layer of truth. To fail to see or know ethics is a failure of intelligence.
Seeing or knowing ethics but choosing not to follow it is a failure of intent, a contradiction between what we know to be true and what we find ourselves incentivized into doing or not doing based on material conditions in our lives. Truth is immaterial but we embody a material body and experience, and so these contradictions tend to pop up a lot. To understand ethics is also to understand the responsibility necessarily implied by those ethics. Ethics means “good and bad”, and being ethical means optimizing for goods over bads. I say optimizing because this is not a perfect 1:1 process but rather involves things like the law of diminishing returns and other interesting logical idiosyncracies. It is often not possible to act in perfect accordance with good and in perfect non-accordance with bad, but we try our very best to optimize for goods against bads.
To deliberately act unethically outside of the scope of what is a common and understandable moral imperfection of intentionality or will that we all suffer from, namely to stray into the category of evil, represents a flaw of intelligence similar to the flaw of intelligence of those who fail even to see and know what ethics even is. To fail to even understand ethics is a failure of intelligence, just as it is a failure of intelligence to understand ethics but not understand the necessarily implied responsibilities that are part of those ethics.
For example, if something is bad and I understand that it is bad, then I also already understand that I ought not do it, because it is bad. “Bad” already contains as part of its necessary meaning-content the fact that one ought not do it. This component of the meaning cannot be separated out from the general meaning of bad itself. Likewise with good, one ought to do good things. The ought-to or responsibility component is integrally tied into and as the meaning of these things themselves.
Thus to fail to understand this component of responsibility or ought-to represents an intellectual failure. Many so-called intellectuals, academics etc. seem to fall into this category. People like Hume, who claim there is no necessary connection between “is and ought”. This represents an intellectual failure of understanding, one that has psychologically-related motivations as its underpinnings. We can see that particularly strong psychological motivations or incentives are often enough to warp intelligence to produce failed ideas and errors. Language is amorphous, deep, heterogeneous and self-overlapping (redundant) enough to allow for many misuses of language that can be mis-understood based on a prevailing psychological need or pathological intellectual failure.
Certain points made earlier bear repeating. Everyone who is intelligent wants to do things efficiently. However, being too efficient may interfere with being effective. And being effective, as the ethical person understands it, is the ethical way to go …as expained in an earlier thread discussing efficiency versus effectiveness.
"
If efficiency is maximized some damage may be done to human beings resulting in needless human suffering. In striving to reach the intended goal with the least cost in time, material and energy, it may involve ‘trampling on people.’ This would be unethical. Details are available in Katz, A Unified Theory of Ethics. Here is a link to it: http://www.wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/A%20UNIFIED%20THEORY%20OF%20ETHICS.pdf
So we don’t want maximal efficiency; we want optimal efficiency along with maximum effectiveness.
As recommended in the new paradigm, the new perspective of the Unified Theory of Ethics, Effectiveness is understood as more than merely getting to a goal; it is getting there with the least harm and with the most value added : thus with the most impact. .Thus, in a sense, while Efficiency is doing the most with the least, “Effectiveness” is, in a sense, doing the least with the most. T Allow me to explain:
Effectiveness entails that while focusing on the end-in-view we are careful that the means employed to get there are ethical. If we want a moral outcome our means must qualify as moral. Hence we are to remain conscious that ends and means are compatible, and be rather particular about the means.
Effectiveness, from the new perspective, is achieving a goal that is value-generative: IT CREATES VALUE. While efficiency is doing something fast and simple, effectiveness is actually getting something done that generates VALIE. Examples of this may be found in the document The Structure of Ethics, especially in the first two chapters. That booklet explains how a discipline – namely Ethics – may be derived from a clear grasp of an earlier discipline known as Robert S. Hartman’s Formal Axiology – an analysis which enables clarity in the field of values.
So if you can manage to help someone rise on the ladder of opportunity, can boost someone up by giving them a sincere compliment, making them smile, giving them a raise, teaching them a new skill, mentoring them, appreciating them, giving them respect and attention, recognizing their worth, doing them a service, etc., you are then creating value.
Or you csan be innovative: you can invent something useful that genuinely fulfills a need. Or, in some other way, you can be creative yet thoroughly ethical at the same time. All of the above are examples of how to arrange it so that in any human encounter or interaction you may have everyone leaves the scene feeling as if they are ‘a winner,’ as though they have gained something.
This is what the life-coaches at the Axiogenics site on the web refer to us as: “THE CENTRAL QUESTION, the keys to success in life, love, and leadership. Ask yourself this question:
What choice can I make and what action I can take, in this moment, to create the greatest net value?”
It’s not about efficiency, this isn’t utilitarianism. That’s dumb. This is about OPTIMIZING for goods over bads. Period end of the story. This already takes into account everything, every aspect of the goods and the bads. As much as is actually absolutely possible in any and every possible iteration interaction context need value situation real or imagined projected as possibly likely to any given degree. Humans have no idea that this is what they’re already doing anyway to the extent that they are actually ethical.
Being able to read the future is absolutely critical for being ethical, and happens to also be an integral part of what it means to be conscious-alive (intelligent).
(Primarily a response to HumAnIze’s posts - apologies thinkdr for the derailment)
[tab]If there is a goal / objective, then actions can be compared relative to their capacity to ideally realize this outcome.
If the ‘is’ in is/ought, references a goal, then the oughts logically unfold.
We are born with preferences - born with instinctual goals.
But often our instincts conflict upon one another.
They cannot each be followed indiscriminately without undermining each other.
Therefore people, due to many influences, set goals themselves in a hierarchy.
A problem emerges when others disagree with that hierarchy.
The case is to be made why one hierarchical set of goals, is wiser, than another set.
There’s a case which I agree with and would gladly attempt to make.
There is an underlying pattern/theme/direction to the evolution of our instincts.
Given natural selection - our instincts are a set of drives that enabled us to survive in this environment.
If we align ourselves with survival using reason and rationality,
many of our drives / instincts will be satisfied.
However, we must ensure quality of life - not simply prolonged existence.
That we make space for frivolous things which give us pleasure,
assuming that they don’t undermine the primary objective -
sustainability of the community.
In this scenario, health can be defined as one’s alignment with survival / sustainability.
That one is well adapted to survival, and has the capacity to resist against the threats to this end.
Happiness itself, is a tool which enables us to fight against risks to our survival -
as look to those who commit suicide… they were not happy. ( an extreme example )
Let’s say we only have one life - after this life, eternal oblivion.
Let’s say someone’s ‘sick’, relative to the above definition of health.
If we have yet to develop the capacity to ‘heal’ them,
why ought they listen to our values?
Why shouldn’t they run with their own ‘unhealthy’ values?
as that’s the hand the cosmos has dealt them.
It is rational for them to run with their set of values,
despite it contradicting the wider population.
This is a dilemma.
Why ought they seek to live a life of misfortune?
As to adjust to our values, would only cause their suffering.
We can make a case to each other, but can we make the case to them?
‘You’re a casualty of our ignorance. Sorry.’
That ain’t compelling.
For them to act to the benefit of the majority,
would be an expression of ‘health’,
which we’ve already established they lack.
(Assuming again one life - no afterlife…)
Let’s say someone believes sentience is bad.
That to experience existence is a mistake.
That every single life ought not be.
That to support life is an error.
That to eliminate life is wisdom.
That one is being ‘charitable’,
if they took it upon themselves to extinguish all life.
An alien species that travels the cosmos,
eliminating sentience before it takes root.
A mercy - as to them, any contribution to this end is positive.
If all your reasons are rooted in life,
which they believe inherently wrong,
on what basis do your beliefs outweigh theirs?
We can be dealt all sorts of hands.
Hands dealt to us can be in conflict to another’s.
Where if each party acts to their interests,
there is disagreement - despite intelligence.
To my mind, a primary way to surpass this -
is to dismantle one’s being and reconstruct it.
One will only do this if influenced so,
but if influenced so,
one can almost build oneself anew.
To reconstruct the aspects of one’s being,
such that the result of one’s function / outcome,
mirrors the vision of one’s ideal.
That one wisely fuels one’s being,
to only produce that which one values.
That one can recognize parts of the being,
that undermines or risks the greater vision,
and can respond to those aspects accordingly.
Is it possible for two separate beings,
to hold the wisest goal for themselves,
and for their goals to be in discord?
If so, how is good/bad solely an issue of intelligence,
if good/bad are relative to goals, and goals are subject dependent?
Sounds like a type of utilitarianism. But somewhere along the way, you decided utilitarianism is dumb. So instead of challenging that belief, you’ll instead continue to redicule utilitarianism. As any good philosopher would, right? [/tab]
We are born with the highest goal. The highest goal, i.e. the one at the top of the hierarchy of goals, determines how we’re going to organize our other goals, the subservient and malleable sub-goals ( the position of the highest goal in the hierarchy isn’t subject to change. ) We need intelligence to do so because it isn’t an obvious thing.
If you have no goal guiding your decision making process, then every decision is as good as every other. In that case, it makes no difference whether you choose A or B. It’s the same. You can choose any. You don’t need intelligence because the purpose of intelligence is to discern between good and bad decisions, and here, every decision is as good as every other.
One can argue that the highest goal is not the same for everyone. I don’t believe that, but even in that case, you still need intelligence to discern between what is good and what is bad, and you’re still possibly wrong and thus in need of help from other people.
Decisions aren’t made based solely on your highest goal. They are also made based on your perception of reality.
Earlier I wrote on the topic "What does ‘being ethical’ mean?
I’d like to discuss some aspects of ethics, as the Unified Theory explains it, with you today .
Recall that ethics - in its modern interpretation - is is all about creating value in human affairs.
I’d like to emphasize here the concept of having ‘an attitude of gratitude.’ And to stress the importance of holding in mind a creative intent, a constant devotion to creativity as a way of enhancing value inhuman interaction.
That is why kindness is a fundamental concept in ethics: it also is also one of the ways of creating value. Kindness entails rendering a service that is useful to another human being . So also are vision, and gratitude, creativity and innovation. These are all ways of increasing value. The moral vision to keep in mind is: making things better …or progress.
Those who know their Ethics are optimists and realists. They hope for the best, expect the worst and work to make the best come to pass. [That is how in Ethics the concept ‘realist’ is defined.
As I have mentioned before, onviolence as a way of life is the moral procedure.
So too is giving a sincere compliment, for that is a way of boosting people up and thus increasing human value.
Ethics further recommends: creative design has a way to make positive social change. It deprives no one, and yet it increases value. A continuous attitude of creative intent is the ethical procedure. This is n contrast to a sense of competitiveness where the belief is: “if I gain you must lose, and if I am to win something, then you must be deprived.”
Enough was said here to provoke a comment or a question from you on any of these points , so let us know what you think.
Art is really beautiful to me.
The concept of art, is really beautiful to me.
In a world of deprivation and mistreatment,
the creation of beauty at no one’s expense,
feels so pure, honest and human…
an expression of what it means to exist as us.
I can create my silly little contributions,
and try to help the world be a more valuable place.
As we all can.
That so many do this,
is a well of inspiration and solace,
and another demonstration of our worth.
For what it’s worth, thinkdr,
thank you for your guidance.
I rarely have the energy to dialogue with you,
nor find much within to add to your contributions,
but I am grateful that you take the time to share.
Ben wrote: “For what it’s worth, thinkdr,
thank you for your guidance.”
Your thanks, Ben, have infinite worth ,to me at least. Furthermore, due to your response, I learned that someone had read my post. I appreciate your appreciation. Also I congratulate you on your discernment. It is to be noted that you have a wisdom beyond what you learned from the Dalai Lama. So I am at your service whenever you want more guidance; [size=75] I’ll pass along to you the little bit that I have learned during 92.5 years of life.[/size]
When I spoke of ‘creative intent’ as a component of ethical awareness, I referred also to a spirit of creativity - that would improve upon existing products, and systems - that serve to make our lives more comfortable, thus enhancing our sense of well-being. [ many engineers have it but one does not have to be an engineer to express this creativity.]
(For instance, dream up a creative alternatives to taxing people; nobody likes taxes.) Etc.
Yes, I agree that a benefit of being ethical is a clear conscience. Now I would annex that benefit to the list of ten others mentioned in the original post above.
I would suggest, for an activist who reads this, that he or she ought to initiate an Ethics Project with the objective of eventually having every college and university offer, in its Liberal Arts division, an Ethics course.
Every major Business School now has such a course, so why not also the College of Liberal Arts? Its goal would be to turn out more ethical people who really know why they are ethical; and would pass along to the friends, neighbors, and contacts their insight on how great it is to be ethical, and thus incur those - eleven, so far - benefits and advantages. The students in such a course would learn to “pay it forward,” to do good deeds - at first, as an assignment on which too report - but later as a lifetime habit formed. A good feeling, along with many other benefits, such as a clear enlightened conscience, is the reward.
Watuji Tetsuro was a Japanese wise teacher, and a reputable Professor of Philosophy, who was interested in ethics, and wrote about ethics and morality 100 years ago.
The Ethics Project being proposed here would agree with his findings which may be summed up this way:
Our sense of how to behave ethically is a natural growth of our nature
as human beings. We need a certain amount of trust in others so that
we will not suffer from being too paranoid. The Ethics Project, through
wide-spread education, aims to get more ethical people, who know
why they are, and then to influence others As to the wisdom and
desirability I’m this way of life.
AN ETHICS PROJECT IS PROPOSED
This Ethics Project would encourage people to say to themselves in keeping with what Dr. Tetsuro taught: “I am aware aware of the qualities we all share, our commonalities, and how we collaborate. I recognize the inter- connections we all have as human beings. I am acutely aware of how we have common concerns, and
that if we don’t trust one another we will live in chaos.”
The teacher of an Ethics Course would explain that being ethical involves acting in a way that is consistent with moral principles and values, such as honesty, fairness, respect for others, civility, readiness to be of service, taking on responsibility, and
willingness to be held accountable for our performance. Ethics means creating value in our interactions with others. It means making choices and decisions that reflect these values; and living by one’s moral standards and principles, and avoiding actions that are armful or violate ethical norms.
Goodness covers almost everything.
Being good, receiving good, giving good, etc.
How good something is depends on how beneficial it is.
I’m not sure what else to say.
[/tab]