Primer on Ethics for Politicians
Defining the Best Approach for Solving Ethical Problems
In the recent spate of issues involving tax evasion problems for President Obama’s cabinet appointments and the impeachment of the Governor of Illinois, Rod Blogjevich, issues become confusing for the public. Why, many ask, does anyone accept the notion of "spin" - the current lexicon for making light of the truth to form a favorable impression - while also accepting different information during sworn testimony? Is there more than one standard for truth?
The Problem of Relativism
In fact, more than one standard for fact gathering seems to be the dilemma of a society where relativism is rampant. Under the theory of relativism, truth is not knowable. Truth is merely the servant of the individual. If you see an action one way and I see it another, it is merely a matter of an opinion. There is no commonly agreed standard from which to measure.
One of the few places where this is not the attitude of the public is in the courtroom. As a society, people continue to agree that in the matter of a trial, one will use the law as a standard by which to determine the truth or falsity of something. However, in life in general, people do not seem to be conducting themselves that way.
This schizophrenic application of principles of relativism to the matter of truth telling - one way in life and another in a courtroom - leaves many perplexed who are fooled by the dilemma. Those not perplexed, place confidence in the notion that the truth can be known when conveyed by someone decidely trustworthy and prudent when relaying a matter as factual. As subtle as an attitude that this seems to be, there are those who actually believe that the truth is unknowable. In other words, to them it is unclear who their own mother might be despite the matching DNA. In that case, truth can vary by definition. This creates the need to define what we mean by what we say.
Tools for Ethical Decision Making
In the instance of ethical decision making, matters become very vague when dealing with those who "spin" what they mean. For this reason, we need to define how to go about ethical decision making in a sea of differing opinions about what is meant by what is said.
Generally there are about five different standards to chose from (think of these as some definable laws of ethics) by which to measure one’s own or another’s conduct. Outlined more comprehensively elsewhere (Judy Joyce "Ethics: A Refresher Course for Politicians", Ste.101 - Feb.19, 2009) , there are steps someone needing to make an ethical decision can take no matter which standard is chosen.
The steps are applied by the internal compass of the person who is trying to act ethically and consistently. Yet the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics in Santa Clara, California advises it’s members that once a standard is chosen, there are still problems to be solved. The First Problem: all do not agree on the same approach to human and civil rights; what constitutes the common good or what is good and what is harmful. The Second Problem: different approaches provide a framework for a particular situation but may use standards at variance with each other. More often, however, the different approaches lead to similar answers.
Beyond Standards
No matter which standard one chooses to use as a framework for decision making, the overriding need is to recognize there is an ethical question at issue. Ask the question: Is there something wrong personally, interpersonally or socially? Could the situation damage individuals or the community? Does it go beyond legal concerns? What does it do to the dignity and hope of living a better life together? Get facts from different points of view. Determine who has a stake in the outcome and who will be effected. Evaluate alternative actions from various ethical perspectives (the five different standards that can be models of behavior). Which opinion is most fair to all stakeholders. Decide, reflect, then act.
Lastly, when telling someone respected what decision has been made or explaining what was done in a public forum, would the decision be a comfortable one for public consumption?
What do you think about this article?
More in Politics & Society
Latest Articles