On another forum, I am engaged in a conversation regarding ethics, which came about as a result of a conversation around the ethics of cheating in a monogamous relationship (or by violating the agreed-upon terms of a polyamorous relationship).
A surprising (to me, anyway) number of the people involved in that conversation hold that ethical constraints apply only to first-order consequences of one’s actions, but not to indirect or second-order consequences; for example, it is not ethical to cheat on a partner, but if you are the person a cheater has sex with, your actions are not unethical, because you are not violating any agreements with the cheated-upon person.
I’ve been thinking a great deal about the nature of ethics and responsibility as a result of that conversation, and I’ve put together a series of questions designed to examine a person’s ethical system, and look for contradictions in that system.
The first four questions concern the ethics of lies of commission and lies of omission. The next three questions concern being the active participant in a series of actions covering a very large range of common moral perception. The next six questions re-visit those situations from the perspective of a passive beneficiary of those actions and of an active beneficiary of those actions; that is, does one’s ethical responsibility vary if a person benefits from an action after the fact, or if the person receives the same benefit by creating the situation before the fact? The last two address something I’ve seen commonly: people often find that their assessment of the ethics of an action changes with their assessment of whether or not an injured party is a “good person” or a “bad person.”
I’m interested in seeing the results of many people’s answers to these questions. So, onward!
Wow, I got first post!
I’ve been the other woman before, and I used to think there was nothing wrong with my position. With time, my values have changed, and I see my past self as having been an accessory to a hurtful deception and a poisonous position in life. I never got caught, but it was still harmful, and that’s unethical.
That’s basically the position I’m coming from; participating in such a situation is harmful, even if it’s not me in the position of violating a relationship agreement.
Wow, I got first post!
I’ve been the other woman before, and I used to think there was nothing wrong with my position. With time, my values have changed, and I see my past self as having been an accessory to a hurtful deception and a poisonous position in life. I never got caught, but it was still harmful, and that’s unethical.
There were a few places where I felt a “Too dependant on other factors” should have been included. Although I understand the desire to get a strictly Yes/No dataset.
Is ectropy when the universe tends toward a more ordered state?
Yup!
Or put another way: Life is an ectropic process, since it locally increases order.
Well, that’s just a hell of a cool name.
Nice word.
Well, entropy’s going to win eventually. Not that ectropy isn’t a lot more exciting.
At least in theory. However, the nice thing is that entropy can be moved from place to place; parts of the universe can be increased in order if the increase is offset by a greater decrease in order elsewhere. (Okay, so that’s a bit oversimplified, but the idea is sound.)
That means we can continue to increase order for a very long time, because there is a great deal of usable energy in the universe, and a lot of places to dump entropy. That might, if we’re lucky, buy us enough time to figure out whether this universe is in fact one of many. If it is, who knows? Maybe we can continue to offset entropy, and forestall the heat death of the universe, by dumping entropy elsewhere! 🙂
What can I say? I’m an optimist.
optimist? I’ll say.
It’s a good point though, that the probable heat-death thing is so vastly far in the future that we might very well find a way around it.
In any case, it’s definitely better to be optimistic than to say “fuck it, we’re all going to die anyway and so is the universe”.
Agreed. In particular:
Issues of legality or illegality aside, since illegal is not necessarily the same thing as unethical, is a person who takes property from another without the knowledge or consent of the property owner behaving unethically?
Maybe? What if the “property” is an abused animal, and someone who will not abuse the animal steals it? What if the property is lawfully removed (e.g., a car abandoned in a parking lot that is eventually towed)?
and
Is person who obtains photographs of others having sexual intercourse with children, who has not directly been involved with the sexual intercourse, who has not in any way actively involved himself in the abuse of any child and who will not now or at any point in the future actively involve himself in the abuse of any child, behaving unethically?
Maybe? Did the person obtain them deliberately, or were they included in something like a zip file that was touted as containing other, legal material? Or perhaps they were on the hard drive of a second-hand computer, or if we’re talking about physical photographs, perhaps they were in a box that was purchased at auction from a storage company? Was the person who obtained them a law enforcement officer collecting evidence in an ongoing case?
Assume for the purposes of these questions a simplest possible case–for example, you took property because you wanted to have it and you knew that its owner would not willingly part with it; you have the photographs because you wanted to have them, and did not receive them accidentally, through no action of your own, by mistake, by trickery on another person’s part (“here, this .zip file contains the source code for the Linux implementation of ftpd!” when in fact it contains the photographs), or in the course of your profession in law enforcement.
Then they’re both unethical.
Ah, that does change things quite a bit. I, like the above commenter, thought of lots of “what ifs” that would bend the equation.
I, too, had to weed out some “what if’s”. What if the stranger was a car salesman, I’d have to change some of my responses. (Meant in humor.)
I know some wonderful car salesmen, but you get the idea. Some dealings with strangers are a contest to begin with. I took this survey from the point of view that the two parties were on common ground.
Ooh, yeah, that changes things regarding the kid thing. Perhaps you could amend the question to reflect intent, say change “obtains” to “seeks and obtains?” That would have definitely changed my answer.
aol
I took it in the spirit I thought it was meant.
There were a few places where I felt a “Too dependant on other factors” should have been included. Although I understand the desire to get a strictly Yes/No dataset.
In pretty much all of those situations, those actions are unethical.
Add-ons:
1. Usually. Take a situation where you steal from someone, something they did not value and never notice is missing, and give it to someone who really needs it (or use it yourself). I don’t think this is unethical, but stealing in general is.
2. This doesn’t mean I don’t do some of them. Sometimes I value practicality over ethics.
3. It’s hard to define “unethical”. Is it that they’re they bad bad people for doing this? Is someone hurt by their actions? I’m going by whether I’d be mad if someone did that to me, but there are many other ways to define it.
In pretty much all of those situations, those actions are unethical.
Add-ons:
1. Usually. Take a situation where you steal from someone, something they did not value and never notice is missing, and give it to someone who really needs it (or use it yourself). I don’t think this is unethical, but stealing in general is.
2. This doesn’t mean I don’t do some of them. Sometimes I value practicality over ethics.
3. It’s hard to define “unethical”. Is it that they’re they bad bad people for doing this? Is someone hurt by their actions? I’m going by whether I’d be mad if someone did that to me, but there are many other ways to define it.
Is ectropy when the universe tends toward a more ordered state?
Agreed. In particular:
Issues of legality or illegality aside, since illegal is not necessarily the same thing as unethical, is a person who takes property from another without the knowledge or consent of the property owner behaving unethically?
Maybe? What if the “property” is an abused animal, and someone who will not abuse the animal steals it? What if the property is lawfully removed (e.g., a car abandoned in a parking lot that is eventually towed)?
and
Is person who obtains photographs of others having sexual intercourse with children, who has not directly been involved with the sexual intercourse, who has not in any way actively involved himself in the abuse of any child and who will not now or at any point in the future actively involve himself in the abuse of any child, behaving unethically?
Maybe? Did the person obtain them deliberately, or were they included in something like a zip file that was touted as containing other, legal material? Or perhaps they were on the hard drive of a second-hand computer, or if we’re talking about physical photographs, perhaps they were in a box that was purchased at auction from a storage company? Was the person who obtained them a law enforcement officer collecting evidence in an ongoing case?
Yup!
Or put another way: Life is an ectropic process, since it locally increases order.
Assume for the purposes of these questions a simplest possible case–for example, you took property because you wanted to have it and you knew that its owner would not willingly part with it; you have the photographs because you wanted to have them, and did not receive them accidentally, through no action of your own, by mistake, by trickery on another person’s part (“here, this .zip file contains the source code for the Linux implementation of ftpd!” when in fact it contains the photographs), or in the course of your profession in law enforcement.
unfortunately a lot of these fall into gray areas for me. for exa. “If a person knowingly and intentionally obtains stolen goods, with full awareness that the goods are stolen, but does not actually steal them himself, is that unethical?”
were they mp3s stolen by illegal downloading, a laptop stolen from a 20something’s college dorm room, or someone eating a chocolate bar which my roomate took from my shelf in the kitchen? makes a difference to whether i’d answer yes or no…
Mp3s are hardly “goods”.
And even through stealing a candy bar is unethical (if answers are limited to Yes/No), it’s an ethics violation that many people would do, and many would forgive.
Where the philosophers earn the big bucks is: if you steal a candy bar, but replace it before the owner finds out, is that unethical?
sure mp3s are goods. They’re a product, the product of content. If they’re protected by DRM, and they’re taken without being paid for, that’s stealing.
I’ll cut that second gordian knot you put up there too; if you steal a candy bar and replace it before the owner finds out, yes, it’s unethical. The correction doesn’t overturn the original wrong.
No, mp3’s are information. A disk of mp3’s would be a “good”. And copyright is not a “good”, as it is not tangible. Goods are not exactly the same as property, because property can be non-tangible.
The oft-argued case of “stealing music” is not about stealing tangible goods – it is about violating someone’s intellectual property rights.
I think that I’m going to suggest that in the 21st century, the definition of “goods” has perhaps changed. Yes, an MP3 file is made up of bits and bytes, but really, it’s the SONG that the artist and label cares about.
I suppose a case could be made for that, but practically and legally, it’s still not considered that way. A person who downloads MP3s from BitTorrent can not be arrested for theft; rather, the person legally could only be charged with copyright violation, which is a civil rather than a criminal matter.
Generally speaking, it seems that “theft” really applies only to things which, when taken, deprive their original owner of that thing. I can’t think of any exception, save perhaps for “identity theft,” which becomes a legal issue (as near as I understand it) only when the identity thief uses the assumed identity to deprive others of goods or services with the assumed identity. I’m not 100% sure, though, how the law treats “theft” in the case of theft of, say, satellite TV service, so I could be mistaken.
In any event, I tend to think of ‘theft’ as applying only to crimes whose opportunity cost is not zero. If I copy an MP3, the opportunity cost is zero; I have not actually deprived someone else of that copy.
Copyright violation is unethical, don’t get me wrong (I tend to think that people who believe it’s OK have never actually created something original that has real monetary value), but it’s a different animal than theft.
It is unethical, but replacing it is ethical, so you’ve reached an ethical balance, even though the original act is unethical in itself.
Well, hmm. That is an interesting philosophical question, isn’t it?
The fact remains that when you take it, you do deprive its owner of the use of it during that time period, and there’s no way to be certain that the owner won’t want the use of it. (What if the owner gets up in the middle of the night looking for a candy bar? Hey, it happens to me!)
So one could make an argument that returning it surriptitiously doesn’t erase the fact that the owner was deprived of it for that time, even if you have no reason to believe that the owner wanted it during that time…
Illegally downloaded mp3s aren’t stolen property, legally or logically. Obtaining them involves a copyright violation, which may or may not be ethical according to the circumstances and your own ethical code, but you can’t be prosecuted for theft for downloading them and you’re not depriving the owner of their use.
unfortunately a lot of these fall into gray areas for me. for exa. “If a person knowingly and intentionally obtains stolen goods, with full awareness that the goods are stolen, but does not actually steal them himself, is that unethical?”
were they mp3s stolen by illegal downloading, a laptop stolen from a 20something’s college dorm room, or someone eating a chocolate bar which my roomate took from my shelf in the kitchen? makes a difference to whether i’d answer yes or no…
most of the time when it comes to an ethics situation i don’t concern myself as much with whether it is considered ethical, only with the impact it will have on other people and myself if it happens. almost all of these fall into a moral gray area with me even though they seem very yes or no at first glance.
So what impact would you say it would have if you knowingly slept with someone who was cheating on a partner?
most of the time when it comes to an ethics situation i don’t concern myself as much with whether it is considered ethical, only with the impact it will have on other people and myself if it happens. almost all of these fall into a moral gray area with me even though they seem very yes or no at first glance.
Then they’re both unethical.
Ah, that does change things quite a bit. I, like the above commenter, thought of lots of “what ifs” that would bend the equation.
Mp3s are hardly “goods”.
And even through stealing a candy bar is unethical (if answers are limited to Yes/No), it’s an ethics violation that many people would do, and many would forgive.
Where the philosophers earn the big bucks is: if you steal a candy bar, but replace it before the owner finds out, is that unethical?
And just because I say an action is unethical, doesn’t mean I won’t do it. But I do have the decency to feel bad about it. :/
YES. I said “yes” to all of the poll questions, but I know still have bootleg stuff.
I’m not a hypocrite as long as I admit that I don’t always act ethically, right? ^_^
And just because I say an action is unethical, doesn’t mean I won’t do it. But I do have the decency to feel bad about it. :/
Whatever happened to the “not necessarily” answer?
The world isn’t black and white, ya know?
Indeed, one can certainly find situations which will ethically excuse almost any act–stealing in order to provide one’s family with food, for example. But what I’m looking for is a baseline–assuming the lowest possible case (eg, you steal something simply because you want to have it, you buy a flatscreen plasma TV from a fence even though you know it’s stolen because you want a flatscreen plasma TV and you don’t want to pay full price).
I’ve posted some musings previously on a foundation of ethical systems, but that’s not really what I was interested in here.
Whatever happened to the “not necessarily” answer?
The world isn’t black and white, ya know?
I too could see a lot of possible gray areas, but I assumed the simplest, most straightforward situations in my answers. There are always exceptions to every rule–if you spend too long haggling over the rare exceptions you’ll never get a sense of what people really believe.
In terms of your original example, helping someone cheat on their spouse…
To me it’s unethical because I believe it’s unethical to behave in a way that you know will hurt other people. If I have sex with a monogamously married man, I will surely cause harm to his marriage and hurt his wife. I don’t think that’s okay.
I too could see a lot of possible gray areas, but I assumed the simplest, most straightforward situations in my answers. There are always exceptions to every rule–if you spend too long haggling over the rare exceptions you’ll never get a sense of what people really believe.
In terms of your original example, helping someone cheat on their spouse…
To me it’s unethical because I believe it’s unethical to behave in a way that you know will hurt other people. If I have sex with a monogamously married man, I will surely cause harm to his marriage and hurt his wife. I don’t think that’s okay.
I have to stop answering surveys like this. Gogo result skewing.
People like me normally wouldn’t even be picked up by random sampling.
I have to stop answering surveys like this. Gogo result skewing.
People like me normally wouldn’t even be picked up by random sampling.
What is ‘unethical?’
Is ‘unethical’ bad?
For illustration: When I sleep in my car, I often wear medical scrubs. They keep me safer because they don’t LOOK like pajamas, but they sleep like ’em pretty comfortably. When I get out of my car to to go the bathroom, I don’t look like a homeless person.
I’m letting people make assumptions about who I am and what I do for a living. I know it’s not ethical, as I define ethics, but the illusion, which is dishonest in the service of pragmatism, protects my safety and is unlikely to cause harm. (Well, as long as I wash my hands thoroughly when I’m being scrutinized in public bathrooms.)
Re: What is ‘unethical?’
I’m letting people make assumptions about who I am and what I do for a living. I know it’s not ethical, as I define ethics, but the illusion, which is dishonest in the service of pragmatism, protects my safety and is unlikely to cause harm.
Okay, so now I’m curious. Why is doing that unethical?
From where I’m standing, it isn’t a lie, either of commission or of omission–I know many people who like to wear scrubs for the sake of comfort, enough so that I would not find it reasonable to draw any conclusions about a person’s occupation or socioeconomic state based on the fact that person is wearing them. Is that unusual?
What is ‘unethical?’
Is ‘unethical’ bad?
For illustration: When I sleep in my car, I often wear medical scrubs. They keep me safer because they don’t LOOK like pajamas, but they sleep like ’em pretty comfortably. When I get out of my car to to go the bathroom, I don’t look like a homeless person.
I’m letting people make assumptions about who I am and what I do for a living. I know it’s not ethical, as I define ethics, but the illusion, which is dishonest in the service of pragmatism, protects my safety and is unlikely to cause harm. (Well, as long as I wash my hands thoroughly when I’m being scrutinized in public bathrooms.)
If a person knowingly and intentionally obtains stolen goods, with full awareness that the goods are stolen, but does not actually steal them himself, is that unethical?
i think it’s interesting to then compare these results with: “would you do it anyway?” which would then lead to “under what circumstances?”
i mean, stealing is wrong & all, but sometimes it’s for the greater good.
“Incredible as he is inept
Whenever the history books are kept
They’ll call him the phony king of England
A pox on the phony king of England!”
‘Course, that opens up a whole philosophical floodgate of questions about whether or not an unethical act can ever be “for the greater good”..
If a person knowingly and intentionally obtains stolen goods, with full awareness that the goods are stolen, but does not actually steal them himself, is that unethical?
i think it’s interesting to then compare these results with: “would you do it anyway?” which would then lead to “under what circumstances?”
i mean, stealing is wrong & all, but sometimes it’s for the greater good.
“Incredible as he is inept
Whenever the history books are kept
They’ll call him the phony king of England
A pox on the phony king of England!”
I didn’t do the quiz because for one thing there was way too much “maybe, it depends, I don’t know”. And for a lot of them, my answer was, “Do I think it’s unethical? Yes. Have I done it, and will I probably do it again in the future? Yes.”
And, well, um, I have ADD, ya know? My attention span just isn’t that long today, LOL.
I wanted to respond to the central question, though – “for example, it is not ethical to cheat on a partner, but if you are the person a cheater has sex with, your actions are not unethical, because you are not violating any agreements with the cheated-upon person.”
For me, ethics aren’t just based on agreements. It’s the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law, you know? I don’t want to hurt someone regardless of whether I have agreements with them or not. I don’t step on someone’s foot even though I don’t have an agreement not to step on their foot.
Moreover, being with someone who is cheating isn’t good *for me*. If they can’t keep their agreements to the other person, how on earth can I ever expect that they will keep any to me? I think that some people think poly is just cheating with permission, but to me they are diametric opposites. Poly is about open and honest communication, and you can’t have that in a cheating situation…which is why I’ll never get into one. Same thing for “don’t ask, don’t tell”.
Ethical or not, it’s just plain not a healthy relationship model.
Out of curiosity, which forum is this, if you don’t mind sharing?
I didn’t do the quiz because for one thing there was way too much “maybe, it depends, I don’t know”. And for a lot of them, my answer was, “Do I think it’s unethical? Yes. Have I done it, and will I probably do it again in the future? Yes.”
And, well, um, I have ADD, ya know? My attention span just isn’t that long today, LOL.
I wanted to respond to the central question, though – “for example, it is not ethical to cheat on a partner, but if you are the person a cheater has sex with, your actions are not unethical, because you are not violating any agreements with the cheated-upon person.”
For me, ethics aren’t just based on agreements. It’s the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law, you know? I don’t want to hurt someone regardless of whether I have agreements with them or not. I don’t step on someone’s foot even though I don’t have an agreement not to step on their foot.
Moreover, being with someone who is cheating isn’t good *for me*. If they can’t keep their agreements to the other person, how on earth can I ever expect that they will keep any to me? I think that some people think poly is just cheating with permission, but to me they are diametric opposites. Poly is about open and honest communication, and you can’t have that in a cheating situation…which is why I’ll never get into one. Same thing for “don’t ask, don’t tell”.
Ethical or not, it’s just plain not a healthy relationship model.
Out of curiosity, which forum is this, if you don’t mind sharing?
A lot of thigns here would fall, in my opinion, under the category of distasteful or stupid but not actually unethical.
Some of them are not even that.
I can tell you that I have withheld knowledge from a lover to get something I wanted, which I wouldn’t have gotten if they knew. Specifically, I’ve had surprise parties for lovers, which gives me the joy of a pleasant surprise. I don’t feel guilty about that.
I’ve also kept personal stuff private with friends who would be uncomfortable hearing it, when it’s none of their business. That happens less and less, though, because it often causes everyone more trouble than it’s worth.
A lot of thigns here would fall, in my opinion, under the category of distasteful or stupid but not actually unethical.
Some of them are not even that.
I can tell you that I have withheld knowledge from a lover to get something I wanted, which I wouldn’t have gotten if they knew. Specifically, I’ve had surprise parties for lovers, which gives me the joy of a pleasant surprise. I don’t feel guilty about that.
I’ve also kept personal stuff private with friends who would be uncomfortable hearing it, when it’s none of their business. That happens less and less, though, because it often causes everyone more trouble than it’s worth.
Well, that’s just a hell of a cool name.
I, too, had to weed out some “what if’s”. What if the stranger was a car salesman, I’d have to change some of my responses. (Meant in humor.)
I know some wonderful car salesmen, but you get the idea. Some dealings with strangers are a contest to begin with. I took this survey from the point of view that the two parties were on common ground.
If a person is in a monogamous relationship, and chooses to cheat by the definition above, and you actively facilitate that cheating by knowingly and deliberately having sex with that person in situations which you know in advance violate that person’s relationship terms, is that unethical?
My initial thought is that it would depend, for me, on my relationship with the person. Is this someone I hooked up with once (or a few times) after meeting at a club, with whom I have no further relationship? Or is it a friend?
If I was having sex with someone with there was more than sex involved (friendship, emotional/mental connection, caring), and I found out that they were cheating on someone else by doing so, I’d stop, due to loss of respect for the person’s dishonesty. But I don’t feel I need to respect a person to have sex with them if it’s purely about sex on both sides, no caring involved. I wouldn’t agree with what they’re doing, and I wouldn’t engage in it myself, but I’m not inclined to consider it unethical on my end. However, I am inclined to think it unethical to persuade said person to cheat where he or she might not have otherwise.
If a person is in a monogamous relationship, and chooses to cheat by the definition above, and you actively facilitate that cheating by knowingly and deliberately having sex with that person in situations which you know in advance violate that person’s relationship terms, is that unethical?
My initial thought is that it would depend, for me, on my relationship with the person. Is this someone I hooked up with once (or a few times) after meeting at a club, with whom I have no further relationship? Or is it a friend?
If I was having sex with someone with there was more than sex involved (friendship, emotional/mental connection, caring), and I found out that they were cheating on someone else by doing so, I’d stop, due to loss of respect for the person’s dishonesty. But I don’t feel I need to respect a person to have sex with them if it’s purely about sex on both sides, no caring involved. I wouldn’t agree with what they’re doing, and I wouldn’t engage in it myself, but I’m not inclined to consider it unethical on my end. However, I am inclined to think it unethical to persuade said person to cheat where he or she might not have otherwise.
YES. I said “yes” to all of the poll questions, but I know still have bootleg stuff.
I’m not a hypocrite as long as I admit that I don’t always act ethically, right? ^_^
Facilitating cheating is such a slippery one, and I’m so glad you brought it up.
Earlier this year, I guess you could say I facilitated cheating when my husband and best friend kinda fell for each other in a big horny frenzy. When I asked both of them if they could tell me honestly that this wouldn’t happen again, they said they could make no such promise. So, I told them they had 6 months to get it out of their systems.
You couldn’t really call it a poly relationship, but you can argue that I facilitated cheating (my very catholic friend says that I am just as guilty of adultery as the 2 of them). OTOH, I thought I was being a realist. :-/ I still don’t know how I’d classify that whole episode.
Is it cheating if it’s with permission though?
I mean, cheating at it’s core is breaching a set of rules. If the arbiter of those rules is you and your husband, and you mutually agree to a modification of the rules, then I don’t see how it’s cheating. Now, if you believe that God is the arbiter of those rules as your catholic friend does, then I suppose that it would be cheating regardless.
Tremendously practical of you for sure 🙂
Facilitating cheating is such a slippery one, and I’m so glad you brought it up.
Earlier this year, I guess you could say I facilitated cheating when my husband and best friend kinda fell for each other in a big horny frenzy. When I asked both of them if they could tell me honestly that this wouldn’t happen again, they said they could make no such promise. So, I told them they had 6 months to get it out of their systems.
You couldn’t really call it a poly relationship, but you can argue that I facilitated cheating (my very catholic friend says that I am just as guilty of adultery as the 2 of them). OTOH, I thought I was being a realist. :-/ I still don’t know how I’d classify that whole episode.
sure mp3s are goods. They’re a product, the product of content. If they’re protected by DRM, and they’re taken without being paid for, that’s stealing.
I’ll cut that second gordian knot you put up there too; if you steal a candy bar and replace it before the owner finds out, yes, it’s unethical. The correction doesn’t overturn the original wrong.
an’ it harm none, do what you will, right?
I don’t see how any of the proposed questions DON’T result in harm in some way.
an’ it harm none, do what you will, right?
I don’t see how any of the proposed questions DON’T result in harm in some way.
Is a person who engages in sexual activity with a child, were “child” is defined as “pre-pubescent,” engaging in unethical behavior?
I really wanted a “probably” for this one. If it really and truly is the child’s idea, then I have no problem with it, but that’s too fuzzy to use as much of a guideline.
because you are not violating any agreements with the cheated-upon person.
And because it’s not my place to enforce my own ethics on someone else.
Especially if you are talking about cultures and beliefs were they are married at such an early age.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm
And because it’s not my place to enforce my own ethics on someone else.
How, exactly, would you be doing that by saying “no” to the cheater?
If you were to prevent the cheater from cheating at all, or if you were to go to the cheater’s partner and spill the beans, that would be enforcing your ethics on the cheater. But unless you want to make an argument that a person who wants to have sex with you somehow has a right or an expectation of doing so, then if you say “no” you are not enforcing your ethics on the cheater; the cheater can always go elsewhere. By saying “no,” you are not depriving the cheater of anything the cheater has reasonable claim to, nor preventing the cheater from cheating; last time I looked, people have the right to say “no” to sex for any reason they choose, or even for no reason at all!
Is a person who engages in sexual activity with a child, were “child” is defined as “pre-pubescent,” engaging in unethical behavior?
I really wanted a “probably” for this one. If it really and truly is the child’s idea, then I have no problem with it, but that’s too fuzzy to use as much of a guideline.
because you are not violating any agreements with the cheated-upon person.
And because it’s not my place to enforce my own ethics on someone else.
well, you’ve seen my journal, so you probably know how i feel about any of the questions pertaining to children. however, many of the others were unethical in gradients that i wouldn’t necessarily concern myself with.
well, you’ve seen my journal, so you probably know how i feel about any of the questions pertaining to children. however, many of the others were unethical in gradients that i wouldn’t necessarily concern myself with.
this makes me question my own ethics…
this makes me question my own ethics…
Nice word.
Ooh, yeah, that changes things regarding the kid thing. Perhaps you could amend the question to reflect intent, say change “obtains” to “seeks and obtains?” That would have definitely changed my answer.
Well, entropy’s going to win eventually. Not that ectropy isn’t a lot more exciting.
I am still astounded at the number of people who believe that being the “cheatee” poses no particular moral dilemma. Is it just that because I’m not interested in casual relationships I can’t just ignore the other people who would be impacted by my actions? To me, that goes with the “I do what I like, you have to own your own stuff” crowd who don’t actually care about anybody but themselves. For whom I have nothing but contempt.
I don’t get it. It is so much not my way that I cannot understand how it can be acceptable. If for no other reason, why would I associate with a known liar? As if the person could be trusted to not also lie to me. I expect little from strangers, so I trust little. But of someone I do trust as a close friend or lover, I demand honesty. And I use that word quite deliberately. Without it, I cannot have a successful relationship at all.
Well, I hear ya on the honesty.
At the same time though, sometimes the cheatee has to acknowledge fallibility in all people. After that, you have 2 choices – as people will sometimes lie, do you 1. avoid all people, or 2. forgive?
I don’t easily trust people, so there aren’t many in the category of “close friends and lovers.” These people are very important in my life. They are ones I will answer the phone for at all hours, for any reason, and offer every resource at my disposal. They are my chosen family. Forgiving an indiscretion is one thing, but a pattern of behavior is not an “oops.” If somebody makes a practice of failing to treat others with respect, particularly someone who is presumably important enough to be considered a monogamous life partner, why would I want to be associated with this? I find it supremely foolish to believe “but with me it’s different” and ignore what else is going on. I can only assume that I will be treated similarly. I don’t need that.
I am still astounded at the number of people who believe that being the “cheatee” poses no particular moral dilemma. Is it just that because I’m not interested in casual relationships I can’t just ignore the other people who would be impacted by my actions? To me, that goes with the “I do what I like, you have to own your own stuff” crowd who don’t actually care about anybody but themselves. For whom I have nothing but contempt.
I don’t get it. It is so much not my way that I cannot understand how it can be acceptable. If for no other reason, why would I associate with a known liar? As if the person could be trusted to not also lie to me. I expect little from strangers, so I trust little. But of someone I do trust as a close friend or lover, I demand honesty. And I use that word quite deliberately. Without it, I cannot have a successful relationship at all.
I find it interesting that lying to strangers to get what you want is more acceptable/matters not to ethnics – than some of the other things.
While I understand that I don’t ‘owe’ a stranger anything, in terms of an agreement – don’t we all deserve the same respect and rules? I think if things were turned, and I was the stranger – would I want to be deceived for someone else’s gain. Uhm well, no.
And I think feorlen brings up good points about ‘why would I be with a liar’ (oh, they’d never do that to ME) and also again, I think – what about the other side — what if I’m the one being lied to. I personally would not do it, not just because of not being able to trust the cheater – but because there is someone else involved also. Whether or not I know them – they _are_ there, life isn’t in little compartments, we’re all inter-connected. And as much as I’d like to think otherwise, someday I could be on the other side of any of the interactions.
I find it interesting that lying to strangers to get what you want is more acceptable/matters not to ethnics – than some of the other things.
While I understand that I don’t ‘owe’ a stranger anything, in terms of an agreement – don’t we all deserve the same respect and rules? I think if things were turned, and I was the stranger – would I want to be deceived for someone else’s gain. Uhm well, no.
And I think feorlen brings up good points about ‘why would I be with a liar’ (oh, they’d never do that to ME) and also again, I think – what about the other side — what if I’m the one being lied to. I personally would not do it, not just because of not being able to trust the cheater – but because there is someone else involved also. Whether or not I know them – they _are_ there, life isn’t in little compartments, we’re all inter-connected. And as much as I’d like to think otherwise, someday I could be on the other side of any of the interactions.
aol
I took it in the spirit I thought it was meant.
I answered yes to every single one. For me it’s not so much a question of “is that unethical?” as “will the result be worth it?” I would lie, whether explicitly or by omission, when there’s a threat to my (or someone else’s) well-being involved. I still don’t think it’s ethical, but safety issues would outweigh the ethical hit. I’d also eat cilantro if it were in a dish put in front of me by my host (assuming they were someone who isn’t a close enough friend to know that I loathe it), because I think politeness, in that case, trumps truthfulness. Or that kindness expresses a deeper truth about myself than causing someone else needless discomfort would.
I would expand “children” to be “people who aren’t in the position of making an informed decision from a place of relatively equal power” and answer the same way. That seemed important.
The enabling of cheaters has been on my mind lately, since one of my friends is doing that very thing and it squicks me out massively. Still love her and all, but it very much highlighted my desire to have the people close to me be on approximately the same ethical wavelength as me. Luckily, most of them are.
I answered yes to every single one. For me it’s not so much a question of “is that unethical?” as “will the result be worth it?” I would lie, whether explicitly or by omission, when there’s a threat to my (or someone else’s) well-being involved. I still don’t think it’s ethical, but safety issues would outweigh the ethical hit. I’d also eat cilantro if it were in a dish put in front of me by my host (assuming they were someone who isn’t a close enough friend to know that I loathe it), because I think politeness, in that case, trumps truthfulness. Or that kindness expresses a deeper truth about myself than causing someone else needless discomfort would.
I would expand “children” to be “people who aren’t in the position of making an informed decision from a place of relatively equal power” and answer the same way. That seemed important.
The enabling of cheaters has been on my mind lately, since one of my friends is doing that very thing and it squicks me out massively. Still love her and all, but it very much highlighted my desire to have the people close to me be on approximately the same ethical wavelength as me. Luckily, most of them are.
The next survey should include, “but would you do it anyway?” 🙂
I mean the reality is that while there are many things you may consider unethical, you may still do them. Invariably there’s always competing interests in the morality. For example, if you have a wife who has become totally uninterested in sex, and you have a couple kids, and you otherwise love your wife, is it totally unethical to have sex outside the relationship? Of course, but if the choice is between that deceit and completely scuttling the family the question becomes far more complex.
1. YES
2. … Dude. That’s nearly exactly how things happened with me earlier this year! O_O.
The next survey should include, “but would you do it anyway?” 🙂
I mean the reality is that while there are many things you may consider unethical, you may still do them. Invariably there’s always competing interests in the morality. For example, if you have a wife who has become totally uninterested in sex, and you have a couple kids, and you otherwise love your wife, is it totally unethical to have sex outside the relationship? Of course, but if the choice is between that deceit and completely scuttling the family the question becomes far more complex.
Is it cheating if it’s with permission though?
I mean, cheating at it’s core is breaching a set of rules. If the arbiter of those rules is you and your husband, and you mutually agree to a modification of the rules, then I don’t see how it’s cheating. Now, if you believe that God is the arbiter of those rules as your catholic friend does, then I suppose that it would be cheating regardless.
Tremendously practical of you for sure 🙂
Well, I hear ya on the honesty.
At the same time though, sometimes the cheatee has to acknowledge fallibility in all people. After that, you have 2 choices – as people will sometimes lie, do you 1. avoid all people, or 2. forgive?
I answered yes to everything, with the exception of the fourth* I also took the questions as for straightforward situations. If you would have included grey areas, the survey would have gotten so long that everyone would be complaining about that ;P
*Probably because for this one I can imagine way more grey areas than black and white.
But something I would also find interesting is to contrast the survey with another about what do people find fair. I know if I ever act unethically, it is because I am luring myself into it by thinking that it is fair anyway. By making judgements I am often not entitled to make.
I answered yes to everything, with the exception of the fourth* I also took the questions as for straightforward situations. If you would have included grey areas, the survey would have gotten so long that everyone would be complaining about that ;P
*Probably because for this one I can imagine way more grey areas than black and white.
But something I would also find interesting is to contrast the survey with another about what do people find fair. I know if I ever act unethically, it is because I am luring myself into it by thinking that it is fair anyway. By making judgements I am often not entitled to make.
I waffled a bit on the lying by omission to strangers, but that would depend on context I think. I tend to find lying by omission to be a bit of a gray area in general.
I waffled a bit on the lying by omission to strangers, but that would depend on context I think. I tend to find lying by omission to be a bit of a gray area in general.
1. YES
2. … Dude. That’s nearly exactly how things happened with me earlier this year! O_O.
Only one “no” If a person is in a monogamous relationship, and chooses to cheat by the definition above, and you actively facilitate that cheating by knowingly and deliberately having sex with that person in situations which you know in advance violate that person’s relationship terms, is that unethical?
I think it is unethical to persuade someone to break an agreement they would not otherwise. I do not have a problem with having sex with someone who has decided to cheat for cause (other partner sexually abandoned them or otherwise violated the contract). I know too many people who got stuck in this situation to not have compassion for them. Ethics is about respecting my agreements more than respecting all agreements. Likewise, I will happily lie by omission or commission to anyone who wants information that I don’t think they should have access to.
Only one “no” If a person is in a monogamous relationship, and chooses to cheat by the definition above, and you actively facilitate that cheating by knowingly and deliberately having sex with that person in situations which you know in advance violate that person’s relationship terms, is that unethical?
I think it is unethical to persuade someone to break an agreement they would not otherwise. I do not have a problem with having sex with someone who has decided to cheat for cause (other partner sexually abandoned them or otherwise violated the contract). I know too many people who got stuck in this situation to not have compassion for them. Ethics is about respecting my agreements more than respecting all agreements. Likewise, I will happily lie by omission or commission to anyone who wants information that I don’t think they should have access to.
Well third party interfereance with contract can be a tort in the business world*, I don’t see why it isn’t also considered wrongful in the world of interpersonal agreements.
*While it varied by state intent or willfulness is usually a factor
True but alienation of affection is a very difficult tort to pursue successfully.
Well third party interfereance with contract can be a tort in the business world*, I don’t see why it isn’t also considered wrongful in the world of interpersonal agreements.
*While it varied by state intent or willfulness is usually a factor
Like many others, I found myself thinking of too many contextual factors and what ifs to answer these in a Yes/No fashion. That made reading the questionaire all the more entertaining, however.
p.s. You might find this article interesting:
Haidt, J. The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology. Science, 316:998-1002, 18 May 2007.
Like many others, I found myself thinking of too many contextual factors and what ifs to answer these in a Yes/No fashion. That made reading the questionaire all the more entertaining, however.
p.s. You might find this article interesting:
Haidt, J. The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology. Science, 316:998-1002, 18 May 2007.
It is unethical, but replacing it is ethical, so you’ve reached an ethical balance, even though the original act is unethical in itself.
No, mp3’s are information. A disk of mp3’s would be a “good”. And copyright is not a “good”, as it is not tangible. Goods are not exactly the same as property, because property can be non-tangible.
The oft-argued case of “stealing music” is not about stealing tangible goods – it is about violating someone’s intellectual property rights.
This is something that I was stunned to discover other people have a level of flexibility about. I once pointed out to a man who was with a woman who was cheating on her husband that he was facilitating a lie, and he blinked at me.
“I never thought of it that way,” he admitted.
And ethics aside, then there is the practical side: if she’s willing to lie to her husband, what are the chances that she won’t also lie to you one day? Slim to nothing, my friend. You’re dating a liar? Be prepared to be lied to. And pray that it’s not about herpes, HPV or AIDS.
All those strong opinions aside, one of my issues with our former poly family was one of our members dating someone who actively engaged in sexual activities with cheating spouses. Sexual safety issues aside, his stance was that he wasn’t concerned if the woman was lying to her husband–that was the husband’s problem. Obviously, this caused a bit of a kerfuffle when the husband in question was my lover!
It’s all water under the bridge now, but this will definitely be a deal-breaking rule in any poly family I join or form: no lying. Not by omission, not by complicity. None. Period. No time for it, no patience for it. Be honest and grow a pair.
This is something that I was stunned to discover other people have a level of flexibility about. I once pointed out to a man who was with a woman who was cheating on her husband that he was facilitating a lie, and he blinked at me.
“I never thought of it that way,” he admitted.
And ethics aside, then there is the practical side: if she’s willing to lie to her husband, what are the chances that she won’t also lie to you one day? Slim to nothing, my friend. You’re dating a liar? Be prepared to be lied to. And pray that it’s not about herpes, HPV or AIDS.
All those strong opinions aside, one of my issues with our former poly family was one of our members dating someone who actively engaged in sexual activities with cheating spouses. Sexual safety issues aside, his stance was that he wasn’t concerned if the woman was lying to her husband–that was the husband’s problem. Obviously, this caused a bit of a kerfuffle when the husband in question was my lover!
It’s all water under the bridge now, but this will definitely be a deal-breaking rule in any poly family I join or form: no lying. Not by omission, not by complicity. None. Period. No time for it, no patience for it. Be honest and grow a pair.
“Is person who obtains photographs of others having sexual intercourse with children, who has not directly been involved with the sexual intercourse, who has not in any way actively involved himself in the abuse of any child and who will not now or at any point in the future actively involve himself in the abuse of any child, behaving unethically?”
In this question and the one that follows, it is unclear what the specific purpose of obtaining the photos is, and for these I believe intent is the determining factor. If the photos are obtained for the obtainer’s enjoyment, I would say that is unethical (and illegal), however, if the photos are obtained to prove that the criminal act has happened, then that may be ethical.
“Is person who obtains photographs of others having sexual intercourse with children, who has not directly been involved with the sexual intercourse, who has not in any way actively involved himself in the abuse of any child and who will not now or at any point in the future actively involve himself in the abuse of any child, behaving unethically?”
In this question and the one that follows, it is unclear what the specific purpose of obtaining the photos is, and for these I believe intent is the determining factor. If the photos are obtained for the obtainer’s enjoyment, I would say that is unethical (and illegal), however, if the photos are obtained to prove that the criminal act has happened, then that may be ethical.
First of all, I think that waffling on the “what ifs” defeats the purpose of this poll, which is to discover a person’s overall ethical mindset. There are going to be fuzzy areas, grey areas and exceptions to EVERYTHING. I’m the queen of the what-ifs. That’s not the point. The point is, where do I draw the line between ethical and unethical behaviour? If I think being the “other woman” is generally unethical but can think of some exceptions where it might be OK, that gives an indication of where my ethics lie. So the answer is “no” because *generally* I think it’s bad.
(for the record, I can’t think of any exceptions that make it “ethical” in my rule book, but that’s a whole separate discussion).
I also had to go with “unethical” in the prepubescent sex questions even though I was a very sexual child and I believe that some individual *are* capable of making those kinds of decisions at younger ages than others, because *generally* I think it violates the whole informed consent deal. The phrase “pre-pubescent” implies that the body is not yet developed for a sexual relationship, regardless of mental status and I think that helps to narrow down the “exceptions” a bit. Now, if we’re talking 17 year olds … that’s a lot fuzzier. I think it’s safe to assume that the intention of the question was not to make exceptions for a person who would naturally find it distasteful but is required to do so in order to prevent further or larger injustices (i.e. a cop collecting evidence).
Part of the problem, I think, has to do with varying definitions of “ethics”. I like‘s other post on ethics, where he describes how the “ethical” consideration has to do with the path of greater courage. For instance, *in general*, lying is wrong. But the neighbor hiding the Jewish family when the Nazis come knocking at the door and deliberately lying about their whereabouts takes greater courage than telling the truth and is therefore not unethical.
I like to take the path of greater courage, even though I have faltered in the past and I’m sure will falter in the future. It’s frightening and it hurts, but I think it makes me a more ethical person. When it comes to telling the truth, yes there are other considerations like “is it necessary”. For instance, my mom really doesn’t need to hear the details of my BDSM and sex life. But when it comes to courage, it is more courageous to stand up to my parents and be honest about who I am romantically involved with and how important they are to me then to hide behind a safety blanket of “they don’t need to know”. So I won’t be telling my mom that I spent most of this morning shackled to my sweetie’s ceiling, but I also won’t hide his existence from her because it might be “easier” than trying to explain why I’m dating him when I am already dating.
Courage is difficult and terrifying. But in the end, I have very few regrets about my life, I sleep with an easy conscionse, and I wrestle with very few demons or moral dilemmas. I genuinely like myself and who I have become. Not many other people can say that about themselves.
I would like to add that my definition of “ethical”, in addition to being the courageous choice, also includes not deliberately harming other people by action or inaction and taking responsibility for my part in the law of unintended consequences.
First of all, I think that waffling on the “what ifs” defeats the purpose of this poll, which is to discover a person’s overall ethical mindset. There are going to be fuzzy areas, grey areas and exceptions to EVERYTHING. I’m the queen of the what-ifs. That’s not the point. The point is, where do I draw the line between ethical and unethical behaviour? If I think being the “other woman” is generally unethical but can think of some exceptions where it might be OK, that gives an indication of where my ethics lie. So the answer is “no” because *generally* I think it’s bad.
(for the record, I can’t think of any exceptions that make it “ethical” in my rule book, but that’s a whole separate discussion).
I also had to go with “unethical” in the prepubescent sex questions even though I was a very sexual child and I believe that some individual *are* capable of making those kinds of decisions at younger ages than others, because *generally* I think it violates the whole informed consent deal. The phrase “pre-pubescent” implies that the body is not yet developed for a sexual relationship, regardless of mental status and I think that helps to narrow down the “exceptions” a bit. Now, if we’re talking 17 year olds … that’s a lot fuzzier. I think it’s safe to assume that the intention of the question was not to make exceptions for a person who would naturally find it distasteful but is required to do so in order to prevent further or larger injustices (i.e. a cop collecting evidence).
Part of the problem, I think, has to do with varying definitions of “ethics”. I like‘s other post on ethics, where he describes how the “ethical” consideration has to do with the path of greater courage. For instance, *in general*, lying is wrong. But the neighbor hiding the Jewish family when the Nazis come knocking at the door and deliberately lying about their whereabouts takes greater courage than telling the truth and is therefore not unethical.
I like to take the path of greater courage, even though I have faltered in the past and I’m sure will falter in the future. It’s frightening and it hurts, but I think it makes me a more ethical person. When it comes to telling the truth, yes there are other considerations like “is it necessary”. For instance, my mom really doesn’t need to hear the details of my BDSM and sex life. But when it comes to courage, it is more courageous to stand up to my parents and be honest about who I am romantically involved with and how important they are to me then to hide behind a safety blanket of “they don’t need to know”. So I won’t be telling my mom that I spent most of this morning shackled to my sweetie’s ceiling, but I also won’t hide his existence from her because it might be “easier” than trying to explain why I’m dating him when I am already dating.
Courage is difficult and terrifying. But in the end, I have very few regrets about my life, I sleep with an easy conscionse, and I wrestle with very few demons or moral dilemmas. I genuinely like myself and who I have become. Not many other people can say that about themselves.
I would like to add that my definition of “ethical”, in addition to being the courageous choice, also includes not deliberately harming other people by action or inaction and taking responsibility for my part in the law of unintended consequences.
True but alienation of affection is a very difficult tort to pursue successfully.
i’m a moral relativist, so i based it off what i would allow myself to do. i firmly believe that people have every right to follow their own moral code, though.
i’m a moral relativist, so i based it off what i would allow myself to do. i firmly believe that people have every right to follow their own moral code, though.
I don’t easily trust people, so there aren’t many in the category of “close friends and lovers.” These people are very important in my life. They are ones I will answer the phone for at all hours, for any reason, and offer every resource at my disposal. They are my chosen family. Forgiving an indiscretion is one thing, but a pattern of behavior is not an “oops.” If somebody makes a practice of failing to treat others with respect, particularly someone who is presumably important enough to be considered a monogamous life partner, why would I want to be associated with this? I find it supremely foolish to believe “but with me it’s different” and ignore what else is going on. I can only assume that I will be treated similarly. I don’t need that.
I think that I’m going to suggest that in the 21st century, the definition of “goods” has perhaps changed. Yes, an MP3 file is made up of bits and bytes, but really, it’s the SONG that the artist and label cares about.
Illegally downloaded mp3s aren’t stolen property, legally or logically. Obtaining them involves a copyright violation, which may or may not be ethical according to the circumstances and your own ethical code, but you can’t be prosecuted for theft for downloading them and you’re not depriving the owner of their use.
Especially if you are talking about cultures and beliefs were they are married at such an early age.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm
And because it’s not my place to enforce my own ethics on someone else.
How, exactly, would you be doing that by saying “no” to the cheater?
If you were to prevent the cheater from cheating at all, or if you were to go to the cheater’s partner and spill the beans, that would be enforcing your ethics on the cheater. But unless you want to make an argument that a person who wants to have sex with you somehow has a right or an expectation of doing so, then if you say “no” you are not enforcing your ethics on the cheater; the cheater can always go elsewhere. By saying “no,” you are not depriving the cheater of anything the cheater has reasonable claim to, nor preventing the cheater from cheating; last time I looked, people have the right to say “no” to sex for any reason they choose, or even for no reason at all!
I started to answer this poll, and then realized there was just too much grey area. There’s too many circumstances where some of these things would be “okay”, and some of them wouldn’t. Not everything is so black and white for me.
And personally, for the “family or a lover” questions, there are lots of supposedly unethical acts I would commit against a family member or a regular lover, but not against my Master, so I found those difficult to answer as well.
On last thing is that I would have to agree with shinyobject and say that practicality is more important to me than ethics.
I started to answer this poll, and then realized there was just too much grey area. There’s too many circumstances where some of these things would be “okay”, and some of them wouldn’t. Not everything is so black and white for me.
And personally, for the “family or a lover” questions, there are lots of supposedly unethical acts I would commit against a family member or a regular lover, but not against my Master, so I found those difficult to answer as well.
On last thing is that I would have to agree with shinyobject and say that practicality is more important to me than ethics.
At least in theory. However, the nice thing is that entropy can be moved from place to place; parts of the universe can be increased in order if the increase is offset by a greater decrease in order elsewhere. (Okay, so that’s a bit oversimplified, but the idea is sound.)
That means we can continue to increase order for a very long time, because there is a great deal of usable energy in the universe, and a lot of places to dump entropy. That might, if we’re lucky, buy us enough time to figure out whether this universe is in fact one of many. If it is, who knows? Maybe we can continue to offset entropy, and forestall the heat death of the universe, by dumping entropy elsewhere! 🙂
What can I say? I’m an optimist.
That’s basically the position I’m coming from; participating in such a situation is harmful, even if it’s not me in the position of violating a relationship agreement.
I suppose a case could be made for that, but practically and legally, it’s still not considered that way. A person who downloads MP3s from BitTorrent can not be arrested for theft; rather, the person legally could only be charged with copyright violation, which is a civil rather than a criminal matter.
Generally speaking, it seems that “theft” really applies only to things which, when taken, deprive their original owner of that thing. I can’t think of any exception, save perhaps for “identity theft,” which becomes a legal issue (as near as I understand it) only when the identity thief uses the assumed identity to deprive others of goods or services with the assumed identity. I’m not 100% sure, though, how the law treats “theft” in the case of theft of, say, satellite TV service, so I could be mistaken.
In any event, I tend to think of ‘theft’ as applying only to crimes whose opportunity cost is not zero. If I copy an MP3, the opportunity cost is zero; I have not actually deprived someone else of that copy.
Copyright violation is unethical, don’t get me wrong (I tend to think that people who believe it’s OK have never actually created something original that has real monetary value), but it’s a different animal than theft.
Well, hmm. That is an interesting philosophical question, isn’t it?
The fact remains that when you take it, you do deprive its owner of the use of it during that time period, and there’s no way to be certain that the owner won’t want the use of it. (What if the owner gets up in the middle of the night looking for a candy bar? Hey, it happens to me!)
So one could make an argument that returning it surriptitiously doesn’t erase the fact that the owner was deprived of it for that time, even if you have no reason to believe that the owner wanted it during that time…
So what impact would you say it would have if you knowingly slept with someone who was cheating on a partner?
Indeed, one can certainly find situations which will ethically excuse almost any act–stealing in order to provide one’s family with food, for example. But what I’m looking for is a baseline–assuming the lowest possible case (eg, you steal something simply because you want to have it, you buy a flatscreen plasma TV from a fence even though you know it’s stolen because you want a flatscreen plasma TV and you don’t want to pay full price).
I’ve posted some musings previously on a foundation of ethical systems, but that’s not really what I was interested in here.
Re: What is ‘unethical?’
I’m letting people make assumptions about who I am and what I do for a living. I know it’s not ethical, as I define ethics, but the illusion, which is dishonest in the service of pragmatism, protects my safety and is unlikely to cause harm.
Okay, so now I’m curious. Why is doing that unethical?
From where I’m standing, it isn’t a lie, either of commission or of omission–I know many people who like to wear scrubs for the sake of comfort, enough so that I would not find it reasonable to draw any conclusions about a person’s occupation or socioeconomic state based on the fact that person is wearing them. Is that unusual?
‘Course, that opens up a whole philosophical floodgate of questions about whether or not an unethical act can ever be “for the greater good”..
optimist? I’ll say.
It’s a good point though, that the probable heat-death thing is so vastly far in the future that we might very well find a way around it.
In any case, it’s definitely better to be optimistic than to say “fuck it, we’re all going to die anyway and so is the universe”.
To me, all of these things are unethical. In each case (except the last two), the situation is ethically analogous to me; a person gains from the result of an unethicl act but distances himself one step from the act. To me, removing one’s self from proximity to the unethical act doesn’t matter if you’re still gaining from it; it’s a bit like hiring someone else to murder your wife, then saying “But Your Honor, you can’t charge me with murder; I didn’t kill anyone!”
The last two questions concern the way a person’s feelings of ethical responsibility change if someone else is removed from his monkeysphere–the list of people he has close emotional ties to. I’ve seen countless examples of people betraying friends and lovers because something happens that makes them feel angry or makes them dislike that person. You will rarely find a person who says “It’s OK to owe someone money and not pay it back,” but you will often see cases where people will owe money to a friend, have an argument with that friend, and then say “Well, I don’t like so-and-so any more, so I see no reason to pay him back” (or whatever). That is, there’s a gulf between people’s professed ethical values and the way they behave toward folks they have negative emotions for–as if they secretly think “I only need to behave ethically toward people I like and I’m not mad at.”
To me, all of these things are unethical. In each case (except the last two), the situation is ethically analogous to me; a person gains from the result of an unethicl act but distances himself one step from the act. To me, removing one’s self from proximity to the unethical act doesn’t matter if you’re still gaining from it; it’s a bit like hiring someone else to murder your wife, then saying “But Your Honor, you can’t charge me with murder; I didn’t kill anyone!”
The last two questions concern the way a person’s feelings of ethical responsibility change if someone else is removed from his monkeysphere–the list of people he has close emotional ties to. I’ve seen countless examples of people betraying friends and lovers because something happens that makes them feel angry or makes them dislike that person. You will rarely find a person who says “It’s OK to owe someone money and not pay it back,” but you will often see cases where people will owe money to a friend, have an argument with that friend, and then say “Well, I don’t like so-and-so any more, so I see no reason to pay him back” (or whatever). That is, there’s a gulf between people’s professed ethical values and the way they behave toward folks they have negative emotions for–as if they secretly think “I only need to behave ethically toward people I like and I’m not mad at.”
Yep, I see your point, and I do see a categorical distinction between obtaining material that was originally created unethically in a way that assists the people who created it vs. in a way that doesn’t. I also see the point about the results of something like Nazi experimentation, though it’s my understanding that this “experimentation” was typically done so crudely and with such poor procedural control that in most cases the results are worthless.
In the case of things like child abuse, I think it’s very difficult to obtain such images in ways that don’t benefit the abuser. I also think that a person who acquires such images in a way that doesn’t benefit the abuser has an ethical obligation to report the image to the appropriate authorities, just as a person who stumbles across evidence of any horrific crime against others has an ethical responsibility to report that crime.
On a somewhat related note, I think the same ethical responsibility falls on people who were the victims of crime. Oftentimes, the victims of violent crime, most typically rape but sometimes other crimes as well, will refuse to testify against the attackers in court out of a sense of shame or guilt. I think that a person who is victimized by such a crime who then refuses to take action which would result in the conviction of the perpetrator bears indirect moral responsibility for future crimes that perpetrator commits. A person who is in a position to take action to prevent a crime and chooses not to do so bears some responsibility for that crime.
Yep, I see your point, and I do see a categorical distinction between obtaining material that was originally created unethically in a way that assists the people who created it vs. in a way that doesn’t. I also see the point about the results of something like Nazi experimentation, though it’s my understanding that this “experimentation” was typically done so crudely and with such poor procedural control that in most cases the results are worthless.
In the case of things like child abuse, I think it’s very difficult to obtain such images in ways that don’t benefit the abuser. I also think that a person who acquires such images in a way that doesn’t benefit the abuser has an ethical obligation to report the image to the appropriate authorities, just as a person who stumbles across evidence of any horrific crime against others has an ethical responsibility to report that crime.
On a somewhat related note, I think the same ethical responsibility falls on people who were the victims of crime. Oftentimes, the victims of violent crime, most typically rape but sometimes other crimes as well, will refuse to testify against the attackers in court out of a sense of shame or guilt. I think that a person who is victimized by such a crime who then refuses to take action which would result in the conviction of the perpetrator bears indirect moral responsibility for future crimes that perpetrator commits. A person who is in a position to take action to prevent a crime and chooses not to do so bears some responsibility for that crime.
Late to the party…
Finally, joining LJ: first, friend mom. Next, friend you 🙂
Here’s my reply to your arguments:
http://petite-lambda.livejournal.com/1383.html
(Sorry it’s so long!)
Peace,
Ola
Late to the party…
Finally, joining LJ: first, friend mom. Next, friend you 🙂
Here’s my reply to your arguments:
http://petite-lambda.livejournal.com/1383.html
(Sorry it’s so long!)
Peace,
Ola