> I would be interested in hearing what those of you on this list
> actually do in ethically conflicted situations in your professional
> contexts. What resources do you draw on? How do make these decisions?
>
Like George, I would like to hear more about what you mean by
Christian ethics. A couple of thoughts.
1. I expect that professional Christians would be aware of the ethics
standards of their discipline so I am surprised that Christians in
organizations would not be aware of them. Our committment to Christian
ethics might imply a heirarchical ethics. Christian ethics would not
be superceded by a commitment to professional ethics, but the
professional ethics standards might be accountable to a higher
authority where they conflict.
I expect there is variation in quality in different professions ethics
standards (and in how diligently they are followed). As an example, I
am a professional engineer, and teach engineering ethics in my intro
engineering class. The first of the fundamental canons, that
"engineers in fulfillment of their professional duties, shall hold
paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the
performance of their professional duties" seems quite consistent even
implied by a Christian view of humans.
2. Doing what is right involves both knowing what is right and having
the character to do what is right even if it is costly. In most cases
where I find fault with individuals, it is the second that is the big
problem, at least I disbelieve what I think are rationalizations.
One striking picture of where a couple of Christians' training was
successful regarding the second was in the Markoc (sp.) obedience to
authority experiments that brought on ethics in psychology testing.
Unwitting subjects were told they were assisting psychologists in
studying learning in an experiment that brought on ethics in
psychology testing.
For the benefit of people who might not be aware of the experiment,
the subjects thought they were administering electrical shocks to
subjects (who were, in reality, actors feigning being shocked) to
study how paing helped learning. Very few of the subjects, who were
told that these shocks were in the interest of science, successfully
resisted their instructions to shock the subjects, even to the point
where the dials indicated that the shocks might cause serious harm
(the actors were screaming like they were being killed), and I am told
that the psychological consequences of people realizing what they had
just done were serious in some cases.
A friend lent me a book on this, and somewhat to my surprise, two of
the people who resisted were a mainline seminary professor, and a
serious young Dutch calvinist (that may be redundant). One of the
things the interviewer puzzled about with the young Calvinist was that
in the post-interview, he wouldn't let himself off the hook and allow
him to rationalize his behavior (which he stopped much earlier than
others but not soon enough for him). Essentially, he said, "No, I did
it, and it was wrong." Unfortunately, I am afraid that the character
these people showed may not be too widespread in the Christian
community, but I hope it is.
The experiment seems to manifest both original sin, and the
possibility of redemption from it.
Back to work. It sounds like interesting work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel W. Cannon | (318)869-5160
Dept. of Physics | (318)869-5026 FAX
Centenary College of Louisiana |
P. O. Box 41188 |
Shreveport, LA 71134-1188 |