Module 3 – Ethics (J. Pamplin)

Is it more important to be a good person or to perform good acts?

I believe it is more important to perform good acts than it is to merely be a good person for several reasons, chiefly because of the tangible and intangible impacts of performing good deeds. Another reason I favor the performance of good acts is because it has a greater chance of inspiring other good acts and other good people. What I find trickiest about the question is the definition of the word “good.” Also tricky is the definition of “acts.” Would inaction be considered an act? For example, if a person who aims to perform a good deed resists giving money to a panhandler because the s/he feels the contribution enables the panhandler, is that inaction an act? To carry the scenario further, would a person who fears giving to the panhandler enables them chooses to do so because they want to help the person in the immediate future (versus sending a longer-term message) be considered a good person performing a good deed or a good person performing a harmful deed? Those questions aside, I believe it is more impactful to perform good deeds because the products of those deeds will more often than not result in or contribute to a good outcome. Simply being a good person seems to me like potential energy whereas performing good deeds is more kinetic.

Does the process by which decisions are made matter more than the outcomes of these decisions?

I believe the process by which decisions are made is important. What’s troubling is the potential for a solid process producing unfavorable outcomes. If a process were in place that would determine an environmental policy based on the number of votes each potential policy received, and the electorate was comprised of more voters who stand to benefit from an environmentally destructive course of action, then the policy that wins the day would likely be unfavorable to the environment. An alternative is to in some way disenfranchise those who have a conflict of interest so as to not arrive at the expected destructive policy. If done in this circumstance, the same would have to be done elsewhere. Then, for instance, minorities would or could be barred from voting on Civil Rights – a matter in which they might have substantially more to gain than the majority; hence, a conflict of interest. I believe the process should be the focus because it is able to be refined to preserve fairness. Different parties may disagree on the outcomes but can agree on the process. It is not lost on me that matters such as Civil Rights progress often faces hurdles because of process. Why vote on equal protection when it’s “obviously” the right choice? Still, if I have to choose one, I lean toward process as the more important focal point.

Is my own life worth more than the lives of others, the same, or less?

My life is more important to me than are the lives of others but my life has no greater value than the lives of others. In the abstract, it feels elementary to proclaim that the value of my life is equal to the value of the lives of others. Looking at the way I live my life, though, it’s clear that I think my life is more important. One way I know this uncomfortable truth exists is that I do not sacrifice all that I have above what I need in service of others. I volunteer regularly and have for my entire life (thanks to the example of my mother and others) and I give often to charities (almost as a reflex), but I have never given to the point that I was in serious discomfort after having done so. It isn’t that I don’t know ways of giving more exhaustively, it’s that I know and still choose a level of comfort over actions that I am sure would literally save the lives of others. What makes it easy is that most of those whose lives I would save are far away from me and I am able to resist thinking of them when I, say, spend more than I should for a luxury. I am also able to take comfort in the fact that I give more than most, even though I know I don’t give as much as I could. If I were asked to influence another person on whether to do something to benefit me or benefit someone else, to save my life or save someone else’s, in that situation my view of “value” would emerge; but left for me to decide, I have shown that I value my life and lifestyle over others.

 

3 thoughts on “Module 3 – Ethics (J. Pamplin)

  1. Hey Julian. I really liked your blog because you answered the same questions as me.
    Here’s a link to mine: http://geog030.dutton.psu.edu/2016/02/03/ethics-views-module-3/

    I agree completely with you on number 1. By performing good acts, you are being a leader and getting others to try throughout their day to help others or the environment in different ways. These acts help make you a good person and keep you in check morally.
    I also said that decisions are very important and are what help people make the right choices. The outcomes of any decision are never clear, so it is our responsibility to plan and choose the best options when making decisions. You had some really great examples that showed that their can be outcomes that are disliked, but the process of trying to decide what is the right for the people is set up to only help the citizens/ anyone involved.

    Great job!

  2. Hi Julian! Here is a link to my blog post: http://geog030.dutton.psu.edu/2016/02/03/dylan-hellings-module-3-ethics/

    I think you make several great points in this post, and I agree with almost everything you bring up. I strongly agree with the statement you make for your last answer. You are saying that something can be more important without necessarily having greater value. I think this point of importance to value is something people often don’t consider, and something I had trouble putting into words. Great post!

  3. Hello my name is Michèle and your blog entry really caught my attention essentially because of how honest and real your response to the third question was. It’s so easy for people to say that every human life is worth the same and should be valued the same but then their actions and the way they go about living their lives doesn’t match this. Everybody has a little bit of selfishness in them and that doesn’t necessarily mean we’re bad people. On my own blog entry http://geog030.dutton.psu.edu/2016/02/03/module-3-ethics-17/ , I also touched upon how the lives of our family members and friends are more important to us than a stranger’s.

Leave a Reply