Ethics Essay, Research Paper

The general issue in the case is that a high school student was given a free copy of the answers to a college entrance exam. He did use the answers while taking the exam, and is now left feeling with a guilty conscience. The man the student turned to for advice, is slightly older than him, and will offer his honest opinion, but the question before us, is what should he say? Is there a way to teach the student a lesson over his wrongful activity, or should he be told that it is really not a big deal?

The problem that confronting this problem with the students parents is that many thoughtful parents want to shield their children from feelings of guilt or shame in much the same way that they want to spare them from fear. Guilt and shame as methods of discipline are to be eschewed along with raised hands and leather straps. Fear, guilt and shame as methods of moral direction are seen as failures in decent parenting. Parents want their children to be happy and how can you feel happy when you are feeling guilty, fearful or ashamed? If we were really convinced that using fear, guilt or shame as methods of discipline worked, though, we might be more ready to use them as techniques. But we aren’t convinced that this is the case. We won’t have more socially responsible people if fear, guilt and shame are part of their disciplinary diet as children.

As people in the United States, we are fully responsible for our actions and deserve to be punished for our crimes. It is the individual who must stand trial, not the circumstances of his or her childhood or the pressures and temptations of modern life. This is not the only way people have thought about these matters, but it is the dominant one today, especially in the United States. This is demonstrated by harsher criminal penalties and the reduction of programs that might protect people from what are thought to be the consequences of their own poor choices. (Whitley, 1999).

Immanuel Kant believed that we all have the power to control our actions and to refrain from doing what we know to be wrong, no matter how strong the temptation may be. This power is “free will,” and Kant illustrates it with a thought experiment: Suppose you feel what seems to be an irresistible temptation to do something you believe to be wrong. The opportunity is there before you. But imagine that in front of the house where you have this opportunity a gallows stands on which you would be hanged immediately after satisfying your desire. No doubt you would be able to control yourself after all. Now suppose that a dictator threatens you with this same death unless you consent to testify falsely against an innocent stranger whom the tyrant wishes to destroy. You may not be sure what you would do, but you certainly know both that you should not obey, and that you could refuse the request. Thus you know that you are free: you either choose to do the right thing, or you choose to go along with your desire to preserve your own life. Either way, it will be your own, free decision. Your moral obligation makes your freedom evident to you. (Allison, 1990) Free will can seem to be directly experienced when we make choices. Reflecting on Kant, our freedom is most obvious to us when we confront a temptation to do what we know is wrong and are aware that we can choose to do the right thing; we are not slaves to our feelings. But we also seem to feel the effectiveness of our will when we simply decide to do something about which there is no obvious conflict. (Allison, 1990).

Do managers of public organizations have to be ethical in order to have good government? Perhaps, although it might be argued that if good government can be achieved with morally mute managers, i.e., managers who do not feel it is their responsibility to promote ethics or morality in government, then it may still be possible to have government that gets the job done efficiently, effectively, and economically. Consider that opening question rephrased somewhat. Would we have good government if public managers were unethical? Probably not, conventional wisdom suggests to us that good government. Which is defined as government that gets the right things done right-cannot be ran by men and women who either are lacking in ethical or moral values or fail to act (govern or manage) on the basis of those values. (Allison, 1990).

Government, of course, is not in the business of producing ethics. It is in the business of producing public goods and services such as justice, transportation, air and water quality, consumer and occupational safety, national security, and protection from the misfortunes of age, poverty, or race, to name a few. Thus public managers and elected officeholders are charged with providing and producing those collective goods and services deemed necessary and desirable that are often not provided by private sector firms or organizations in a cost efficient or effective manner. But why then do so many people, managers included, believe that ethical government is so important? The answer is straightforward-without ethical government, the production of necessary and desirable public goods and services is not possible. Or, as is so commonly illustrated in the experiences of undemocratic and developing countries, the costs and consequences are so great that whatever goods and services are produced are often not affordable by the vast majority of the population (Thompson, 1985).

Academic perspectives on ethics management come together in some areas and diverge in others. First, there is concurrence in recognizing that managers can and should engage in ethics management. However, this is not to say that managers should think of ethics management as controlling or manipulating the ethics of co-workers. Such a view itself borders on the unethical. Rather, it is to suggest that managers can engage in or promote practices that cultivate a strong ethical environment. Indeed, such practices can be translated into habits, the organization may discover that it has an ethical autopilot. Second, academics and practitioners share the view that informal ethics strategies can be effective in strengthening the ethical environment of public organizations. Managers who wish to achieve the ethical workplace need not run through a daily ten page checklist of “to do” and “not to do” steps. Ethical organizations are not necessarily built or maintained in a methodically correct manner (Larmore, 1996).

The discussion over ethics raises many questions, it touches our government, our academic arenas, our businesses, as well as touching our lives in general. As a student, I have found myself in situations where ethics played a factor. Whether or not I gave into was always a moral decision that was placed upon me. For the most part I always did the right thing, but in high school, there were a few exceptions to that rule. For instance, in our history class, many of my friends had the class prior to me, so they had already taken the test and knew the answers. Also some bright student had the teachers guide. So one of my friends would give me a pen that held inside all of the right answers to the test. So here I was, faced with much of the same problem as the student in this case (4.3). Did I use the pen? Well, I can say with honesty now that I did. Did I feel good about it? That answer is a resounding No. The way I see it is that it s a part of growing up. About learning life s lessons with practical experiences, where the choice between right and wrong is not just a choice, but a test. The guilt that I experienced following the cheating incident made me realize something. Life is not about getting through the easiest way, but getting through the right way. Will I cheat again here in college? That answer is also No. I am too far along in my college career (Sixth year senior) to do anything to disparage the work that I have accomplished here in my time spent at Akron University. What would I say to the student in this case? I would tell him of my own experience, and let him know that while he cheated, he was actually learning. Not about the information on the test he cheated on, but he learned one of life s lessons. He will have many more opportunities to right this situation. For instance, say he goes to make up a test, and is placed outside of the teacher s classroom. The temptation to look at your books out there would come up, and by remembering what he has learned prior to this. The decision to act morally right would most likely bring the student back to his primary goal of taking the test, and not cheating. But then again, with some people you just never know what they might do. Hopefully though, he will recount his lessons learned and just Do the Right Thing.