Ethics class on conscience

I asked my students in Ethics this semester to write a short story on the theme “You may escape the law, you may escape the ethics committee, but you can’t escape your conscience.”

Image: https://www.scienceabc.com/wp-content/uploads/ext-www.scienceabc.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Moral-decision-Being-torn-between-angel-and-devil-Hatched-vector-drawing.jpg-.jpg

Their stories highlighted a number of points.

1. Sin is a terrible thing. From the young scientist who fabricated the results of a drug test that killed people, to the guy who patched organ parts in a demented attempt to recreate his daughter, sin is all the more ugly because it is chosen. On the other side, one must choose to repair it, then one might finally be set at peace. Otherwise, conscience will scream. Not a few wrote about the suicide of the protagonists.

2. We think we are kings and queens. But, in fact, there are limits. Look at any playground: if you don’t follow the rules no one will play with you. You can twist those rules, play your own game, but in the end you will have to apologize or the other kids won’t play.

3. Principles are better guides than rules. Legally, one can obtain a patent if the person one stole the idea from has no proof he was the originator. Laws define actions and circumstances, but cannot possibly define all the combinations. But the spirit of the law is based on principles of fairness. Conscience judges on principle, and punishes the actor with remorse. An actor might prefer to have his PhD rescinded than to bear the screams of his conscience.

4. Sometimes one will meet a situation that will challenge one’s sense of right and wrong. Maybe one is faced with imminent death and must administer an untested compound at risk. Often, lesser risks are more dangerous because they are easier to run. But then, being based on unethical principles, progressively worse decisions can be made down the line as they were not nipped at the bud. Guarding the conscience is a life’s work.

5. It is wise not to drown the screams of conscience. People on the right side of it recognize the signs of emotion and reason, then muster the courage to bite the pill. Nonetheless, the struggle is real:

• Strong emotions like rage, and strong feelings like agony can trump reason, and the deed may be hard to repair. But some people are able to choose the most uncomfortable outcomes, like the loss of a PhD, in exchange for the knowledge of having done the right thing.

• Often, as with job promotions, the desperate need to be right and to advance blinds one to seeing the immediate consequences of, say, fabricating a photo that someone might not even notice. Of course, we know someone eventually does.

• And then there’s simple cowardice in the face of peer pressure — “what will my boss say if I have no results to show while everyone else does?”

What can one do to stay ethical?

Always, heed the call of conscience, which is harder to ignore the more terrible the sin was. But that voice can be drowned out if our infractions are minor, and that leads to a vicious spiral. But we will hear it. When we do, let’s listen. Conscience can be wrong, its reasoning may be misplaced. But at least by lending it our ear we don’t take the first step in a deadly spiral.

Beware rationalization. This is easy for adults, because by habit we find a reason for doing any thing, even if we have to invent that reason. But you must ask: what do you base your ethical rules on? Do you base them on relativism, i.e., right is what I make it? The most insidious of these rationalization is, I think, relativism. Without a sense of an objective basis for right and wrong, there is no point to even discuss ethics.

Do you base them in law, i.e., if it’s not forbidden it’s allowed? Do you base them on a sense of duty? Do you base them on the nature of the act, or its consequences, on its lack of perfection? Do you base them, heaven forbid, on superstition?

Do you think that the ends justify the means? That pleasure is more important if immediate rather than delayed? Is it enough to look impressive rather than go through the effort of being impressive?

And then, what are your intentions? And how do the circumstances make the sin worse or less bad?

These considerations suggest that ethics should be a part of the curriculum and rigorously discussed and debated.

We will at some point ask the students to make sacrifices. I was moved when one student said “Sir, in this case I think I would rather sacrifice short term credit for long term trust.” I told her she just summarized the whole of ethics class.

The more effective sacrifices will not be in big things. They would be in the little challenges, which represent daily exercises rather than tournament competitions. Most of these small challenges will be anonymous, in areas where we would be ashamed if we were seen. Small challenges are often also in areas where we are afraid, and thus fail to do good when it is clearly in our power to do so.

Finally, it is good to confess our evil deeds. And on the flipside, to forgive. The consequences may be painful even if temporary. But still, the punishment will be a something in a sea of infinite somethings that took place in our past, present, and future.

We got this.

We do wrong. But, I think there’s no better peace than knowing we have been able to right our wrongs.

(Q.C. 230712)

Research Ethics: Moral vs Legal vs Ethical

Legal, ethical and moral are similar but not equivalent

Most of the time, when we say ethical we also mean moral and legal. But, these terms are not the same. Here are some of their distinguishing features.

Moral

Moral refers to what is right or wrong according to a set of moral principles. Morality is often based on religious, cultural, or personal beliefs, and may differ between individuals or groups. Moral considerations may be based on personal beliefs that might not be shared by others.

Morality only applies to voluntary acts. A spontaneous reaction of anger has no moral value. But violence committed in anger may, as a given person implicitly chooses violence and its effects, with knowledge from previous experience.

Choice implies that good acts are reasonable and bad ones aren’t, because choice is a product of reason. A reasonable action is congruent with the nature of things (e.g., an object is treated or used according to its nature), with the duty of the actor (e.g., fulfilling one’s duty is good, omitting it is bad), with harmony (e.g., rebellion and sedition are morally bad), and with positive consequences (e.g., free is good, jailed is bad). Good actions may be said to make one “happy”.

The judge of the moral value of an action is conscience, a person’s internal sense of right and wrong. Conscience is the person’s reasoning power evaluating an action aligns with the person’s values and beliefs. Conscience condemns a “bad” action for causing damage, e.g., in human relations, because people are hurt, or one becomes addicted. That damage may be slight or heavy implies that moral value has degrees. Reason makes this judgment considering the interplay of three determinants: the nature of the act, the intention of the actor, and the circumstances.

  1. Nature. The act itself is damaging, e.g., stealing causes the loss of property.
  2. Intention. Intent aggravates or attenuates the ethical value of the act, and can change the nature of the act. For example, the intent to feed a starving family makes a theft less grave. The intent to protect one’s life makes lethal self defense a species of homicide that is not criminal in contrast to another species of homicide that is, murder.
  3. Circumstances. The circumstances under which the action is committed aggravate or attenuate the ethical value of the act, making the agent more or less culpable. For example, theft committed with violence is worse than theft committed with no violence.

Conscience is often shaped by a person’s upbringing, cultural background, religious or spiritual beliefs, and life experiences. It can be influenced by external factors such as societal norms, laws, and moral codes, as well as by internal factors such as emotions. These imply that conscience can become more or less effective in keeping persons from harm. A case where conscience fails is seen through addiction.

What is addiction from a physical perspective?

Addiction is a disorder that affects the brain in various ways. One way addiction can lead to impaired thinking is through changes in the neurological processes that underlie decision-making and impulse control. We underline three processes: the reward pathway, executive control in the prefrontal cortex of the brain, and the stress response.

1. Reward Pathway: The brain’s reward pathway, which is primarily controlled by the neurotransmitter dopamine, is central to addiction. When a person engages in an addictive behavior, such as using drugs or alcohol, the brain releases dopamine, which creates feelings of pleasure and reinforces the behavior. Repeated exposure to the addictive behavior can in time lead to changes in the reward pathway, making the brain less sensitive to dopamine and requiring more of the addictive substance or behavior to produce the same pleasurable effect. This can lead to impulsive decision-making and a lack of control over one’s behavior.

2. Executive control in the prefrontal cortex: The PFC is involved in decision-making, planning, and impulse control — executive control. Addiction can lead to changes in the prefrontal cortex, making it more difficult for individuals to make good decisions, plan ahead, and control their impulses. As a result, individuals with addiction may be more likely to engage in risky or impulsive behaviors, even if they know the consequences may be harmful.

3. Stress Response: Addiction can also affect the brain’s stress response system, which is involved in regulating the body’s response to anxiety. Addiction can make individuals more sensitive to stress and anxiety. This can lead to negative thinking, which can further impair decision-making and lead to a spiral of addiction and negative thoughts.

These processes affect decision making on moral matters. In time, a person with a conscience thus compromised will find it easier to commit unethical acts.

A man condemned by his conscience suffers attacks of conscience, manifested as shame or guilt. The experience of shame or guilt is thought to involve a complex interplay of brain regions and neural pathways, including the ACC, PFC, amygdala, and ventral striatum. These regions process emotional and cognitive information, regulate behavior, and guide moral decision-making. Advances in neuroscience research are shedding new light on the neurological basis of this complex emotion, which appear as anxiety, worry, depression, and their associated physical effects, all of which move the agent to “make amends”.

In a moral controversy, we have recourse to an external arbiter. In Judeo-Christian cultures this is God. In other cultures it may be the King or the State.

Morality has no boundaries because a person carries her conscience wherever she goes.

Legal

Law is classically defined as a set of rules and principles promulgated by one in authority to regulate behavior and maintain social order. Legal refers to what is established by law, or what is permitted or prohibited by the legal system. What is legal is not necessarily ethical or moral, as laws may be created for a variety of reasons, including economic, political, or social considerations.

A legal system known as common law is based on judicial decisions and precedents, rather than on written laws or statutes. In this system, judges have the power to interpret and apply the law based on previous court decisions, rather than being strictly bound by legislative or statutory codes. Common law is an important legal system in countries like the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, and Australia.

The Philippines does not have a common law legal system. The Philippine legal system is a civil law system based on the Spanish legal tradition. The civil law system is characterized by a comprehensive legal code, which sets out a wide range of legal rules and principles in a systematic and comprehensive manner. The primary source of law is the Constitution, which outlines the fundamental principles and framework of the legal system. Other sources of law include statutes, administrative regulations, and court decisions.

While the Philippine legal system is not based on the common law, it has some features of common law systems. For example, courts in the Philippines have the power to interpret and apply the law, and their decisions can be used as precedents in future cases. However, unlike in common law systems, Philippine courts are generally not bound by previous court decisions and are free to depart from them in order to achieve a just and equitable result in a particular case.

Laws are bounded by space, time, and persons — jurisdiction. Special laws known as contracts regulate the behavior of the contracting properties who may have recourse to courts for the enforcement of these contracts.

Ethical

In this course we distinguish “ethical” from “moral” by defining as ethical what is behavior expected of individuals in organizations. We allow that these behaviors may be guided by moral or legal principles or values. Still, what is ethical is not necessarily legal or moral, as ethical considerations may be based on personal or professional standards that are not enforceable by law.

The scientific community defines what is ethical and unethical behavior based on principles such as honesty, objectivity and respect for dignity as stated above. These principles are also the moral principles of truth and respect for human dignity and freedom. Privacy is a moral principle based on dignity, and a legal principle enforced by law.

Ethical controversies are adjudicated by representatives of the scientific community, such as the head of a lab, university officials, and bodies designated by funding agencies.

Ethical standards may differ across disciplines. E.g., many mathematics journals list authors in alphabetical order, a practice that most biologists do not adhere to.

Ethical practices may also be viewed as behaviors that have been effective in solving problems in the past or preventing them in the future. These practices are open to change, since problem solving is affected by technological progress, which also creates new ethical challenges.

In the next section, we will look at why people commit unethical acts, and what are the costs of such acts.