Morality, Ethics, and Culture
Ethics, too, are nothing but reverence for life. This is what gives me the fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, promoting, and enhancing life, and that destroying, injuring, and limiting life are evil.
- Albert Schweitzer
Bioethics, due to its nature in dealing with relatively new issues, is a latecomer on the philosophical stage. However, the manner in which it deals with those issues is an old practice. In order to better understand the stances of the players in the topics, and in any other ethical issue as well, we have to look at how we make moral and ethical decisions. Obviously, this will be a relatively superficial look; if philosophy was easy, Cal wouldn’t offer a major in it. 
There are several terms that are thrown around a lot in ethical discussions. Its important that we understand what these words really mean, in an academic sense.
Virtue - a highly individualistic notion of ethics; can be either normative (the purpose of a being) or moral (reason, truth, value). Virtue is generally seen as being independent of any relationship with other beings, so it presents major problems of subjectivity.
Right - the set of freedoms that an individual or a group possesses. Included in this set is the right for an individual or group to voluntarily relinquish any or all of those rights. Obviously, problems arise when two parties have conflicting rights.
Duty - the set of obligations that an individual or a group possesses. Major problems arise when duties are considered independently from the consequences of those duties.
The following concepts involve methods to balance the three ethical lodes above.
Utilitarianism - an ethical decision is best when it creates the most net good, either by maximizing benefit, minimizing cost, or a combination of the two. This combination can be measured in two ways: 1) each person represents one unit, and the best decision is the one that makes the most people happy, or 2) each person can incur various degrees of benefit/cost, and the best decisions is the one that takes into account those variations.
For example, say a home is in a prime location for an airport. The former method would measure a cost to four people (the family) against the benefit to thousands of people (the local economy). Simple decision. However, the latter method would measure the cost to that family (loss of a home and jobs, or worse depending on the government) against the boost to the economy. The decision is a bit harder to make now.
Consequentialism - an ethical decision is best when it creates the best possible outcome. (Ends over means)
Pragmatism - an ethical decision is best when the practicality and utility of the decision is considered alongside the outcome. (NOT means over ends; rather, means = ends)
Objectivism - the validity of an ethical decision is independent of individual attitudes.
Subjectivism - the validity of an ethical decision can only be interpreted through the attitudes of individuals.
Pluralism - various ethical statements can be equal in truth and correctiveness; even if they stand in contrast to each other.
Now, all these concepts are well and good in theory. But what we are interested in for our topics is how these concepts are utilized to make applicable decisions in the real world. And in our Model UN world, we have the additional complicating factor of cultural differences. This leads to cultural relativism, or the argument that different cultures place different values on certain societal aspects. Cultural relativism stands in marked contrast to universalism, or the concept that one set of ethical or moral principals can be applied to all cultures equally. One example of this difference is the debate over educating children. In Western thought, it is moral and ethical to provide education to all children under a certain age. In other cultures, however, it is immoral and inethical to make this decision without consulting the family, which may need the child to help bring in income. The issues you will encounter in our committee will force you to take special care in understanding these cultural differences.
Lastly, we need to summarize the thought process that many policy makers actually use to make tough ethical decisions.
- The Four A’s -
1. Acquire Facts
2. Alternatives
3. Assess
4. Act
By acquiring facts, determining which alternatives exist, assessing the validity and feasibility of the alternatives, and acting, governmental bodies and review boards can ensure that major ethical lapses don’t occur and a decision can actually bee made. This, however, won’t be your task for the 56th session. Your task is to determine what type of institution is the best for making these decisions. Make sure, however, that when you go about researching what institution is best for your nation, you keep in mind the above concept, for they will be central to our discussion.
Sometime within the next few days, we will be posting a sample ethical issue, and we will leave it open to you to practice the above modes of thought by providing your opinions on the issue.
-Bryan, signing off.
March 5th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
It is clear that the vast differences in culture make it difficult to have the international community working in coherent thought. I think that in working to create a regulatory body or set guidelines for medical research, the search for commonality between cultures is key. What one might deem ethically correct in one cultural sphere, may be viewed as unacceptable in another. When countries come together, representing their people, it becomes possible to discuss these differences, but more importantly the commonalities. Creating a global compromise for countries to follow, would in theory be, creating a moral truth.