ETCC
DB 2
In the discussion board, you will choose one of the Inquiries from Ruggiero (pp 49-50) # 11 a-d, briefly describe the Inquiry and respond accordingly. (Be sure to incorporate this week’s readings Chapters 4 & 5)
The Role of Conscience
If feelings are no better a guide than the majority view, is the basis of morality each person’s own conscience? How trustworthy is conscience?
The term conscience is so common and often so carelessly used that for many people it has little meaning. Precisely what is a conscience? Does everybody have one, or are some people born without one? Are all consciences “created equal”? Are our consciences influenced by the attitudes and values of our culture? Can we do anything to develop our consciences, or are they fixed and unchangeable? These important issues must be considered before we can decide whether conscience is a reliable moral guide.
One definition of conscience is an “inner voice,” but what kind of voice exactly? The voice of desire or discernment? The voice of emotion or reason? Our own voice? (If so, how does it differ from ordinary reflection?) The voice of society or custom? (If so, how do we explain the many times when con- science urges us to defy custom?) The voice of God? (If so, how do we explain cases in which conscience fails to inform us that an act is wrong? As failures of God?)
Another definition of conscience is a special “moral sense” or “intuition” that is innate in human beings. This comes close to being a workable defini- tion, but it also poses difficulties. The term sense usually is associated with a physical organ—the sense of sight with the eyes, the sense of hearing with the ears, and so on. Conscience cannot be that kind of sense. Similarly, equating conscience with intuition ignores the fact that conscience can be developed whereas intuition is inborn.
Conscience, it seems, cannot be defined in terms of what it is. It can only be defined in terms of what it does or how it occurs. Nor is it unique in this regard. A number of other terms are defined in the same way. In the physical realm, for example, electricity is defined as “a force that . . .” or “a phenome- non that occurs when. . . .” In the metaphysical realm, intellect is defined as “the ability to . . .” or “the capacity for . . . ,” and mind is defined as “the collective conscious and unconscious processes . . .” or “the faculty by which we. . . .” Using the same kind of definition, we may define conscience as the special awareness that what we have done or are tempted to do is wrong. (Page 38)
Conscience and shame
We know our conscience has judged us harshly when we feel a sense of shame. The first definition of shame in Webster’s Dictionary is “a painful sensation excited by a consciousness of guilt or impropriety, or of having done something which injures reputation, or of the exposure of that which nature or modesty prompts us to conceal.” Because shame is a phenome- non almost everyone has experienced, it is not surprising that it has been traditionally regarded as natural and essentially wholesome. Oddly, how- ever, popular psychology regards it as a sign of emotional instability. One writer describes it as a scourge of the psyche, an emotion totally with- out redeeming value that is responsible for a broad range of psycholog- ical disorders, including depression, addiction, sexual dysfunction, and emotional problems linked to gender, age, and race. Shame, the writer argues, is never appropriate; instead, the proper, healthy emotion is always “self-acceptance.”
If this view sounds profound, the reason is simply that we have heard it so often in books, in magazine articles, and on talk shows that we never think to question it. Yet the moment we test it against everyday reality, its absurdity becomes evident. Think back to a time in your childhood when you felt ashamed of something you said or did, such as being disrespectful to a parent or a teacher, hitting your brother or sister, or stealing something from a playmate. If your shame prompted you to apologize, or at least to do the person a kindness to make up for the wrong, your self-respect was restored. Feeling bad about yourself was a necessary step toward feeling good about yourself again.
Think, too, of the “bad actors” you encounter each day or read about in the news: the employers who misuse their employees, the drivers who endanger the lives of others on the highway, the men and women who berate and belittle their spouses and children, and the irresponsible people who cheat and lie their way through life. When you see people behave this way and then show no sign of remorse, are you impressed with their emo- tional health? Is the fact that many rapists, child molesters, serial killers, and terrorists are not ashamed of their heinous deeds a positive development? Of course not. (Page 39)
The Role of Conscience
The time for celebration is not when people lose their sense of shame but when, after having lost it, they manage to regain it. The following passage from a John Grisham novel describes such a moment:
At some undefined point in his life, pushed by his work and his addic- tions, [Nate] had lost his decency and shame. He had learned to lie, cheat, deceive, hide, badger, and attack innocent witnesses without the slightest twinge of guilt.
But in the quiet of his car and the darkness of the night, Nate was ashamed. He had pity for the Phelan children. He felt sorry for Snead, a sad little man just trying to survive. He wished he hadn’t attacked the new experts with such vigor.
His shame was back, and Nate was pleased. He was proud of himself for feeling so ashamed. He was human after all.
individual differences
Simple observation will demonstrate that the intensity of conscience differs from person to person. Even as small children, most of us have perceived, however vaguely, that our playmates and relatives appear to differ widely in this phenomenon. Preschoolers will often grab toys away from others. Some of them will never show (and, if externals are a mirror to internal states of mind, never feel) the slightest remorse. Yet others will be so aware of the offen- siveness of such behavior that they will immediately be saddened and repen- tant; their remorse will be evident. Hours later they will still be trying to make amends.
The classmates of a grade-school stutterer will vary greatly in their atti- tude toward him or her. Many will treat him or her as a nonperson, an object to tease and taunt and mimic. Some will simply know no better and will be unaware that their actions are wrong. Others will at some moment sense that they have caused him or her pain and will feel ashamed of their behavior.
Such differences in conscience are observable in adults as well. Some people are very sensitive to the effects of their actions, acutely aware when they have done wrong. Others are relatively insensitive, unconscious of their offenses, free from feelings of remorse. They live their lives uninterested in self-examination or self-criticism, seldom even considering whether some- thing should be done. Some see right and wrong as applying to only a limited number of matters—sexual behavior, for example, and deportment within the family. The affairs of citizenship and business or professional conduct are, to them, outside (Page 40)
the sphere of morality. Still others were at one time morally sensitive but have succeeded in neutralizing the promptings of conscience with elaborate rationalizations. When Claude’s wife expresses disapproval of his cramming the hotel’s soap and towels and rugs and bedspreads into his suitcase, he says, “Look, the hotels in this country expect you to take a few
souvenirs. They build the cost into their room rates. If I take a bit more than they’ve allowed for, they write it off on their tax returns.”
Finally, there are the extremists: the scrupulous and the lax. Scrupulous people are morally sensitive beyond reasonableness, often to the point of com- pulsion. They see moral faults where there are none. For them, every action, however trivial—whether to peel the potatoes or cook them whole, whether to polish the car today or tomorrow—is an excruciating moral dilemma. Their counterparts at the other pole are virtually without conscience, using other people as things, unmindful of their status as persons, pursuing only what satisfies the almighty me.
The shapers of Conscience
Many people have the vague notion that their consciences are solely a product of their own intellectual efforts, not subject to outside influence. They imagine themselves as having devoted a period—precisely when they are not sure, perhaps during their teenage years—to carefully evaluating various ideas of right and wrong and then forming their own moral perspective. That this notion should exist is understandable. People are naturally more aware of their conscious mental life than of any outside influences, particularly subtle ones. In addition, the thought that one’s life is and has always been completely under one’s control is very reassuring. In any case, the notion is wrong.
Conscience is shaped by two forces that are essentially outside our control—natural endowment and social conditioning—and one that is, in some measure, within our control—moral choice. The specific attributes of our con- science, including its sensitivity to moral issues and the degree of its influence on our behavior, are due to one or more of these forces. Let’s examine each of them in turn.
Natural endowment
A person’s basic metabolism and temperament are essentially inborn. Some people are calm, others excitable; some are talkative, others taciturn; some are highly perceptive, others much less so. Such characteristics present cer- tain obstacles and/or opportunities in the development of conscience. For example, the vivacious, energetic person, ( Pg 41)
quick of movement and speech, who constantly performs in metabolic overdrive may tend to be somewhat less disposed to careful analysis of past actions than the slower, more reflective person. The impulsive person, impatient to do and have done, may find it difficult to consider the consequences of his or her actions; for such a per- son, conscience may operate only after the fact. It is not, of course, a matter
of one metabolic rate, temperament, or disposition being preferable to another. Each presents some fertile areas for the development and employment of conscience, as well as some barren ones.
Social Conditioning
Conditioning is the most neglected shaper of conscience. Yet, ironically, it is in many ways the most important. Conditioning may be defined as the myriad effects of our environment: that is, of the people, places, institutions, ideas, and values we are exposed to as we grow and develop. We are conditioned first by our early social and religious training from parents. This influence may be partly conscious and partly unconscious on their part and indirect as well as direct. It is so pervasive that all our later perspectives—political, economic, sociological, psychological, and theological—in some way bear its imprint.
If children are brought up in an ethnocentric environment—that is, one in which the group (race, nationality, culture, or special value system) is regarded as superior to others—research shows that they will tend to be less tolerant than other people. More specifically, they will tend to make rigid right–wrong, good–bad classifications. If they cannot identify with a group, they will oppose it. In addition, they will tend to need an out-group, some outsiders whom they can blame for real and imagined wrongs. This, in turn, makes it difficult or impossible for them to identify with humanity as a whole or to achieve undistorted understanding of others.
In addition, ethnocentric people, even in childhood, have difficulty dealing with complex situations and therefore demand simple solutions to problems, even problems that do not admit of simple solutions.
The influence of such training on conscience is obvious. Although few of us are subjected to a purely ethnocentric environment as children, elements of ethnocentrism are common in most environments. The effects on us, though less dramatic and pronounced, are nevertheless real and a significant shaping force on our conscience.
Early in life we are also conditioned by our encounters with brothers, sisters, relatives, and friends. We see a sister’s observance or disregard of family rules or her habit of lying ( pg 43)
to parents. An uncle brings a present he has stolen from work. Our playmates cheat in games. More important, we see not only these actions but also the reactions of the people themselves and of others who observe them. We are witness to all the moral contradictions, all the petty hypocrisies of those around us. We ourselves act—now in observance of some parental rule, then against another—and we are rewarded or punished. We also imitate others’ strategies for justifying questionable behavior.
Next we are conditioned by our experiences in grade school, by our widening circle of acquaintances, and perhaps by our beginning contact with institutional religion. We perceive similarities and differences in the attitudes
The shapers of Conscience
of our teachers and classmates. We observe their behavior, form impressions, and sense (quite subliminally and vaguely, to be sure) the level of development of their consciences. We observe and learn from our priest, minister, or rabbi. Perhaps in all these situations, it is not the formal so much as the informal contact, the simple acquaintance with their personalities, habits, and patterns of behavior, that affects us in powerful, though subconscious, ways. Though memory may cloud, experience remains indelible.
Finally we are conditioned by our contact with people, places, and ideas through books, radio, the Internet, newspapers, magazines, CDs, movies, tele- vision programs, and social media. What we see and hear make an impact on our attitudes and values, sometimes blatantly, sometimes subtly. Situation comedies instruct us as to what may appropriately be laughed at and/or ridiculed. Soap operas and dramatic programs train our emotions to respond favorably or unfavorably to different behaviors. Talk shows inform us of what celebrities think about a variety of subjects, including right and wrong. And commercials incessantly tell us what possessions and living styles will make us happy and are therefore desirable. As the entertainment and communications media have grown more numerous and more sophisticated, the number of individuals and groups involved in social conditioning has multiplied and become more influential, and their messages are often at odds with those of home, church, and school.
Moral Choice
Long before we were able to make authentic moral choices, heredity and social conditioning had already shaped our conscience, and they continued to do so even when, as small children, we made rudimentary choices. Young children’s choices, after all, are not fully conscious acts but mere assertions of will that express their personality traits or imitation of others’ behavior. A toddler’s obeying or defying her parents’ directions is an example of such an assertion. Only in later childhood do we develop the ability ( pg. 44)
to weigh alternatives and make reasoned moral choices. The problem is that by then we will have already developed attitudes and patterns of response to situations and people, at least some of which are likely to be both morally undesirable and difficult to change.
That people tend to behave in ways that are consistent with their thinking is fairly well known. What is not so well known is that the reverse also occurs— they think in ways that justify their behavior. The eminent English scholar Dr. Samuel Johnson explained the two tendencies as follows:
Not only [do] our speculations influence our practice, but our practice reciprocally influences our speculations. We not only do what we approve, but there is danger lest in time we come to approve what we do . . . for no other reason than that we do it. A man is always desirous of being at peace with himself; and when he cannot reconcile his passions to [his] conscience, he will attempt to reconcile his conscience to his passions.
Note the word passions, a synonym for the term that is causing so much moral confusion today— feelings. Dr. Johnson knew what was pointed out in the previous chapter, that feelings are not a reliable guide in moral matters. Furthermore, as he implies here, when feelings are allowed to overrule con- science, conscience loses its moral bearings. It becomes desire’s puppet, telling us what we want to hear instead of what we need to hear. One doesn’t have to be morally disreputable to be victimized by this process. It can ensnare respect- able, well-intentioned people who not only want to make wise moral choices but honestly believe they are doing so, as the following examples illustrate:
A police detective was investigating a rape case in which the victim had recorded part of the perpetrator’s license number. The detective eventually found a suspect who matched the description of a rapist in almost every way. There was only one problem—his license plate number did not match. Rather than lose the case on what seemed a technicality, the detective changed the victim’s statement, inserting the suspect’s plate number. The detective did not consider this action immoral; he believed he was just bolstering his case, even though his action effectively eliminated exoneration based on “reason- able doubt.”6
A number of newspapers around the country have a policy of including the cause of death in every obituary, even if the family of the deceased asks that it be omitted. (For example, the obituary might state that the cause of death was suicide by suffocation, slashed wrists, or a gunshot wound to the head.) The editorial staffs that make this policy apparently do so with a clear conscience, despite the fact that many grieving families suffer embarrass- ment and shame as a result ( pg. 45)
When actor Hugh Grant was arrested for consorting with a prostitute in Los Angeles, Grant’s friend, Academy Award–winning actress Emma Thompson, described her reaction in an interview: “I thought, thank God, you know, you’ve broken out.” She reportedly went on to say that what Grant had done was not something to be ashamed of but “wonderful, abso- lutely wonderful.”7 Evidently, from her moral perspective, Grant’s unfaith- fulness to his fiancée and possible exposure to sexually transmitted disease, including HIV/AIDS, not only posed no moral issue but were in some unspecified way admirable!
A Balanced view of Conscience
The unpleasant realities we have noted about conscience demonstrate that it is not an infallible moral guide. However, to leap from that evidence to the conclusion that conscience is without value would be a mistake. For all its imperfections, conscience is the most important single guide to right and wrong an individual can have. It is, as the saying goes, the “proximate norm of morality.” For this reason, when circumstances demand an immediate moral choice, we should follow our conscience. (The only alternative would be to violate it, to choose to do what at that moment seems immoral.) However, whenever circumstances allow us time to reflect on the choice conscience
recommends, we should use that time to analyze the issue critically and to consider the possibility that a different choice might be better.
In short, we should follow our conscience, but not blindly. True free- dom, true individuality, and real moral growth lie in examining conscience, evaluating its promptings, purging it of negative influences and error, and reinforcing it with searching ethical inquiry and penetrating ethical judg- ment. The chapters that follow contain helpful criteria for further developing your conscience.
Accordingly, for our purposes in examining moral issues in this and sub- sequent chapters, the answer “It’s a matter for the individual’s conscience to decide” will be inappropriate. Let’s consider a few cases to see exactly why. A high school girl hears a rumor that a classmate is a shoplifter. Is she morally justified in repeating the story to her best friend if she makes the friend prom- ise not to “tell a soul”? A 13-year-old boy walks into his neighborhood grocery store and asks the grocer for a pack of cigarettes “for my mother.” The grocer knows the mother doesn’t smoke and that the boy is too young to buy cigarettes legally. Should she sell them to him? A weapons manufacturer has an opportu- nity to make a big and very profitable sale to the ruler of a small foreign country. He knows the ruler is a tyrant who oppresses his people and governs by terror. Is it right for him to sell the weapons? A college student’s friends are sexually promiscuous. She has always ( pg. 46)
regarded promiscuity as immoral, but lately she has wondered whether she has been too scrupulous. What should she do?
Whatever we decide is right in these cases, our decision should be based on more than saying “Leave the matter to the individual’s conscience.” If we say that in the first three cases, we are saying, in effect, “Any action is acceptable,” for we can have no way of knowing exactly what those people’s consciences will prompt them to do. If we say it in the case of the college student, we are evading the issue, for her dilemma is deciding whether the promptings of her conscience are reasonable.
Sample Response To inquiries
Here is a sample response to help you understand the kind of analysis and the form of response appropriate for the inquiries that follow. (You need not agree with the particular viewpoint expressed.) Note that the response expresses not just the writer’s moral judgment but also the reasoning that underlies it.
Inquiry: A graduate school professor has several student assistants, talented young men and women pursuing doctorates. He regularly uses their research find- ings and interpretations, and even their phrasing, in his own scholarly writing, without crediting them either in the text of his articles and books or in the foot- notes. “It’s part of their job to do research for me,” he reasons; “the money they receive from their fellowships for doing the research is credit enough for them.” His conscience does not trouble him. But should it?
The Role of Conscience
Sample Response: His conscience should trouble him because what he is doing is unethical and the argument he offers to support his actions is flawed. Book publishers don’t put someone else’s name on an author’s book on the grounds that the royalties the actual author earns will be “credit enough.” A person’s ideas and the words used to express them are possessions. It doesn’t matter whether the person in question is a famous scholar or a student. Taking ideas without permission is no different from steal- ing the computer that recorded them. There’s also the element of deception to be consid- ered. The professor is tricking members of his profession into giving him recognition and honor that he doesn’t deserve.
If you need additional assistance composing your response to the inquiries that follow, read “Writing About Moral Issues” in Appendix 1.
Inquiries Two Timely issues sexual harassment ( pg. 47)
Sexual harassment has been forbidden by Federal law since 1964, and as noted in Chapter 1, it is also a moral offense. Moreover, it has received increased attention in the media since the 1990s. It is now known to be fairly common in government, business and the professions, educational institutions, and else- where. Many prominent people have been accused of it, including author and TV personality Bill O’Reilly, Senator Bob Packwood, TV star David Letterman, former President Bill Clinton, NBA star Kobe Bryant, film producer Harvey Weinstein, TV anchor Matt Lauer, and actor Kevin Spacey. As a result of such allegations, distinguished careers have been ended, and many millions of dol- lars have been awarded in settlements.
Yet for all the attention sexual harassment has been given, it is not as clear as it might be. Which of the following, for example, does it include: Asking a stranger for a date? Complimenting a person’s appearance or clothes? Telling a risqué joke to a person? Telling the same joke to a mixed group? Wearing a shirt with a crude or an obscene slogan in class or the workplace? Other import- ant questions are these: Does feeling uncomfortable about something that is said or done prove that harassment has occurred? Is it possible for a person to be guilty of sexual harassment without having a troubled conscience?
Answer each of the questions stated earlier and explain the reasons for your answers.
Gain of function Research
From the outset of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, it was alleged that the virus came from a Chinese lab experiment on “gain of function” research. Such research takes a virus from an animal and alters its genetic structure in a way that
allows it to infect humans. In October 2021, Lawrence A. Tabak,
( Note: Keep a copy of your thoughts on these issues. We will address them again in a later chapter .
RESOURCES BELOW
1. When it comes to politics, many people follow their parents’ and grand- parents’ patterns. They will openly admit, “My family has registered and voted Democrat [or Republican] for years and I’m proud to do the same.” But historians find that political parties have changed over time, even reversing their positions on some issues. (pg. 49)
It is therefore likely that if our ancestors were voting today, they might well vote differently. Should unthinkingly following family voting tradition bother one’s conscience? Explain.
2. Advances in electronics have added two new rapid means of communication to the older one of e-mailing. One is private, texting; the other is public, tweeting, and is limited to 280 characters. All three can be used to pass on information. Unfortunately, much of the information that we receive is often false. Examples include the following reports: that deadly spiders are hiding under toilet seats, that many college students indulge in the practice of cow tipping, and that you can unlock your car remotely through a cell phone. All these are false, as you can see by consulting Snopes.com or TruthorFiction.com. Should your conscience bother you if you pass on such information without checking to see if it is true? Is it ever ethical to pass on rumors you hear about other people? Explain your answer.
3. Gay marriage is now legal in all states. However, many people believe that marriage should continue to be, as it has been historically, only between a man and a woman. Consider the case of the operator of a wedding chapel who holds that belief. If she remains true to it, she will refuse to allow gay marriages to be performed in her chapel. Yet her refusal could be considered discrimination under the law. Should she follow her conscience and risk breaking the law, or should she follow the law and violate her conscience? Explain your reasoning.
4. After U.S. News and World Report published an article that discussed cheating in school and pointed out why it is wrong, a student wrote a letter to the maga- zine arguing that cheating is not morally wrong but merely an efficient way to avoid “busywork” and produce a quality piece of work. Instead of a reprimand, he suggested that cheaters deserve praise for being enterprising and effective.8 Do you agree with this student? If so, explain why. If not, explain why not in terms of what you have learned in this book.
5. A number of medical centers around the United States now offer “find- ers’ fees” to physicians for referring patients to researchers who are conducting trials of new drug therapies, the side effects of which are not yet known. One researcher, for example, was offering physicians a $350 payment for each referred patient who enrolled in the research project. Many physicians accept the fees and
rug00275_ch04_038-050.indd 47 09/09/22 10:21 AM
Final PDF to printer
48 The Role of ConsCienCe make the referrals, apparently without suffering pangs of conscience. Are their
actions ethical?9
6. From 1940 to 1970, more than 4,000 radiation experiments were performed on tens of thousands of Americans, many of them poor and uneducated, without their informed consent. Examples of alleged incidents: Children in a Massachusetts orphanage were fed radioisotopes; 829 pregnant Tennessee women were fed radioactive iron; patients in Rochester, New York, were injected with plutonium; cancer patients in Cincinnati received heavy doses of gamma rays. Not all of these experiments can be attributed to researchers’ ignorance of the harmful effects of radiation; the main purpose of the experiments was to identify those effects rather than to cure the patients. Even so, the researchers do not seem to have thought they were committing a moral offense. Were they?10
7. When Bruno and Bertha rented their apartment, they signed a lease that included a provision that animals were not allowed. Now they have decided they want to have a cat. They plan to sneak it into the apartment at night so the land- lord won’t know they have it. Their consciences are not troubled. Comment.
8. Sylvester is the descendant of a nineteenth-century robber baron. (A robber baron is an unscrupulous individual who gains wealth by unethical means, such as by paying off legislators, exploiting employees, or savaging the environment.) Though embarrassed by the way his family’s wealth was acquired, Sylvester nev- ertheless believes he is entitled to keep it because he inherited it. Is he correct?
9. For each of the following cases, decide whether the person’s conscience was correct. That is, decide whether the action it directed the person to take (or silently approved) is ethically justifiable. Explain your reasoning.
a. Broderick stops at a pay phone to make a call. As he is talking, he absent- mindedly fingers the coin return and finds a dime someone has carelessly forgotten. When he is finished talking, he pockets the coin and walks away. Halfway down the block, he feels guilty for taking it. He returns to the booth and deposits it in the coin return.
b. A doctor is driving down the highway late at night. She sees a car in the opposite lane swerve sharply off the road and plunge down an embank- ment. No other cars are around. Her first impulse as a physician is to stop and assist the victims. However, she remembers that the state has no “Good Samaritan law” to protect her from a malpractice lawsuit. Her conscience tells her she is justified in driving on.
c. A candidate for the local school board has heard the rumor that her opponent gives “wild parties.” As she proceeds with her campaign, she visits the homes of many voters. She makes it a point to tell everyone what she has heard about her opponent, always adding, “Of course, it’s only a rumor that no one has yet proven to be true.” She believes sincerely that it would be dishonest of her not to inform them about the rumor so that they can evaluate it before voting.
d. In order to beat out the competition for a summer gardener’s job at a nearby estate, Alan agreed to work for a wage somewhat lower than the standard of the area. The owner and her family are at the estate only on weekends, and Alan works alone. Although his workday is fixed—9 to 5,
rug00275_ch04_038-050.indd 48 09/09/22 10:21 AM
Final PDF to printer
addiTional inquiRies 49
Monday through Friday—he arrives late and leaves early on most days and occasionally takes an afternoon off. He does not feel guilty because his employer is paying him less than others would have worked for.
e. An enterprising black real estate broker hires a white man and woman to buy a house in a white neighborhood and then transfer title to her. She then visits the white residents of the neighborhood and explains that she owns one house already and plans to buy others and sell them to black families. She tells each white resident that some other white neighbor has secretly agreed to sell. Everyone becomes frightened that property values will plum- met, and many are tricked into selling to the broker at much lower prices than their homes are worth. The broker then sells the homes to black fami- lies for what they are really worth. Not only does she feel morally blameless, but she regards herself as a heroine of sorts, a fighter against discrimination in housing.
f. Fred is the oldest of seven children of a widow. He is an honor student in a technical program at a nearby junior college. He pays his way by steal- ing automobile tires, radios, and stereotape decks and selling them. When he first took up this part-time “occupation,” he felt a little guilty. But he no longer does, for he decided that no one is really injured: The owners will be somewhat inconvenienced but not deprived because their insurance will cover replacement costs.
10. The following people all have clear consciences. Decide whether they are entitled to them and explain your decision.
a. George believes strongly that drug use and dealing are a personal matter, outside the sphere of morality. He sells marijuana, cocaine, heroin, any- thing. Whatever there is a market for, he will deal in.
b. Gus specializes in LSD, which he laces liberally with strychnine to increase his profits.
c. Connie believes strongly that the use of any drug is a crutch and that hard drugs ruin lives. She volunteers to be an undercover agent at her college, without pay.
11. The consciences of the people in the following cases are confused. As a result, the people cannot decide whether the actions they are contemplating are morally right. Decide for them and present the rationale for your position.
a. A married couple discover that their 22-year-old daughter, a college senior, is a lesbian. They are shocked and dismayed, for they regard this as moral degeneracy. They are thinking of refusing to attend her graduation and refus- ing to welcome her in their home until she renounces this sexual preference.
b. A student is taking a composition course in college. Her assignment is to write on the morality of war. Back in her room, she moans aloud that she doesn’t know where to begin with such a complex subject. One of her roommates declares where she stands on the issue. The other challenges her view. In time, several students wander into the room and get involved in the ensuing discussion. One goes out and gets a term paper she did on a similar subject. She reads it aloud and is interrupted from time to time as
rug00275_ch04_038-050.indd 49 09/09/22 10:21 AM
Final PDF to printer
50 The Role of ConsCienCe
someone disputes a statement or expands upon it. After an hour or so, the session breaks up, leaving the student who didn’t know where to begin with a different problem: deciding to what extent, if any, she is justified in using in her paper the facts and opinions she heard from the others.
c. Harry has been an officer in the police department of his small city for a year. He has seen many violations of department policy: squad car teams pulling over on lonely streets and sleeping during evening shifts, officers receiving hush money from gamblers and dope pushers, officers conduct- ing sexual commerce with women in the station house while on duty, and sergeants and lieutenants spending whole shifts at home and altering duty records to cover their absences. Harry is seriously considering turning these men in, but he is confused about where his loyalty should lie.
d. An airline pilot goes for his regular medical checkup. The doctor discovers that he has developed a heart murmur. The pilot has only a month to go before he is eligible for retirement. The doctor knows this and wonders whether, under these unusual circumstances, she is justified in withholding the information about the pilot’s condition.
12. Rhoda enjoys socializing with fellow employees at work, but their discussion usually consists of gossiping about other people, including several of her friends. At first Rhoda feels uncomfortable talking in this way about people she is close to, but then she decides it does no real harm and so she feels no remorse for joining in. Should she feel remorse?