8. Ethics Notes 13

Elaborate Notes

FEATURES OF ETHICS

• Ethics as a Framework for Evaluation: Ethics does not function as a rigid set of rules that dictates a single, correct course of action for every situation. Instead, it provides a normative framework, principles, and tools to evaluate the moral dimensions (rightness or wrongness) of various possible actions. For instance, Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics (c. 340 BCE) emphasised the concept of Phronesis or practical wisdom, which is the ability to discern the appropriate course of action in complex situations, rather than mechanically applying a rule.
• The Social Function of Ethical Codes: Every society, from ancient civilizations to modern states, develops a code of conduct, whether formal (laws) or informal (customs), to ensure social stability.
  • Peace and Harmony: Codes like the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1754 BCE) in ancient Mesopotamia aimed to establish justice and order.
  • Cooperation and Conformity: The French sociologist Émile Durkheim, in The Division of Labour in Society (1893), argued that shared values and beliefs, which he termed the “conscience collective,” are essential for social solidarity and cooperation.
  • Preventing Deviance: Societal ethics define acceptable behaviour and create social pressure against actions deemed harmful or disruptive, thus preventing widespread deviance.
• Contextual Nature of Ethics: Ethics is not absolute, universal, or eternal. Its principles and applications are contingent upon the context. This viewpoint is known as Ethical Relativism.
  • Time Period: The institution of slavery was considered ethically and economically justifiable in the Roman Empire and the antebellum American South, but it is now universally condemned as a grave moral evil.
  • Society/Culture: In some Eastern cultures, collectivism and community welfare are prized above individual rights, whereas Western liberal societies often prioritize individual autonomy. For example, the concept of filial piety in Confucian ethics places a strong moral duty on children towards their parents, a value that may be interpreted differently in individualistic societies.
• Multiple Levels of Ethics: Ethical considerations operate at various scales.
  • Personal Ethics: An individual’s private code of conduct (e.g., a personal commitment to never lie).
  • Organizational Ethics: The principles guiding a company or institution (e.g., Google’s former motto, “Don’t be evil,” or a hospital’s commitment to patient privacy).
  • Institutional Ethics: Pertains to the principles governing entire sectors, such as medical ethics or legal ethics.
  • Societal Ethics: The dominant moral values and norms of a community or nation.
• The Individual-Society Interplay: The relationship between individual morality and societal ethics is dialectical.
  • Individual shaping Society: Social reformers often challenge the prevailing societal ethics with their personal moral convictions. For instance, Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s campaign against Sati, which he considered a morally abhorrent practice, led to the Bengal Sati Regulation in 1829. M.K. Gandhi’s personal commitment to Ahimsa (non-violence) reshaped the ethical fabric of India’s freedom struggle. Savitribai Phule, by establishing the first school for girls in Pune in 1848, challenged the unethical societal norms that denied education to women and lower castes.
  • Society shaping Individual: When societal ethics are internalised by an individual, they become their personal morals. For example, the societal ethic of respecting elders becomes an individual’s moral duty.
• Abstract Nature of Ethics: Core ethical values like justice, fairness, and compassion are abstract concepts. Their intangible nature can make them difficult to grasp, leading people to fail to recognise their violation in concrete situations. This abstraction can contribute to a gradual erosion of ethical standards, as individuals may not perceive the moral significance of their actions (a phenomenon Hannah Arendt termed the “banality of evil” in her 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem).
• Ethics and Voluntary Action: Moral evaluation is primarily applied to actions that are performed voluntarily. An action performed under duress or coercion, where the agent has no meaningful choice, is generally not subject to the same ethical scrutiny. Aristotle distinguished between voluntary and involuntary actions, arguing that only the former are subject to praise or blame. The example of an act performed at gunpoint illustrates this; the act is a product of coercion, not free will.
• Responsibility over Accountability: Ethics is sustained by an internalised sense of responsibility, not merely by external accountability.
  • Accountability is being answerable to an external body (e.g., a superior officer, a court of law).
  • Responsibility is a self-driven, internal moral commitment. For example, stopping to help an accident victim (the “Good Samaritan” principle) is often an act of responsibility, as there may be no legal accountability for not doing so in many jurisdictions. Similarly, casting a vote in an election is an act of civic responsibility.

ESSENCE OF ETHICS

The essence of ethics rests on the foundation of human agency and rationality. It presupposes that individuals are not merely beings of instinct but are capable of deliberation, reasoning, and making informed choices. As the philosopher Immanuel Kant argued in his Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (1785), this capacity for rational choice is what gives humans dignity and makes them moral agents. Because these choices have consequences that ripple outwards, affecting both the individual and the wider society, ethics posits that every individual bears a moral responsibility for their actions. The primary function of ethics, therefore, is to serve as a guide or a compass, enabling individuals to navigate complex choices and align their actions with what is considered morally right.

DETERMINANTS OF ETHICS

• God and Religion (Divine Command Theory): This perspective posits that ethical standards are derived from the will or commands of a divine being. Morality is what God commands, and immorality is what God forbids.
  • Characteristics: Such ethics are often considered absolute, universal, and unchanging.
  • Examples: The principle of Niskama Karma (action without attachment to results) from the Bhagavad Gita; the Eightfold Path (Right Understanding, Right Thought, etc.) from Buddhism’s Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta; and the Jain philosophy of Anekantavada (many-sidedness), which promotes non-violence in thought by acknowledging the partial truth in all perspectives.
  • Critique: This determinant is not universally applicable, as it excludes atheists and agnostics. Furthermore, it faces the Euthyphro dilemma, posed by Plato: “Is an act righteous because God commands it, or does God command it because it is righteous?”
• Human Intuition (Moral Intuitionism): This view suggests that moral truths are known through an immediate, intuitive sense of right and wrong, rather than through complex reasoning.
  • Characteristics: Decisions based on moral intuition are often quick, automatic, and emotionally charged. They are subjective, stemming from an individual’s ingrained moral character.
  • Process: As illustrated in the example dialogue, the justification for a moral belief (“we should not cause pain”) eventually terminates in a foundational belief that is held to be self-evident (“because this is the right thing to do”).
  • Psychological Basis: The psychologist Jonathan Haidt, in The Righteous Mind (2012), argues that many moral judgments are like this—swift intuitions followed by post-hoc reasoning to justify the initial gut feeling. These intuitions are often driven by empathy and emotional intelligence.
  • Qualities: Individuals who rely on moral intuition often exhibit qualities like compassion, kindness, and gratitude.
• Culture and Society (Ethical Relativism): This holds that moral standards are culturally-bound and are determined by the norms and values of one’s society. The saying, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do,” encapsulates this idea.
  • Examples: A comparison of dominant values often highlights this:
    • Western Societies: Often emphasize individualism, competition, and rationality.
    • Indian Society (Traditionally): Often emphasizes collectivism, cooperation, and spiritual orientation.
  • Critique: While society is a powerful source of ethics, it cannot be equated with ethics. Societal norms can be profoundly unethical. For example, practices like patriarchy, the caste system, dowry, and racial segregation (Apartheid in South Africa) were or are societal norms, yet they are ethically unjustifiable. Reformers like Martin Luther King Jr. often appeal to a “higher law” of ethics to challenge unjust societal laws.
• Agencies of Socialization: These are the institutions and experiences that instill ethical values in individuals.
  • Examples: The family is the primary agent of socialization. Schools impart values through moral science classes and the “hidden curriculum.” Peer groups, media (cinema), and significant life experiences also shape an individual’s moral compass. This aligns with Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (1977), which posits that people learn behaviors and values by observing and imitating others.
• Leadership: Leaders, by their actions and exhortations, can set the ethical tone for their followers and society at large.
  • Positive Examples:
    • Sardar Patel: His visionary and rational approach was crucial in the integration of princely states into India.
    • Lal Bahadur Shastri: His resignation as Railway Minister following a train accident in 1956 remains a benchmark for integrity and moral accountability in public life.
    • Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw: His professional courage and wisdom in advising the government during the 1971 Indo-Pak War is an example of ethical leadership in the military.
  • Negative Examples: Leadership can also be a source of unethical conduct. The demagoguery of Adolf Hitler led an entire nation down a path of moral depravity, illustrating the danger of blind obedience to authority.
• Philosophy: Rational philosophical inquiry provides systematic and reasoned approaches to ethics. This will be covered under Normative Ethics (e.g., Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics).
• Constitution: For a modern nation-state, the Constitution serves as a foundational ethical document that establishes the moral framework for governance and society.
  • Examples: The Preamble outlines the core values of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. The Fundamental Duties (Article 51A) prescribe civic and moral obligations. The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) outline the social and economic goals that the state should strive for.
  • Constitutional Morality: As articulated by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, this is a paramount commitment to the principles of the constitution, which must override social or religious moralities in case of conflict. The interpretation of the constitution as a “living tree” ensures that its ethical principles can adapt to contemporary challenges.

DETERMINING ETHICS w.r.t TO HUMAN ACTION

The morality of any specific human act is traditionally analyzed using three components, derived from scholastic philosophy (e.g., Thomas Aquinas):

• 1) Object (The Act Itself): This refers to the inherent nature of the action. It is the primary determinant of morality.
  • Morally Right (Good in itself): Telling the truth, helping others.
  • Morally Wrong (Evil in itself / Malum in se): Lying, murder, theft.
  • Morally Indifferent: Acts that have no intrinsic moral quality, such as jogging, running, or sitting. Their moral quality depends on the intention and circumstances.
• 2) Circumstances (The Context): These are the situational factors surrounding the act, such as the time, place, and conditions. They can alter the degree of morality but cannot change an inherently evil act into a good one.
  • A good act made better: Giving food to a person is good; giving it to a starving person is better.
  • An indifferent act made good: Sitting is indifferent; sitting with a lonely, grieving person to comfort them is a good act.
  • A bad act made worse: Robbing someone is bad; robbing a beggar of their only meal is a much graver evil.
• 3) Purpose (The Intention): This is the “why” behind the act—the motive or goal of the agent. A good intention cannot justify an evil act (the end does not justify the means), but a bad intention can corrupt a good or indifferent act.
  • Good Act + Bad Intention: Donating to charity (good act) solely to gain social media followers and boost one’s ego (bad intention) taints the morality of the act.
  • Bad Act + Good Intention: The classic case of Robin Hood, who stole (bad act) to give to the poor (good intention). While the motive is laudable, the act itself remains objectively wrong in most ethical systems.
  • Indifferent Act + Good Intention: A doctor running through traffic (indifferent/potentially reckless act) with the intention of saving a patient’s life (good intention).

CONSEQUENCES OF ETHICS

At the Individual Level	At the Societal Level
Source of Ultimate Happiness (Eudaimonia): Living an ethical life contributes to a sense of purpose and fulfillment, what Aristotle called Eudaimonia or human flourishing. The act of blood donation, for instance, provides a “warm glow” of satisfaction.	Ensures Good Governance: An ethical framework in public administration promotes transparency, accountability, and service orientation. Civil servants like Armstrong Pame (the “Miracle Man” who built a 100 km road in Manipur without government funds) and Prashant Nair (known for “Compassionate Kozhikode”) exemplify this.
Development of a Higher-Order Being: Ethical behaviour allows individuals to transcend lower-order, self-interested needs (like wealth, power) and focus on higher virtues. This aligns with Abraham Maslow’s concept of self-actualization. For example, Lord Rama’s choice to uphold his father’s promise over claiming his kingship prioritised integrity over power.	Promotes Desirable Social Change: Societal ethics of care, justice, and rationality drive progressive reforms. For example, the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, which decriminalized suicide, reflects a more compassionate and rational ethic. The Supreme Court’s recommendation to treat sex workers with dignity is another example of an evolving societal ethic.
Credibility and Social Esteem: An ethical person earns trust and respect, building social capital. Honest civil servants, compassionate political leaders, and courageous citizens who stand up for what is right are acknowledged and appreciated.	Equitable and Inclusive Development: Ethical principles like fairness and justice demand policies that ensure equitable distribution of resources and opportunities for all sections of society, particularly the marginalized. This is central to Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach, which argues for development as the expansion of human freedoms and capabilities.
Improved Interpersonal Relations: Ethical behaviours like honesty, empathy, and fairness foster trust and mutual respect, which are the cornerstones of strong and healthy relationships.	Sustainable Social Order: By socializing the younger generation with core ethical values, a society ensures its own stability and continuity. This process of value transmission creates a foundation for a just, peaceful, and sustainable social order.
Inner Peace and Decisiveness: Ethical living reduces internal conflict and the “crisis of conscience” (cognitive dissonance). A person with a clear ethical framework can make decisions more quickly and confidently.	NA

DIMENSIONS OF ETHICS

Ethics as a philosophical discipline is broadly divided into four main areas of study:

• Descriptive Ethics: This is the empirical study of people’s moral beliefs and practices. It seeks to describe “what is” the case in a society or group. It is the domain of anthropologists, sociologists, and historians.
  • Question: “What do people in culture X think is right?”
  • Example: Studying and documenting the moral codes of the Maasai tribe in Africa.
• Meta-Ethics: This branch investigates the nature of morality itself. It does not prescribe what is right or wrong but explores the meaning of ethical language and the nature of moral facts.
  • Question: “What does ‘right’ or ‘good’ even mean? Are moral truths objective?”
  • Example: Analyzing whether the statement “Murder is wrong” is a statement of objective fact or an expression of subjective feeling.
• Normative Ethics: This branch is concerned with establishing moral standards and principles that determine what is right and wrong conduct. It seeks to provide a framework for how one “ought” to act.
  • Question: “What is the ‘right’ thing to do?”
  • Example: Major normative theories include Consequentialism (e.g., Utilitarianism), Deontology (e.g., Kantian ethics), and Virtue Ethics (e.g., Aristotelian ethics).
• Applied Ethics: This branch involves the practical application of normative ethical theories to specific, often controversial, real-life issues.
  • Question: “How do we apply moral principles to situation X?”
  • Example: Bioethics (debates on euthanasia, abortion), Environmental Ethics (moral obligations to the environment), Business Ethics (corporate social responsibility), and Media Ethics.

---

Prelims Pointers

• Aristotle’s concept of Phronesis refers to practical wisdom in applying ethical principles.
• Émile Durkheim coined the term “conscience collective” to refer to a society’s shared beliefs and moral attitudes.
• Ethical Relativism is the view that moral standards are dependent on culture, society, or time period.
• Ethical Absolutism holds that certain moral principles are universal and unchanging.
• Social reformers who challenged societal ethics include Raja Ram Mohan Roy (against Sati), M.K. Gandhi (Ahimsa), and Savitribai Phule (women’s education).
• Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829 was a key legal reform driven by moral campaigning.
• Hannah Arendt used the phrase “banality of evil” to describe how ordinary people can commit atrocities by not thinking ethically.
• Moral evaluation applies primarily to voluntary actions.
• Divine Command Theory states that ethics originate from God’s commands.
• The Euthyphro dilemma, from a Platonic dialogue, questions the foundation of religion-based ethics.
• Examples of religious ethical frameworks: Niskama Karma (Hinduism), Eightfold Path (Buddhism), Anekantavada (Jainism).
• Jonathan Haidt’s work supports the idea of moral intuition, where gut feelings often precede moral reasoning.
• Constitutional Morality is a term associated with Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, referring to adherence to the constitutional ethos above other moralities.
• The “living tree” doctrine suggests that a constitution must be interpreted organically to adapt to changing times.
• The three determinants of the morality of a human act are: 1. Object (the act itself), 2. Circumstances (the context), and 3. Purpose (the intention).
• Aristotle’s concept of Eudaimonia refers to human flourishing or ultimate happiness achieved through a virtuous life.
• The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 decriminalized the act of attempting suicide in India.
• Four Dimensions of Ethics:
  1. Descriptive Ethics: Describes what people believe is right.
  2. Meta-Ethics: Analyzes the meaning of moral concepts.
  3. Normative Ethics: Prescribes what is right.
  4. Applied Ethics: Applies principles to real-world problems.

---

Mains Insights

Analytical Perspectives

• The Tension between Ethical Relativism and Universal Human Rights:
  • While ethics is context-dependent (relativism), the post-World War II consensus, embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), posits certain inalienable rights and ethical principles as universal.
  • Debate: How does one reconcile respect for cultural diversity (a tenet of relativism) with the condemnation of practices like Female Genital Mutilation or honor killings, which violate universal human rights? This is a central challenge in international relations and global ethics. For a civil servant, this translates to balancing community sensitivities with the implementation of universal legal principles.
• Constitutional Morality vs. Societal Morality:
  • Cause-Effect: In a diverse and evolving society like India, societal morality (often rooted in tradition and religion) frequently clashes with constitutional morality (rooted in liberty, equality, and fraternity).
  • Examples: The Supreme Court’s judgments on the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple and the decriminalization of homosexuality (Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, 2018) upheld constitutional morality against prevailing societal norms.
  • Significance: This dynamic is crucial for governance. It implies that the role of the state and the judiciary is not merely to reflect popular opinion but to uphold and champion the foundational ethics of the constitution, even when it is unpopular.
• The Role of Intuition in Administrative Decision-Making:
  • Dilemma: Should a civil servant rely on quick, empathetic moral intuition or on slow, deliberate, rule-based reasoning?
  • Intuition (System 1 Thinking): Can lead to faster, more compassionate decisions, especially in crises. It is linked to emotional intelligence. However, it can also be biased, subjective, and inconsistent.
  • Reason (System 2 Thinking): Ensures objectivity, fairness, and adherence to procedure (rule of law). However, it can be slow, bureaucratic, and may lack a human touch.
  • Insight: Effective administrators need to cultivate both. They must use reasoned analysis to check their intuitive biases while allowing empathy and intuition to humanize their application of rules.
• The Dialectic of Individual Conscience and Societal Ethics:
  • Relationship: History is propelled by individuals whose personal morals (conscience) conflict with and eventually transform societal ethics. The examples of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nelson Mandela illustrate this.
  • Implication for Governance: This highlights the importance of protecting the right to dissent and freedom of conscience. It also suggests that a healthy society is not one with perfect conformity, but one that allows for ethical challenges to its own norms, facilitating progress. For an individual, it raises the question: When is it a moral duty to disobey an unjust law or societal norm?

Answering the Sample Questions

• Q1. The crisis of ethical values in modern times is traced to a narrow perception of the good life. Discuss.
  • Introduction: Define the “crisis of ethical values” (e.g., rising corruption, materialism, environmental degradation). Posit that this crisis stems from a modern, narrow perception of the “good life.”
  • Body Paragraph 1: The Narrow Perception of the Good Life:
    • Define this narrow view: Equating success with material wealth, consumerism, and hedonistic pleasure.
    • Mention causes: Globalization, market economy’s influence, decline of community life.
    • Effect: This leads to treating others as means to an end (Kant’s warning), prioritizing profit over people and planet, and a rise in instrumental values over intrinsic values.
  • Body Paragraph 2: How this Perception Causes Ethical Crisis:
    • Individual level: Leads to stress, envy, and a lack of inner peace.
    • Societal level: Promotes corruption (the end justifies the means), crony capitalism, and environmental exploitation (tragedy of the commons).
    • Governance: Leads to policy-making focused solely on economic metrics (like GDP) at the cost of social well-being and environmental sustainability.
  • Body Paragraph 3: The Broader, Ethical Perception of the Good Life:
    • Contrast the narrow view with a broader one: Aristotle’s Eudaimonia (flourishing), Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach (freedom to achieve), Gandhian ideal of Sarvodaya (welfare of all).
    • This view includes virtues like compassion, integrity, service, and ecological consciousness.
  • Conclusion: Reiterate that a shift from a narrow, materialistic definition of the good life to a broader, more ethical one is essential to address the modern crisis of values and build a more just and sustainable society.
• Q2. Discuss the significance of ethics with respect to individual and societal well-being.
  • Introduction: Define ethics as the normative science of human conduct and state that its significance is profound for both the individual and the society at large, forming the bedrock of personal fulfillment and social harmony.
  • Body Paragraph 1: Significance for Individual Well-being:
    • Psychological: Provides inner peace, reduces cognitive dissonance, and builds self-esteem.
    • Decision-Making: Offers a framework for making sound judgments, especially in complex dilemmas.
    • Personal Growth: Encourages development of virtues, leading to character building and self-actualization (Maslow’s hierarchy).
    • Social: Fosters trust and strengthens interpersonal relationships.
  • Body Paragraph 2: Significance for Societal Well-being:
    • Governance: Ethics is the foundation of good governance, ensuring accountability, impartiality, and public trust (cite Nolan Committee principles).
    • Social Cohesion: A shared ethical framework promotes peace, cooperation, and social solidarity, reducing conflict.
    • Justice and Equity: Ethical principles of justice and fairness drive the creation of an inclusive society with equitable distribution of resources.
    • Progress and Sustainability: Ethics of care and responsibility motivate society to pursue progressive social reforms and sustainable development.
  • Conclusion: Conclude by summarizing that ethics is not an abstract luxury but a practical necessity. It acts as the invisible thread that binds a good person to a good life and a good society to a just and prosperous future. Without it, both individual and societal well-being would crumble.