By S.Belen
Education Consultant, Department of Education, Jakarta
Introduction
I
already read Damianus Abun’s article entitled Moral Relativism, Universalism /
Absolutism and the Teaching of the Church on Catholic Morality in AERA Research
Journal, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 2010.
Dami’s
analysis is profound and systematic leading to a clear conclusion about his stand to defend moral
universalism, specifically from Catholic Church’s point of view. He starts his
writing by illustrating discussion with his students about whether morality is
universal or relative. He then points out the definition of descriptive
morality and normative morality and classifies moral relativism into three
categories, i.e. descriptive relativism, meta-ethical relativism and normative
relativism. He shows the history of opinions on this issue, from Protagoras (as
mentioned by Plato, 1591 B.C.), Herodotus (484 – 420 B.C.), David Hume and
Edward Westermarck.
Allow
me to comment this issue from other perspectives to enrich Dami’s standpoint.
Those perspectives are the relation between morality and human brain, the need
for rational analysis and the problem of executing moral values in business.
Morality and human brain
- Success principle: every
human being is designed to reach success, not failure.
- Imitation principle: every
human being likes to imitate every thing, including language, motions,
elder brother or sister, animal, machine sound, a variety of natural
sounds, friend, teacher and parents.
- Synergy principle: human
brain is synergic, continuously develops. Illustration: 1+1=2+. In this system ”2+” can be equal
to 3, 5, 224, some millions or unlimited. Human brain has unlimited
potentials. From baby to old person, an individual can continuously
develop his / here spiral thought and learn in a synergy along his / her
life.
- Trial
and success principle: an individual is inclined to follow these following
steps in achieving success, i.e. trial – event – feedback – check - adjust
– succeed.
- Perseverance principle: perseverance is a
vital intelligence, a learning machine, thinking and creativity.
- Radial thinking principle:
human brain thinks to all directions like a light bulb shines rays to all
directions.
- Brain as a mechanism of
truth seeking: human brain does this for the survival of an individual.
The
seventh principle is related to moral values. According to this principle, a
baby for example should know that fire can burn or a knife can cut finger. If
the baby does not know, the chance for survival decreases or even the baby will
die. When brain says about truth, the body becomes responsive and all senses
work more strongly and stress decreases significantly. Truth is a necessity for
the brain. Therefore, many popular genius figures see their life goal as a
“truth seeker” in science, arts, philosophy, religion and technology. Unsurprisingly,
many heroes and noble figures, saints, state leaders and community leaders
frequently say that the goal of their struggle is to build or uphold truth, to
protect and sustain life. (Tony Buzan, 2003; Cf. Tony Buzan 2001).
This
research result shows that human being keeps striving to reach the truth. And,
one of important truths is the universalism of morality. The history of
humanity shows that people from generation to generation always develop moral
principles and their implementation in real life in many spheres of life for
the betterment of humanity. Long time ago slavery was accepted but now slavery
is rejected. In the past racism was allowed but nowadays racism is rejected.
More and more countries apply death penalty in state laws. Harder sanctions are
taken to punish rapists in the countries all around the world. Those examples
indicate the prevalence of moral universalism over that of moral relativism
throughout the history of mankind.
Rational analysis is needed
Moral
relativism has two components, i.e. the negative: “there are no universal moral
rules” and the positive: “right and wrong is relative to the society in which
the person lives”. On the other hand, absolutists or proponents of moral
universalism argue that there are basic universal rules, e.g. “murder is wrong”.
Let’s see one example.
The
relativists say that the habit of killing an old parent who is very ill whilst
healing cure is impossible by his / her child in Eskimo community is not wrong
according to the moral value of Eskimo people. From moral universalism / absolutism
point of view, murder is wrong. However, in this case we cannot judge this
action as immoral because a seriously rational analysis will conclude that a greater
value underlying this action is honor to parents as an obligation of a child.
This value is morally right. This is a more important moral value. Thus,
although from a simple perspective the murder action is immoral but this action
can be accountable for the child to stop a long painful suffering of his / her
parent in very cold temperature of North Pole. This action is motivated by a
right and important moral value.
This case shows that to determine an action whether it is moral or immoral should be conducted by using reason, logic, concepts, rational explanation and public discussion to analyze problem and to find an answer.
In general and specifically in business there are at least four major sources of moral values, namely religion, philosophy, culture and law.
In reality it can be seen that there are global differences in moral practices or ethics. Pluralism applies. There are different ethical theories for guiding moral decision making. Additionally, it seems that culture and economic development drive global differences.
Kohlberg also proposes a model of moral development across cultures, which shows a type of hierarchy from the bottom to the top, i.e. (1) obedience and punishment, (2) individualism and reciprocity, (3) interpersonal conformity, (4) social system / law and order, (5) social contract, and (6) universal ethical / moral principles. From observation in a variety of cultures, it can be concluded that stages 1 to 4 apply to various cultures whilst stages 5 and 6 apply only in a limited cultures.
In terms of economic development and how it affects ethics, the tendency is that there is a correlation between higher levels of economic development and the application of higher standards of ethics. This idea is based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
Midgley argues against relativism by saying that it results in an inability to judge anything, including relativism, since relativism is a judgment against making condemnations of other cultures. It shows internal inconsistency because if one culture believes that it is all right to condemn other cultures, by relativist standards, there’s no way to tell them to stop immoral practices.
On the other hand, Tom Donaldson argues against absolutism or universalism by saying that it is not respectful, ignores local context and assumes one set of concepts overrides all others.
Donaldson’s Hyperrnorms emphasizes three human values, namely respect for human dignity, respect for basic rights and good citizenship. In terms of respect for human dignity, people should be treated as ends in themselves. For example, corporate culture that respects customers and suppliers and safe products, services and workplace.
In terms of respect for basic rights, a business
enterprise must support and protect rights of employees, customers and
community and must avoid relationships that violate people’s rights to health,
education, safety and adequate standard of living.
In terms of good citizenship, a company should support
essential social institutions, such as economic system and education system,
and works with other organizations to protect the environment.
According to Donaldson’s Hypernorms Model, in reality it
seems that there is still a moral free space. A corporate is obliged to allow
local units to adapt to local standards and to support efforts to decrease
corruption.
In implementing supernorms, corporate standards are accepted as absolutes and a corporate should deliberate conditions of acceptance of buyers and suppliers and the corporate should support efforts to decrease corruption. From another point of view, Donaldson’s arguments really show the prevalence of moral universalism. Although the implementation of moral norms or standards is not perfect, a corporate is demanded to rectify the implementation, such as by supporting efforts to decrease corruption.
From international point of view, it can be stated
that there is an evolution among business enterprises to reach universal
principles which can be realized globally in various cultures. (Source: http://www.unglobalcompact.org/).
One reason for this symptom is pointed out by Pojman. Because of limitations in
resources, intelligence, knowledge, rationality and sympathy, the social fabric
tends to become chaos. Morality is anti-entropic: it counters the set of
limitations, expands our sympathies, and contributes to the betterment of the
human predicament.
One important example of international efforts to
implement moral universalism is UN Global Compact. This was founded by Kofi
Annan in 1999 through international ethics guide which should be known by
managers. At least there are 2900 firms in over 100 countries already signed
this consensus.
This guide consists of ten universal principles within four categories, i.e. human rights, labor standards, environment and anti-corruption. The vision of this guide is a more sustainable and inclusive global economics. Company can use this as a platform to develop their own specific codes of conduct. In their annual reports, the companies publish how they are promoting the ten principles in their businesses.
Human Rights
• Principle 8: Promote greater environmental responsibility; and
• Principle 9: Encourage development & diffusion of environment-friendly technologies.
Moral universalism appeals to draw on collective views of multiple societies and cultures to place clear boundaries on what constitutes moral business behavior and immoral business behavior. A multinational company can apply a code of ethics more or less evenly across its worldwide operations.
On the other hand, according to the school of moral relativism, different societies/cultures/countries put more/less emphasis on some values than others, have different standards of right and wrong and have different social mores and behavioral norms. What is moral or immoral must be judged in light of local customs and social mores and can vary from one country to another.
A most risky moral problem faced by multinational companies is payment of bribes and kickbacks as part of business transactions.
Therefore, moral relativism applies multiple sets of moral standards. The proponents of this thought maintain that there are only a few moral absolutes to judge a company’s conduct in various countries. Conversely, there are plenty of situations where moral norms are contoured to fit local customs and traditions, local beliefs about what are fair and local standards of “right” and “wrong”. They also note that moral problems in business cannot be fully resolved without appealing to the shared convictions of the parties in question. The rule of this school of thought is “when in Rome, do as the Romans do.”
Social contracts theory maintains adherence to universal or first-order moral norms should always take precedence over local or second-order norms.
Relativism (individual, group & culture based notions of right & wrong) and absolutism (universal law of right and wrong) are at extreme ends of the moral spectrum. However, pluralism holds that there are different ethical theories for guiding moral decision making.
Both social contracts theory and pluralism, from another point of view, show that although the big debate on relativism or universalism of morality is not yet finished, mankind keeps striving to improve moral standard implementation. Moral universalism prevails and the perfection process of moral universalism in this global world still evolves. Love as a main menu of human brain and brain as a mechanism of truth seeking are a pillar of this evolution. Let’s be optimistic!
“Good Will, Duty, and the
Categorical Imperative”, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), file powerpoint (ppt)
Business 303 Sheppard, Business Society & Ethics,
Week 10:
Business Ethics, file ppt
Buzan Tony (2001). Head First, 10 Way to Tap into Your Natural Genius, Bahasa Indonesia version by T.Hermaya: “Head First, 10 cara memanfaatkan 99% kehebatan otak Anda yang selama ini belum pernah Anda gunakan, Jakarta: Gramedia, 2003.
Mistakes in Moral Reasoning, file ppt
Multinational Companies, file ppt.
Railton Peter, Normative Guidance and Moral Motivation, Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan, Oslo, October 2008, file ppt
Strategy, Ethics,
and Social Responsibility, Screen graphics created by
Jana F. Kuzmicki, Ph.D., Troy University-Florida Region, The McGraw Hill
Companies, 2007. file ppt
Week Three: The Morality of Human Rights, file ppt
In implementing supernorms, corporate standards are accepted as absolutes and a corporate should deliberate conditions of acceptance of buyers and suppliers and the corporate should support efforts to decrease corruption. From another point of view, Donaldson’s arguments really show the prevalence of moral universalism. Although the implementation of moral norms or standards is not perfect, a corporate is demanded to rectify the implementation, such as by supporting efforts to decrease corruption.
This guide consists of ten universal principles within four categories, i.e. human rights, labor standards, environment and anti-corruption. The vision of this guide is a more sustainable and inclusive global economics. Company can use this as a platform to develop their own specific codes of conduct. In their annual reports, the companies publish how they are promoting the ten principles in their businesses.
Human Rights
•
Principle 1: Support & respect the protection of
internationally proclaimed human rights; and
•
Principle 2: Do not comply with others in human rights abuses.
Labor Standards
•
Principle 3: Uphold freedom of association;
•
Principle 4: Eliminate forced labor;
•
Principle 5: Abolish child labor; and
•
Principle 6: Eliminate discrimination in employment.
Environment
•
Principle 7: Support a precautionary approach to environmental
challenges;• Principle 8: Promote greater environmental responsibility; and
• Principle 9: Encourage development & diffusion of environment-friendly technologies.
Anti-Corruption
•
Principle 10: Work against all forms of corruption, including
extortion & bribery.
(Business 303
Sheppard, Business Society & Ethics, Week 10: Global Ethical Dilemmas).
The big debate on relativism or universalism of
morality or the question whether moral standards are universal or dependent on
local norms results in three schools of thought, namely moral universalism, moral
relativism and integrative social contracts theory. According to the school of moral universalism, same
standards of what is moral and what is immoral resonate with people of most
societies regardless of local traditions and
cultural norms. Consequently, common moral standards can be used to
judge conduct of personnel at companies operating in a variety of country
markets and cultural circumstances.
Examples of universal moral principles or norms are,
honesty, trustworthiness, treating people with dignity and respect, respecting
rights of others, practicing the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you. Pojman), avoiding unnecessary harm to workers and users of a
company’s product or service, and respecting the environment.
Moral universalism appeals to draw on collective views of multiple societies and cultures to place clear boundaries on what constitutes moral business behavior and immoral business behavior. A multinational company can apply a code of ethics more or less evenly across its worldwide operations.
On the other hand, according to the school of moral relativism, different societies/cultures/countries put more/less emphasis on some values than others, have different standards of right and wrong and have different social mores and behavioral norms. What is moral or immoral must be judged in light of local customs and social mores and can vary from one country to another.
A most risky moral problem faced by multinational companies is payment of bribes and kickbacks as part of business transactions.
Therefore, moral relativism applies multiple sets of moral standards. The proponents of this thought maintain that there are only a few moral absolutes to judge a company’s conduct in various countries. Conversely, there are plenty of situations where moral norms are contoured to fit local customs and traditions, local beliefs about what are fair and local standards of “right” and “wrong”. They also note that moral problems in business cannot be fully resolved without appealing to the shared convictions of the parties in question. The rule of this school of thought is “when in Rome, do as the Romans do.”
The third school of thought is the concept of
integrative social contracts theory. According to
this school of thought, the moral standards a company should try to uphold are
governed by both limited number
of universal moral principles that are widely recognized as putting legitimate moral
boundaries on actions and behavior in all situations and the circumstances of local cultures, traditions, and shared
values that further prescribe what constitutes morally permissible behavior and what does not.
Integrative
social contracts theory appeals that universal moral principles establish
“moral free space” based on the collective view of multiple societies and
cultures. Commonly held views about morality and moral principles are used to combine
to form a “social contract” with society.
It is appropriate for societies or companies to go beyond universal moral
principles and specify local or second-order moral norms. Where firms have
developed moral codes, the standards they call for provide appropriate moral guidance.
Social contracts theory maintains adherence to universal or first-order moral norms should always take precedence over local or second-order norms.
Relativism (individual, group & culture based notions of right & wrong) and absolutism (universal law of right and wrong) are at extreme ends of the moral spectrum. However, pluralism holds that there are different ethical theories for guiding moral decision making.
Both social contracts theory and pluralism, from another point of view, show that although the big debate on relativism or universalism of morality is not yet finished, mankind keeps striving to improve moral standard implementation. Moral universalism prevails and the perfection process of moral universalism in this global world still evolves. Love as a main menu of human brain and brain as a mechanism of truth seeking are a pillar of this evolution. Let’s be optimistic!
Readings:
15, Managing Ethical and Social Responsibility
Challenges in Bumper Sticker Ethics S
Wilkens, file ppt
Business Ethics, file ppt
Buzan Tony (2001). Head First, 10 Way to Tap into Your Natural Genius, Bahasa Indonesia version by T.Hermaya: “Head First, 10 cara memanfaatkan 99% kehebatan otak Anda yang selama ini belum pernah Anda gunakan, Jakarta: Gramedia, 2003.
Buzan Tony (2003). Head Strong, Bahasa Indonesia version by Susi
Purwoko, Memperkuat hubungan otak-tubuh untuk mendapatkan fisik dan mental yang
fit, Jakarta: Gramedia, 2003.
Global Ethical Dilemmas,
file ppt http://www.unglobalcompact.org/
Introduction to Ethics, Comp. Ethics, Intro to Ethics/2,
file ppt
Introduction to World Religions, RLG 201a, file ppt
Steines John F, Business,
Government, and Society, Chapter 7, file ppt
Louis P.Pojman, Ethics:
discovering right and wrong Marketing Ethics, file ppt
Railton Peter, Normative Guidance and Moral Motivation, Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan, Oslo, October 2008, file ppt
Rejecting ‘cultural’ justifications for violence
against women, A Consultation Paper by the Research Programme Consortium on
‘Women’s Empowerment in Muslim Contexts: Gender, Poverty and Democratisation from the Inside Out’ (WEMC), file ppt
‘Women’s Empowerment in Muslim Contexts: Gender, Poverty and Democratisation from the Inside Out’ (WEMC), file ppt
Week Three: The Morality of Human Rights, file ppt
No comments:
Post a Comment