Ethical Choices - Doing the Right Thing Because..

[packsaddle]

Eamonn, I saw similar instances while I was working for the military-industrialist complex. But your story has one huge difference...after reading it I have an incredible desire for a huge plate of crab legs. Mmmmmm.

 

Fuzzy, I don't buy the comparison. The car bombers (and anyone else who rationalizes hurting innocent people) are suffering from self-deceptions if they think they are serving some higher power. I think fear and self-hatred are the roots of this behavior but I am not an expert on the matter. It simply is the only way I can explain their irrational behavior in my mind.

Mother Theresa, OTOH, may or may not be engaged in a self-deception but regardless, her actions exemplify what we want everyone to be like. There was a better example a couple of thousand years ago who just wanted everyone to be nice to each other. So we killed him. Have a nice day

[Fuzzy Bear]

Pack,

 

The Comparison is actually a contrast between CB's and MT as proposed by SScout. The idea is that all moral (systems) are not practical or ones that lead people in a suitable direction. It is imperative that each individual carefully weigh the practicality of how they make choices.

 

There are those that might believe that Mother Theresa was irrational but then that argument might not be as acceptable to those she helped. The fact that she was held in high esteem throughout the world points to a different conclusion from irrationality.

 

Sainthood does not come cheaply and if one believes that simply blowing themselves up achieves some kind of saintly distinction, then they have been lead to believe in a moral system that lacks a basic understanding of humanity. That type of religion should be labeled amoral. FB

 

 

 

[Beavah]

Yah, and all this hifalutin' stuff gets us back to Eamonn's original question, eh?

 

Da boys will make choices; we can't do anything about that.

 

All we can do is try to set things up so that the odds are better that they'll make good choices.

 

We do that by our caring for them and our example.

 

We do that by community rules and expectations.

 

We do that by occasional recognition for exemplary choices.

 

We do that by consistent consequences for poor choices.

 

All of these things are tools to help boys learn to make choices on their own, yah? None should be dismissed.

 

Even Mother Theresa's religious order, with her inspiring example, lives by a set of Rules. Maybe dat's an important ingredient of what separates them from homicidal bombers, eh?

 

[SSScout]

So...

The person who stops to change a strangers tire...

The person who dedicates their life to inspiring and helping the poor and sick, using all their resources (to the point of being nearly destitute)...

The person who seeks to bring peace to war torn areas, at the cost of his life (remember Tom Fox? and others)...

The person who makes billions (with a B)of dollars, by his inventing and organizing skills, who then finances many other people to do many good things (by our own definition of "good")...

The father who sleeps less than he should to work at three jobs so his children will wake up to a college education...

The fire fighter who RUNS up the stairs into the burning house...

 

These folks are different from the fellow whose first question is "whats in it for me?" in what way?

 

And how (HOW) has the car bomber been convinced that his/her action will benefit... who? Not him/herself... his/her family? nation?

 

How (not why) , how is it done?

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

SSS,

Change your questions into statements and then share with us your moral code.

FB

[Beavah]

I think SSS's point is that the firefighter running into the building requires the same notion of self-sacrifice as the bomber running into the building. Jim Jones' Guyana compound is, at some level, a very similar self-sacrifice as da martyrs at Masada.

 

The worst evil is often a reflection and mockery of the most generous good. The actions, commitment, and sacrifice are similar, eh? So is the language in some cases. Only the goals and results differ.

[SSScout]

Thank you.

Fuzzy: I think the questions are almost always more important than the answers. I think we (our society) loses sight of why our enemy is like he/she is at our greater peril. If we only want to destroy them, then we lose the possibilty of ultimately convincing them of our friendship (or is that something we really want?). Do we prefer them DEAD or our possibly forgiven FRIENDS?

 

I ask the questions because 1) I do not pretend to fully understand the possible answers and

2)I like to hear the further wisdom of my fellow forumites. You all make me THINK, which leads me to play the Devils Advocate on occasion. YOU help ME understand myself... ( BTW, I recommend "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain)

 

So if the suicide bomber sees his/her sacrifice as somehow benefitting his/her family/community/nation (if only by example?),HOW has he/she been taught to come to this point? What makes our rules/examples/teaching/Scoutmaster Minutes/counseling effective in getting our boys (and girls!) to "sacrifice" their lives to BUILD rather than DESTROY?

 

I just finished watching the last two episodes of "Victory at Sea" with our son. This is part of his home schooling, history class. Trying to explain to him WHY the young Kamakaze pilots thought it necessary/appropriate to dive their planes into the atacking US ships was hard. Drive off the enemy and defend the home islands at all cost? Glory and honor in death? Reward in heaven? Loyalty to the Emporer? Loyalty to the other soldiers/pilots that had gone before?

After what the Japanese military had done to their neighboring nations, son wanted to know why these pilots (not so much older than son) would even WANT to fight the US. Didn't they know how wrong they (the Japanese) had been? (of course not). Try to explain the South East Asia Coprosperity Sphere and the Japanese belief in their "destiny"...

 

Back to Scouts: "...gather the clan that cheerful service brings to fellow man..." I think I remember that right. The self centered boy (gimme my Gameboy back!) may eventually get "out of himself" if we keep at it.

 

Fuzzy: My "moral code"? I've often felt that if everyone who espouses Christanity actually followed Christs example and teaching, there could be no wars...

 

YiS.

 

[Fuzzy Bear]

Thanks SSS.

 

There is a problem with defining a good moral code. If a good moral code is based on subtly, then few will be able to understand the differences and few will follow. I suggest a simple principle of "do no harm" which allows people to understand that every choice is weighed in the light of the impact of their actions.

 

We have discussed in the past if there is a difference between murder and killing, such as is done in a war. The idea is that if a person is protecting their family, country, and their God, then it is acceptable to kill. One example used is, if we had not stopped Hitler, then most of the world would have been murdered. Another example is the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan, if we had not dropped the bombs, then we would have lost thousands of our soldiers in trying to end the war.

 

Most of what we do is not based on stopping a Hitler or ending a World War. We generally are confronted with how we are going to treat our neighbor or another person on this Forum. When it comes to ending a life for any reason then most of us put that on the end of a very long list of things not to do or to even think about, unless we are forced to figure it out.

 

Jesus appeared to dismiss wars as the standard of human conduct but encouraged people to love one another, 'you have heard that you should love your neighbor and hate your enemy but I say, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you , do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you. This is done so that you may become sons of your father who is in heaven. Rewards are not heaped upon people that love only those that just love them. Jesus asked each person to do something that is entirely against their human nature. Few examples are to be found. FB(This message has been edited by Fuzzy Bear)

[Eamonn]

I of course am to young to have been around when BP and the founders of Scouting were doing their thing.

I really think BP and the others were way ahead of their times and to me seem to have had a good grasp and understanding of Boys, especially when I try to understand and think about the times and attitudes of the times when they were doing their thing.

As a Kid growing up they seemed a lot more understanding than the adults I had to deal with.

My Irish-catholic upbringing and education was not what anyone would term as "Jolly" by any means. As a kid growing up in the early 1960's. I seen in the media lots of stuff about Free Love and all that other stuff. But I was expected to be seen and not heard.

I don't think I did the right thing because it was the right thing. - I think I done it because I was scared.

Scared that if I got caught that I'd end up in hot water, scared that Sister Mary- Matthew would whack me, scared that if my parents found out that Sister had whacked me, they would add a whacking and scared if I got away with it and God got me before I'd made it to the confessional that I'd up in purgatory or worse still end up spending eternity with fire and damnation.

Sure we did things that were supposed to be good. Every Lent I took home my little Save The Children Box and collected pennies for what was then "The Little Black Babies". I filled the box, but all the time I was thinking that it wasn't fair -Heck them pennies could be spent on something important -Me!!

I don't think I gave a tinkers about ethics.

My philosophy for life was based on "Only the mugs get caught."

The easiest way not to get caught was not to do it in the first place.

Doing the right thing wasn't about doing it because it was right, it was doing it because there was less fuss that way.

At times I know OJ, does what is expected of him not for any other reason other than to get people off his back.

This isn't ethics at work, there is nothing "Good" about it or in it.

Right now I can't think what it is called?

I like to think I care about the people I meet and work for, a lot of them and their families thank me for taking the time to explain things and go over things with them. At times my boss tells me that I'm getting too involved. I'll admit that there are some people that I seem to warm up to more than others and there are a few that I consider to be real pains. Still I try to do my best for all of them, even the pains.

I don't get anything extra for doing this, I'm not going to lose my job if I stop.

Maybe deep down I'm like the guy who helped change the tire and I hope that one day someone will do the same for me.

Eamonn.

[FireKat]

You can chew this topic till the cows come home but it all boils down to the teaching of Jesus in the Golden Rule:

 Do unto others as you would have them do to you.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Chewing on an issue concerning morals and reducing it to the smallest morsel is important and something that people have pondered over for centuries. Let's assume that the Golden Rule is all of it in a nutshell. Now then, since it goes directly against human nature to act in someone else's behalf just as well as you would do for yourself, does that fix it? If it were so simple, then Mother Teresa would be just another face in the crowd of millions of Do Gooders.

 

Here is another point that should not be overlooked about M.T. Sainthood had to be based on a miracle. It was discussed how one woman was cured of stomach cancer because M.T.'s picture was shown to her. The woman was healed. The husband said that it was medical intervention that healed his wife and then later recanted. I am totally mystified by this story because Sainthood should have had nothing to do with a picture miracle. The miracle was how she was able to live a life of continually giving to others instead of herself. I believe that somehow those decision makers in the Catholic Church have overlooked a crucial element of Sainthood and that is how a person lives their whole life should determine Sainthood. There would be fewer Saints.

 

The question is still alive and well. How do we transfer a good set of morals to another person and obviously we then must learn how to recognize ourselves. FB

 

[packsaddle]

OK, the boys will indeed make some poor choices along the way, in spite of knowledge to the contrary. I sure did and fortunately there were some very tolerant and understanding adults around that allowed me to straighten up and fly right. A poor choice or decision doesn't necessarily mean they don't know the right thing to do, they just yield to temptation or poor judgement once in a while. For example, they know not to steal but if I leave a bag of candy untended at a meeting, I guarantee it will be raided before the meeting is over. At some level, conscience not withstanding, they are very similar to raccoons. Nevertheless, they know it is wrong and I think possession of conscience is the essential ingredient from which we craft ethical decision-making. Occasionally, conscience seems to be absent but not often.

 

I try to detect this in the boys the same way I detected it in my children. I occasionally confront them individually with situations that they might rationalize as an ethical gray area. Before they decide, I explain the choice in a way that removes the equivocation and clarifies the situation. When they make the right decision (almost every time) I know for certain they have the right ingredients. For that rare occasion when one of them doesn't, I know a lot more work is ahead.

[SSScout]

I have no argument with any of the thoughts presented so far. I think we are all in agreement that it is a good thing to teach our young'ns good from bad, give'm consequences for not doing what we think is "the right thing", understand they will make some bad decisions and forgive'm acordingly. BUT...

 

What is the difference in the TEACHING that leads one person to run into the burning house and perhaps give their life to save another, while someone else sacrefices their life to kill others? The first is universally named a hero, while the second might be called a hero in one cultural context and a mass murderer in another. Yet both have made "ethical" (moral?) decisions consistant with their cultural upbringing. That's one extreme end of the spectrum.

 

Is it purely 'fear', whether of Sister Mary Mathew or your dad or the law or your g(G)od? Is it example? I remember once having an adult friend of my father APOLOGIZE to me, a mere Scout, for a mistake he had made that only slightly affected me. But I remember that apology yet, so many years later, as an example of taking responsibility for ones actions, good or ill.

 

I was once told that the Hebrew people were so concerned with following God's commandments (and if you read enough of the Bible, I think you'll realize there were ALOT more than ten) to the letter, they lost sight of the spirit behind them. Is that part of the equation?

 

Wow, how does something that seems so natural, now seem so complicated?

 

'Course maybe I'm worried about the wrong thing. Maybe encouraging boys to return lost wallets or do their assigned chores willingly or admitting that requirement 2B of the merit badge was never done is different than not hitting your tent mate or willfully killing that blacksnake.

 

Wha'dya think, eh? Should I drop a couple bucks in that beggars hat or just not make eye contact as I walk by?

 

And how did Scouting fail those boys that grew up to be the child abusers mentioned lately in the "Headlines" section?

 

 

"Truth is much more convenient. You have so much less to remember."

 

YiS

[Fuzzy Bear]

The Hebrews did lose sight of their God and were punished several times over several centuries. The Hebrew decedents are alive and well and not just a few love and respect God and follow the commandments willingly.

 

Being good and teaching good is neither easy nor natural due to the basic nature of mankind. Even if one does not believe that mankind is unkind, it is difficult to find those individuals from any religion/culture/time period that show(ed) a wealth of goodness.

 

Scouting with its' Service to others, Good Turn, Scout Law, Eagle Scout, on and on should be counted as an organization that holds Peace first as well as the best elements in life.

 

As far as the beggar, don't make eye contact and don't drop a few dollars in their hat, humbly offer to teach him/her to fish. Probably, they will give you a couple of dollars to leave them alone.

 

 

FB