ETHICS AND HUMAN INTERFACE FINAL NOTES

Ethics and human interface: Essence, determinants and consequences of Ethics in

human actions; dimensions of Ethics; ethics in private and public relationship
Essence means intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of Ethics, especially ethics in
abstract, which determine its character. Now my notes from 1 to 6 and 16, 17, 18
come under this topic. I will work on Indian tradition also and very soon write notes on
them.
1. What is ethics?
2. Role of Ethics
3. Importance of Ethics
4. Why be Moral?
5. Nature and scope of ethics {Essence of ethics]
6. Morality and Ethics
16. Ethical Traditions
17. Religious Ethical Traditions
18. Secular ethical tradition
Determinants mean factors which decisively affect the nature or outcome of Ethics.
I didnt go in details here, so I think I will come back on this topic again while
discussing topic of Human values and lessons from the lives and teaching of great
leaders reformer and administrator in India and world; role of family ,society and
educational institutions in inculcating values.
7. Determinants of Ethics in Human action
11. GOD as determinant of Human Ethics: views and criticism
My notes 8,9,10 are helping tools plus some ethical concepts are precisely mentioned
there which will help a lot if we will remember them.
8. Some Concepts of Ethics [PART- 1]
9. Some Concepts of Ethics [PART- 2]
10. Some Concepts of Ethics [PART- 3]
Dimensions mean measurable extent of ethics or we can say level of ethics. Here I
tried to discuss some topics. But I know I didnt touch the topic personal ethics. I
think I will do it with Human values and lessons from the lives and teaching of great
leaders reformer and administrator in India and world,; role of family ,society and
educational institutions in inculcating values.
12. Dimensions of Ethics
13. The Ethical Dimension of Sustainability
14. Concept of sustainable development
15. Meaning of sustainability Ethics
19. Social dimension of Ethics
20. Characteristics of Ethics of sustainability
21. The ethical Principles of sustainability
22. Creating a culture of Ethics in Public sector
I have discussed some question on the topic ethics in private and public life. I
think this topic is related to the topic ethics and civil services. So I will try to
cover those questions when I will start this topic.
23. Ethics in Public life
24. Ethics in public and private life: Questions
25. Ethics in Private sector
26. Elements of organizational ethical culture
Ethics and Human Interface : What is ethics ? (Note 1)

Ethics comes from Greek word ethos means character, habit, culture, ways of
behavior etc.
Ethics is the systematic study of human actions from the point of view of its
rightfulness or wrongfulness as means for the attainment of the ultimate
happiness.
Ethics is the science what human ought to be as the reason of what one is. It
regulates and directs human life. It gives the right orientation to ones existence.
As a theory ethics provides the basic fundamental principles of moral judgment. .As
a practice it is concerned about the end to be gained and the means of attaining it.
Ethics is not only general and abstract rule of action (e.g. do good or avoid evil), but
also particular and concrete precepts (e.g. help the poor, obey legitimate authority, be
truthful, adultery is bad etc). These particular and concrete precepts come from
moral consciousness.
Ethics deals with voluntary actions of human means the actions done by human
consciously, deliberately and in view of an end.
Thus, ethics is not merely set of codes. It is to help one to find what is good and how
to get it.

Ethics and Human interface (Note 2 ) : Role of Ethics

In human behavior ethics role is to decide how human must behave. In human
activity ethics role is to decide how human ought to be act. In political and social
life ethics decides how humans life and institution must organize to be moral.
In economic life of human ethics deals with those activity which are the conditions of
the attainment of the highest end of life.

Ethics and Human interface (Note 3): Importance of Ethics

 1. Self realization = It helps a person to critically evaluate his /her actions,
choices and decisions. It assists a person in knowing what he/she really is and
what is best for him/her. It helps a person to decide what he/she should do
for the attainment of the best. This way it deepens the reflection of ultimate
question of life.
2. Improves thinking, perspective and judgments = It improves our thinking
about specific moral issues. It helps us to decide what should be correct
course of actions and what should be avoided. This way improves our
perspective and makes it more reflective and better throughout. This way one
can clarify moral position in making judgment.
3. Sharpen our general thinking processes = It trains our mind to think more
logically and reasonably. This way one can handle moral issues with greater
clarity.
Ethics and Human interface (Note 4 ) :Why be Moral ?
1. Deep desire for good = every person want to be good. Being moral helps
person to attain what is best for him / her.
2. Satisfactory human life = every institution designed for human good have
some rules and regulation based on moral principles. Being moral helps a person
to admire and follow rules. This way a person lives with peace and satisfaction
in concern institution.
3. To live a better life= Morality enhances ones life. It brings peace and
satisfaction which leads human being to live life better.
4. Sustains stability = Morality provides a common point of view. The common
point of view among people leads to agreement among them. If a person would
be moral he/she can have a agreement with other people. This way there will
be stability in society and other institution.
Theres a question arise of individual freedom .. How far the society can go
on demanding? Should it not respect the freedom of the individual? Is
morality made for man or man is made for morality?
Morality is concerned about our moral health. It seeks to enhance our lives, to
help us to live better lives. It tries to discover a more objective standpoint of
evaluation than that of purely personal preference.

Ethics and Human interface (Note 5) Essence of ethics

We know that today there is an agreement on some general principle whether it is
correct or not. So, we can say that there must be some general principles which are
self-evident or first principle.

There are three types of principles-

 1. First principle It is self-evident, intuitively known by all, and cannot be
deleted from human heart.

2. Secondary Principle- It is derived from first principles. It requires reflection.

3. Tertiary Principle-It requires study and discursive thoughts.

All moral Principles are derived from self evident principle. It is believed that there
must be some rule or law which enforces values and that is natural to human person,
intuitively known. This is called MORAL INSTUITIONISM.
Immediate data of moral consciousness cannot be denied, it is self-evident. If a
human person is moral conscious he/she must feel a moral obligation of human inter-
relatedness and that the norm for moral good. This moral consciousness is an integral
part of Human consciousness. Human consciousness is a process of becoming moral and
aware of self. The more person become conscious and aware he/she more becomes
conscious about what he/ she should be. This leads the emergence of moral precepts
or values.
Hence, moral precepts are derived from fundamental moral precepts. It is not mere
logical deduction or immediate inference. It is always present and continuously
developing in human consciousness. It is progressive development of human
consciousness. If it is not found in all human then it is possible with a passage of time
it can evolve when a person leads in a process of self fulfillment.

Love is a basic moral activity. Love is beginning of human moral life and also the end
gain. It is love for self that a person perfects himself as a human. Love is essential
basis in the process of self-fulfillment.
In evolutionary visions of human consciousness morality can be static and
alsodynamic. It is static in completely evolved society and dynamic in more or less
perfectly evolved society. . This way morality can be distinguished between absolute
and relative ethics. Absolute ethics is an ideal code of conduct formulating the
behavior of the completely adapted human person in the completely evolved
society. Relative ethics is the nearest approximation to this ideal according to the
more or less perfectly evolved society in which human person happens to find him/her.

Moral intuitions are the slowly organized. They are results of experience received by
the race. In other words an induction from experience handed down from one
generation to the other ends up by becoming an instinctive moral reaction. Evolution is
moving towards the emergence of the highest form of life.Happiness as the supreme
end of human person is the concomitant and virtue is the condition for its
attainment.
 Morality is affected by geographical, climatic and economic conditions. It is also
conditioned by religion. Almost every religion faced reform movement and then it
seems that changes brought by reforms are change in religious consciousness, but
indeed that is the change in religiously conditioned morality.
Legal and moral are different things. It is not necessary that something legal is
obviously moral. Legal means allowed by state. For example a secular state cannot
promote moral belief of one section against another in a pluralistic society.
Thus human and moral consciousness is always in a process of development and is
depended on physiological, cultural, social, psychological, environmental and other
factor.
Now , in search of objective moral truth one have to carefully distinguish between
Moral Relativity and Ethical Relativism .
Moral relativity is the view that different people in different cultures and civilization
have different moral beliefs and what is believed to be morally right at a given time
may be wrong in different time and place.
Ethical Relativism is the view that there is no basic moral principle , but what is
morally right is relative to individual or group concerned.
If it cannot give reasons but simply admits that it is strictly impossible to say what is
morally right and morally wrong it can be reasonably called Ethical Skepticism.
Human persons knowledge of self is a progressive and dynamic knowledge, always
tending towards a better and better understanding. In this sense human persons
knowledge of self is relative. And if this is true moral knowledge is also relative in so
far as it is progressive and far from complete. However an attentive study of the
evolution of human persons self-consciousness and of moral knowledge helps one
discover a certain constant progression.

Ethics and Human Interface ( Note 6) : Morality and Ethics

Although the words ethics and morality are often used interchangeably, moralityis
more precisely used to refer to the customs, principles of conduct and moral codes of
an individual, group or society. Ethics, also termed moral philosophyor the science
of morals, is the branch of philosophy that studies morality through the critical
examination of right and wrong in human action.

Ethics and Human Interface (Note 7) : Determinants of ethics in human action

1. Nature
2. A desire for living good
3. Childhood upbringing
4. Later life experience
 5. Religious belief
6. Discussions with other
7. Moral philosopher
8. a priori truth, i.e. like something that we have embedded in us as
knowledge
prior to any physical or social experience.

1. Self oriented interest

10. Creation of society
11. Situation
12. Ethical insight
13. Consequences

Ethics and Human Interface : (Note 8): Some Concepts of Ethics [ PART- 1]
This will help us to understand any book or article on ethics:

1. Absolute Ethics: It is an ideal code of conduct formulating the behavior of

completely adapted human person in completely evolved society.
2. Relative Ethics: It is the nearest approximation to the ideal code of conduct
according to more or less perfectly evolved society in which a happen to find
him /her.
3. Human consciousness: consciousness of an individual or a social being.
4. Moral consciousness: It is integral part of human consciousness.
5. Moral relativity: It is simply the view that different people especially in
different civilization and culture have different moral belief and what is
believed to be morally right at a given time and place may be wrong at
different time and place.
6. Ethical relativism: It is the philosophical theory that there is no fundamental
or universal moral norm or basic moral principle but what is morally right is
relative to individual or group of men.
7. Ethical skepticism: The situation in which one cant decide and give reason
what is ethically right or wrong.
8. Moral objectivism: It holds that at least some moral principles and rules are
objectively knowable on the basis of observation and human reasoning.
9. Universalism: It suggests that basic right and wrong is the same for
everyone,while also allowing for some variation in individual circumstances and
context.
10. Ethical absolutism: It is the view that there exists an eternal and
unchanging moral law that transcends the physical world and is the same for
 all people at all times and places (Holmes, 1993). In this view, moral rightness
and wrongness exist independent of human beings and unrelated to human
emotions and thought. There is an absolute source of truth that transcends
human rationality and choice
11. Deontology (from the Greek deon, meaning duty) refers to an ethical
theory or perspective based on duty or obligation. A deontological, or duty-
based, theory is one in which specific moral duties or obligations are seen as
self-evident, having intrinsic value in and of themselves and needing no
further justification.
12. Teleology (from the Greek telos, meaning goal or end) describes an ethical
perspective that contends the rightness or wrongness of actions is based
solely on the goodness or badness of their consequences. In a strict
teleological interpretation, actions are morally neutral when considered apart
from their consequences
13. Consequentialist : Concern for outcomes
14. Non-Consequentialist : Do not concern for outcomes
15. Principlism: Each principle represents a serious, though not absolute, moral
duty that must be weighed against other duties in resolving an ethical conflict or
dilemma.

Ethics and Human Interface (Note 9) : Some Concepts of Ethics [ PART-2 ]

16. Principle of Respect for Persons: It maintains that human beings have
intrinsic and unconditional moral worth and should always be treated as if there is
nothing of greater value than they are.
17. Principle of legal moralism: This allows society to render an act illegal on the
basis of social values and judgments.
19. Welfare principle: This allows autonomy to be restricted for the benefit of
others.
20. Principle of Non-maleficence: It states that we should act in ways that do not
inflict evil or cause harm to others. In particular, we should not cause avoidable or
intentional harm.
21. Principle of beneficence: It is often simply stated as an obligation to act in ways
that promote good.
22. Veracity: It is the principle of truth telling, and it is grounded in respect for
persons and the concept of autonomy.
23. The principle of fidelity: It broadly requires that we act in ways that are loyal.
This includes keeping our promises, doing what is expected of us, performing our
duties and being trustworthy.
24. Principles of Justice: requires that we act in ways that treat people equitably and
fairly. Actions that discriminate against individuals or a class of people arbitrarily or
without a justifiable basis would violate this basic principle.
25. Distributive justice: This conception of justice refers to an equitable balance
of benefits and burdens with particular attention to situations involving the allocation
of resources.
26. Principle of equality: It requires that all benefits and burdens be distributed
equally. The advantage to this conception of justice is that everyone is entitled to an
equal share of resources; however the principle becomes problematic when not
everyone is perceived as equally deserving of an equal share.
27. Principle of need: It suggests that resources should be distributed based on
need so that those with greater need will receive a greater share. In theory, this
supports the principle of equality in that everyone will end up with the same share of
goods.
28. Principle of contribution: It maintains that persons should benefit in proportion to
their individual contribution. Those who contribute proportionately more to the
production of goods should receive proportionately more goods in return.
29. Principle of effort: It recognizes the degree of effort made by an individual as
the determining factor in the proportion of goods to be received.
30. Procedural justice: It requires processes that are impartial and fair. This form of
justice underlies the requirement of due process when conducting disciplinary action
against an employee.
31. Compensatory justice: It involves compensation for wrongs or harms that have
been done.

Ethics and Human Interface : ): Some Concepts of Ethics [PART- 3]

32 .Virtue ethics : Virtue-based ethics does not rely directly on ethical principles in
its formulation. In virtue ethics, the focus is on the role of character as the source of
moral action. Human character is shaped over time by a combination of natural
inclinations and the influence of such factors as family, culture, education, and self-
reflection. This means that some people will be more likely to choose virtuous behavior
than will others.
33. Utilitarianism : a moral theory that defines a moral act solely in terms of the
outcome or consequences of that act. This teleological perspective is based on a single
guiding principle. The principle of utility, also referred to as the Greatest Happiness
Principle, states that actions are right if they produce the greatest balance of
happiness over unhappiness.
34. Natural rights : These are generally held to be a gift of nature or God that
cannot be taken away. Modern notions of natural rights are most closely associated
with the seventeenth century British philosopher John Locke and his contention that
human beings are entitled to life, liberty and property. In contemporary theory, these
and other moral claims have come to be referred to as universal human rights and
form the basis for establishing and/or evaluating ethical standards within the social
order.
35. Positive right :It is a right to receive a particular good or service from others .
Therefore, a positive right assumes that someone (individual or agency) is obligated to
do something for you.
36.Negative right :It is a right to be free from some action by others, so a
negative right obligates others to refrain from action.
37. Communitarian Ethics : Communitarianism refers to a theoretical perspective
that seeks to lessen the focus on individual rights and increase the focus on
communal responsibilities. The definition of community varies and can refer to
anything from the nuclear or extended family to the political state or nation. In
this approach, ethical thought is grounded in communal values, established social
standards and traditions and considerations of the larger society

Ethics and Human Interface :(Note 11 ) GOD as determinant of Human Ethics:

views and criticism
Divine Command Theory: Morally good actions are good because they are commanded
by God. Means:
The source of morality is God.

Something is good because it is Gods will.

If one wants to lead good life one should do what is Gods will.

Now the question is why does God command those morally good actions?
Socrates answer is that God commands them because they are good. But if this is so,
DCT must be wrong, because then there must be an independent standard of goodness
that God uses to decide which actions are good.
Plato concluded that God desires a thing because it is good. Gods will doesnt make a
thing good the thing would be good regardless of God.
But what if we instead say that there is no such independent standard that Gods will
determines which actions are good: the good ones are good because he has commanded
them?
If we will avoid the problem of independent standard for morality, it will invite three
new problems:

1. The problem of arbitrariness: According to divine command theory

[DCT] there is no any a standard on the basis of which god is deciding his will.
So, his decision seems arbitrary and he must be commanding on his whim. In
general, commands issued on a whim and for no good reason do not generate
moral obligations. Why think we have reason to follow the arbitrary commands
of a whimsical God?
2. The problem of triviality : As DCT claims, Gods will is the source of
goodness, to say God is good-willed is just to say that Gods will is as he wills it
to be. But that seems (at least close to) tautologies it seem like an empty
claim.
3. The problem of abhorrent commands: As DCT says god is source of morality
and there is no independent moral standard. DCT seems to entail that God
could have commanded us to rape, murder, and pillage, and then those actions
would have been good. But that seems clearly false those actions, surely,
could never have been good.
Hence , it seems like once we fix all of an actions natural properties how much pain
it causes, and who commits it, and why, and when, and whether any promises were
broken, etc., that should be enough to determine its moral properties: whether or not
its good. It doesnt seem like a good action might have had all the same natural
properties but might not have been good. But DCT seems to contradict this: DCT
suggests that had God willed differently, the same action that is in fact good might
have been bad, despite having all of the same natural properties.

The proposal that God doesnt command according to an independent moral standard
neednt entail his commands are arbitrary e.g., perhaps he commands as he does out
of love; and a loving God might not have been capable of issuing abhorrent commands.
And perhaps a divine command theorist could hold that if God had not loved, his
commands would not have given rise to moral obligations? (But why think this, if not
because we think only a loving Gods commands would live up to independent standards
of goodness?)

Ethics and Human Interface: (Note 12) Dimensions of Ethics

There are distinct levels or dimensions of ethics.
Personal Ethics
Organizational Ethics
Societal Ethics
 Ethics for future world i.e., a parallel world ethics
It is impossible, in the connected world of the early 21st. century, to contemplate one
without recognizing the influence on and by the other two. Personal ethics cannot be
separated from the organizational context in which most of us are destined to spend
the majority of our lives, be it working for a multinational corporation, a government
department or agency, a not-for-profit organization or simply volunteering at the local
pre-school. Humans are gregarious by nature and seek out the company of other
humans in communities that are increasingly focused around the workplace. Similarly,
organizations have to be sympathetic to the values and expectations of the wider
societal context in which they are embedded.

The fourth dimension belongs to tomorrows generations and consists of our ethical
accountabilities to those who cannot speak for themselves. It includes whats left of
the natural world as well as the health of the economic, social and spiritual orders
bequeathed to them. Surely we have a duty, an ethical responsibility, to patrol the
boundaries of the society we are custodians of for our children and our childrens.
There must be a philosophy of passing the baton from leader to leader. There must be
ethics to protect precious flower for the next generation. World endured for over a
century of change because of that philosophy and the culture remained intact for
several decades. This responsibility to future generations is often referred to in the
notion of inter-generational equity. In the context of sustainability it is used to
describe the responsibility of present generations to safeguard the interests of
future generations and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
defines sustainability as forms of progress that meet the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.

Ethics and Human interface : (Note- 13) The Ethical Dimension of Sustainability
The United Nations had struggled to find a way to address global environmental
problems. The industrialized countries had proposed international treaties and action,
but the developing nations had prioritized the need for economic development, with
little interest in environmental regulation. The commission provided the conceptual
framework for coordinated action, proposing that all nations have a stake in fostering
economic development, but of a new kind: sustainable.
The World Commission on Economic Development brought the idea of sustainability
to the global stage in 1987. The United Nations sponsored this study of the
relationship between economic development and the environment, published as Our
Common Future, also known as The Brundtland Report.
The Brundtland Report: It proposed sustainability as an integral framework, in
which economic development, social equity, and environmental protection are seen as
inseparably related goals.
The Brundtland Commission advanced public understanding of the link between
economic growth of the poorer nations and global environmental protection. The
commission argued that poorer countries must have the opportunity to develop
economically if they are denied this opportunity it will be much harder to convince all
countries to support practices that can be sustained over time but richer countries
must foster policies to favor environmental conservation with economic development.
Then Brundtland Report provided a deceptively simple definition of sustainability:
meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their needs. The official U.N. definition of sustainability
has 3 dimensions, or 3 pillars, also known as the Three Es of sustainability.
These are environmental protection, economic development, and social equity.
Sustainability provides a positive vision for the future of the human. From a
motivational perspective, few people are inspired by the notion of being less bad in
their environmental impact. In contrast, sustainability provides a framework and
markers for making positive change.
Social equity: This pillar of sustainability has a clearest ethical component, that of
socio-economic fairness or social justice. The lifestyles of the richest and poorest
members of the human family pose the greatest threat to the integrity of our Earths
life support systems, but for different reasons. The wealthiest consume vastly more
than their fair share of resources, more than the planet can provide for everyone.
The poorest 1/3rd of human society, those living on less than $2 per day, have no
alternative but to use resources in a short-sighted way, for example, cutting down
trees for firewood before they are able to grow to their full height. The wealthiest
countries have the capacity to make choices for a more sustainable lifestyle, while the
poorest members of the human family generally do not. Thus, sustainability is built
upon the practice of solidarity with the poor; fostering economic development for
them will enhance sustainability. The social equity dimension suggests that
sustainable development is an inherent moral good, but its consequences are likely
to be ethically positive as well.
Ethical concern to future generations: Sustainability challenges present day humans
to consider the well-being of future generations, to view their needs as worthy of our
moral concern. Modern humans are not accustomed to considering future generations,
but the power of our markets and technologies threaten their quality of life. We can
express a moral concern for the future by restraining our consumption of non-
renewable resources today. Note that some resources, such as minerals, are
essentially finite. Other resources, such as wind and plants, because they draw their
energy from the sun, can be managed so as to provide a continuous source of goods.
An ethical approach to sustainability suggests that society has an obligation to
restrain wasteful uses of resources among the affluent, but it also has a special
obligation to foster economic development for the poorest of the poor, all while
maintaining environmental resource protection. When referring to sustainable
development, one needs to define what is to be sustained, for whom, and for how long.
Sustainability is not an absolute condition, but always partial. Sustainability, like
justice, occurs along a continuum, and making progress along this is necessarily
incremental. Restraint is its price.
Questions:
1. What could you contribute to the transition to a more sustainable society?
2. What kind of ethical arguments could best persuade various sectors of society to
assume an obligation for the well-being of future generations?
3. Many people only perceive two of the pillars of sustainability: environmental
protection and economic development. Why do you think it is more difficult for people
to recognize the role of justice / social equity?

Ethics and Human Interface : ( Note 14 ) Concept of sustainable development

Sustainable development: In essence, sustainable development is a process of change
in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation
of technological development; and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance
both current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations.
Our common interest: There are three type of country developed, developing and
underdeveloped. To promote common interest in sustainable development one has to
neglect of economic and social justice within and among countries. And we know that
this is not fair. Hence, there is a difficulty in promoting common interest or equity for
sustainable development.
Strategic Imperatives: This will require policy changes in all countries, with respect
both to their own development and to their impacts on other nations development
possibilities.
reviving growth;
changing the quality of growth;
meeting essential needs for jobs, food, energy, water, and sanitation;
ensuring a sustainable level of population;
conserving and enhancing the resource base:
reorienting technology and managing risk; and
merging environment and economics in decision making
The strategy for sustainable development aims to promote harmony among human
beings and between humanity and nature. The pursuit of sustainable development
requires:
A political system that secures effective citizen participation in decision
making.
an economic system that is able to generate surpluses and technical knowledge
on a self-reliant and sustained basis
a social system that provides for solutions for the tensions arising from
disharmonious development.
a production system that respects the obligation to preserve the ecological
base for development,
a technological system that can search continuously for new solutions,
an international system that fosters sustainable patterns of trade and
finance, and
An administrative system that is flexible and has the capacity for self-correction.
These requirements are more in the nature of goals that should underlie
national and international action on development. What matters is the sincerity
with which these goals are pursued and the effectiveness with which departures
from them are corrected.

Ethics and Human Interface: (Note 15) REASON FOR DEVELOPING AN

ETHICS OF SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainability is commonly understood to require the balanced pursuit of three
goods: ecological health, social equity, and economic welfare. It is grounded on the
ethical commitment to the well-being not only of contemporary populations but also
the well-being and enhanced opportunities of future generations.
Sustainability is now a well-known and commonly accepted framework for guiding a
wide variety of choices. Sustainability suggests that, in the decision making process,
societies that have a good quality of life have an obligation to ensure both future
societies and contemporary, less well off societies are also able to achieve a standard
of living in which their basic needs are met.
Communities are applying sustainability to solving energy problems, addressing waste
disposal issues, developing greenspaces, planning urban areas, and reinvigorating the
local economy.
Companies are using the concept of sustainability to expand the measure of success
for their endeavors from the financial bottom-line to a triple bottom line that adds
social and environmental performance to economic performance.
 Universities are applying sustainability to guide changes to their campuses,
curriculum, governance, investments, procurement policies, and relationships to their
local communities.
In short, sustainability is a framework upon which can be built specific strategies for
guiding decision making. For example, The Natural Step, developed in Sweden, is a
sustainability-based strategy for making decisions about resources utilization and
disposal. Numerous other strategies that have sustainability as their core concept
have emerged and are being applied to guide decision making in the private and public
sectors.
The future is becoming ever more complex and it is increasingly difficult to safely
navigate through the maze of issues that confront us. Humanity faces a future of
much more costly energy, potentially catastrophic consequences due to climate
change, shortages of potable water, the blowback of effects from the vast array of
synthetic chemicals developed over the past half-century, and depleted fisheries, to
name but a few. And this is occurring in the face of still rapidly increasing numbers of
humans and rising per capita consumption. New technologies abound, from genetically
engineered seeds, to nanobots, nuclear fusion reactors, powerful antibiotics,
autonomous robots, and a vast web of wireless systems interconnected by data
highways. Deploying these technologies has been driven by a cost-benefit calculus
that, in light of the consequences of many of these technologies, must be considered
obsolete. Sustainability can provide many of the answers to how best to treat new
technologies and how to change the basis of decision making such that technological
benefits far outweigh the risk, for both the short and long term and for present and
future societies.
REASON FOR DEVELOPING AN ETHICS OF SUSTAINABILITY
Brundtland Report: sustainability is meeting the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.
Thus, responsibility of contemporary society for the quality of life of todays
population plus the preservation of resources, the environment, and other ingredients
needed for future populations to also experience a good quality of life. This is an
enormous and daunting task and requires enormous changes in thinking, policy, and
basic assumptions about the economy for its full implementation and basic assumptions
about the economy for its full implementation.

For the present, it would mean that wealthier, more technologically sophisticated
societies would have to contribute materially and through a wide range of assistance
programs to increase the wealth of poorer nations, to aid them in developing the
capability to provide the basic needs of their population.
For future generations it means ensuring the availability of a wide range of
resources: natural, cultural, mineral, educational, food, clean air and water, genetic
diversity, and numerous others that support a good quality of life.
Everyone on the Earth has a right to having their needs for food, shelter, and clothing
met. Present people have an obligation to future generations to provide them an intact
and functioning planet in at least as good state as they received it. And we are all
interdependent, present and future generations, but it is the present, wealthier
countries that control the fate of everyone else, present and future. The application
of the sustainability framework therefore requires a better understanding of the
ethical concepts which support it.

Among these ethical concepts is the Precautionary Principle, the Chain of

Obligation, the Distributional Principle, the Land Ethics, and the Rights of the
Other Specie. Through a better understanding of the ethics of sustainability, it
becomes clear why the sustainability framework is not only an approach to addressing
and solving the many difficult problems facing us, but why it is in fact the right
approach, the right thing to do.

Ethics and Human Interface : ( Note 16) Ethical Traditions

There are different approaches in Ethics:

One approach says, ethics is about individual conduct or character, and thus defined
by questions such as How shall I live? or What does it mean to be a good person?

Second says ethics refers to universal values and thus poses questions such as What
is the Good? or What rules can rightly apply to all moral actors or agents?

Another focuses on the process of moral decision-making, the characteristics of a

good society, or the relationship between human goodness and the divine, among many
other issues.

These differing approaches depend in part on varying foundational assumptions about,

for example, whether goodness stems from a transcendent power such as God or
whether the source of value is nature, human conscience, or reason.

A further source of divergence is the question of whether it is possible to identify a

universal, absolute good or if, to the contrary, values are inevitably subjective or
relative in nature.
Differences in ethical frameworks also emerge from divergent attitudes toward
rationality, emotion, and science, among other matters.

What unites different schools of ethics is a conviction that it is both possible and
worthwhile to identify good, or at least better, ways of acting and being in the world.

These approaches can be divided into Religious tradition and Secular tradition.
Ethics and Human Interface : ( Note 17 ) Western Religious Ethical Traditions
:
Probably religious tradition is earliest way of thinking about ethics.
Western religious traditions:
Religion involves ritual, symbol, community life, institutions, doctrines, and many other
factors, but moral values are a central aspect of religious identity for both individuals
and groups. Through religion, people think about what it means to be a good person and
what a good society would entail; they find resources, support, and guidance in their
efforts to live up to these values and to improve their communities.
Religious values in the modern West are predominantly informed by biblical
traditions. Most important is the biblical emphasis on social justice. Some important
ethical guidelines include hospitality, protection of the weak from the strong,
forgiveness of debts, and prohibitions on usury. Christian scriptures (commonly
referred to as the New Testament) continue these emphases, adding Jesus particular
concerns with social groups on the margins of mainstream society, such as lepers. For
both Hebrew and Christian scriptures, individuals and societies are judged in large
part based on how they treat the poor, the sick, and the outcast.
The biblical emphasis on social justice rests, in part, on a social view of human
nature: people are related to and dependent upon one another and thus responsible for
one anothers well-being. Christian ethics insist on just distributions of social goods,
especially to needy groups. For this tradition, a good society is one in which no one
falls through the cracks, well-off people take care of those in need, and cries for help
are answered promptly, generously, and without rampant self-interest.
Contemporary environmental ethicists and theologians highlight issuessuch as the
importance of agriculture and the land for biblical societies and the inclusion of
animals and other aspects of the natural world in visions of divine fulfillment. Perhaps
the most important biblical principle with regard to non-human nature is the recurring
injunction to be good stewards of the land and non-human animals.
A stewardship ethic begins with the premise that God has created the natural world
for the benefit of all people. Humans are not the owners of this world, but rather are
caretakers who have both special responsibilities and some special privileges with
regard to created goods. Stewardship is intended as both a social ethic, to ensure
that all people have their just share of created goods, and an environmental ethic that
helps to preserve Gods creation.
Another contemporary western religious tradition is Roman Catholic social thought .
U.S. Catholic Bishops 1986 pastoral letter on the economy.1 In their pastoral letter,
the bishops assert that economic decisions and institutions should be judged on
whether they protect or undermine the dignity of the human person. This dignity,
they add, can be realized and protected only in community. People are social beings,
and their most important goods require collective support and enactment, which are
the responsibility of all people, of all social groups and classes. This responsibility can
be fulfilled only with widespread participation in both the economic and political
processes, which must be equitable and open. Finally, the bishops assert that all
members of society, and especially the most powerful, have a special obligation to the
poor and miserable. This obligation can be understood, in part, as the demand to
fulfill the basic human rights of all people to food, clothing, shelter, and other
economic and material conditions for human dignity, as well as political and civil
liberties. The economic values outlined in Economic Justice for All build on centuries
of Catholic social thought and are reaffirmed in Catholic statements today, not only in
the U.S. but globally.
Both non-Catholic Christian Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, and other and major
Jewish and Muslim organizations emphasize social justice and care for the poor and
vulnerable as the major ethical principles that guide their positions on concrete
social problems. Serious differences exist, certainly, on issues such as the role of
government, the responsibility of individuals and families, the moral status of
capitalism and other economic systems, and a range of other matters, including
sustainability. Still, major Western religious traditions largely agree on the centrality
of justice, equality, fairness, and charity as the most important principles for
evaluating specific social decisions, institutions, and processes.
Increasingly, contemporary religious thinkers and leaders are taking environmental
concerns into account when discussing social and economic ethics. A wide range of
religious groups have issued statements on the environment, some of them very
general, such as Pope John Paul IIs calls for ecological conversion and his naming
of Francis of Assisi as the Patron Saint of Ecology. Other religious statements
address specific problems, such as climate change, a topic to which American
Evangelical Protestants have recently given a great deal of attention. For many
Christian, Muslim, and Jewish thinkers, the guiding principle behind environmental
concern is the integrity of creation, or the notion that because God created the
natural world as well as humans, nature has its own intrinsic value and is not meant only
to serve short-term human interests.
Ethics and Human Interface: (Note- 18) Secular Philosophical Ethical Traditions

The secular tradition in Western ethics begins with the classical Greek thinkers,
especially Plato and Aristotle. Social ethics, and more specifically the characteristics
of a good society, is the central moral problem for these thinkers. Plato and
Aristotle asked explicitly what the good life is for humans and provided answers that
continue to influence both scholarly and popular thinking about ethics. Their
reflections began with the notion that humans are social beings whose good is only
fulfilled in community. Their work does not display much interest in the issues that
preoccupy many popular discussions of morality, but rather focuses on problems of
public virtue, right relationships, and good leadership.
One of the most important classical philosophical themes is justice one of the most
important virtues discussed by Aristotle. Justice involves giving to each his or her
due, which implies a careful weighing both of what is possible and what is deserved, as
well as comparisons among different relevant cases. For Aristotle, justice is
both procedural concerned with fairness in decision-making and other social
processes and substantive concerned with the proper distribution of actual goods.
Both kinds of justice are central for sustainability today since a sustainable society
requires both just political institutions and mechanisms, on the one hand, and
distribution of necessary goods that avoids extremes of poverty and social inequality
on the other.
Immanuel Kant (1724- 1804), the father of deontological ethics defines good
practices as those that identify and follow the correct rules or uphold correct duties.
For deontological ethics, the likely consequences of actions do not matter in moral
decision-making, and the actual consequences do not affect evaluations of the moral
worth of an action. Rather, ethical judgments are based on the moral actors
intentions and adherence to duties or rules.
Kant insisted that human reason was competent to determine ethics, and that ethics
should be based and critiqued on rational grounds. Kant articulated his ethical thesis
in the form of several categorical imperatives, moral statements that are
objectively and universally true because of their intrinsic qualities (rather than
because of their source or consequences). The most famous articulation of Kants
categorical imperative is to Always act according to that maxim whose universality as
a law you can at the same time will. (Means an ethical action must be able to be
made universal: if it is not good for all people to act in this way, it is not good
for a single actor to act in this way.)
Kants deontological model has strongly shaped theories about rights, one of the most
important concepts in modern political and social ethics. Kant argues that persons have
intrinsic value that is independent of their instrumental use to others. The assertion
of intrinsic value is necessary to declarations of human rights, which assert that
simply by virtue of being human, persons have rights to such things as freedom from
torture or access to clean water, for example. Other persons then have the duty to
abstain from torturing or polluting water (and perhaps, in some models, to protect
others from being tortured).
Rights theories are also important in relation to the ethics of human relations to
nonhuman animals. A number of philosophers and activists have asserted that non-
human animals have certain rights, such as the minimum right to avoid unnecessary
suffering and untimely death.
The other major model in Western philosophical ethics is consequentialist or
teleological ethics. In consequentialist or teleological ethical systems, decisions
about what to do and subsequent evaluations of the morality of an action are based on
the expected or actual consequences of a behavior (from the Greektelos, meaning
end). The most prominent consequentialist model isUtilitarianism, first articulated by
English philosophers Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-
1873). They gave greatest happiness principle which focus on good is happiness and
the ultimate goal of ethics should be to create the greatest good for the greatest
number of people. Mill divided pleasure into two parts : higher pleasures (intellectual)
and lower pleasures (sensual). He believed that higher pleasures should be what are
ultimately promoted over the lower pleasures. This led to Mills effort to instill a
moral education in the public sphere that would teach people how to value and promote
the higher pleasures or good in society.
The other tradition is pragmatism, a school of philosophical ethics that originated
with the work of American philosophers C. S. Peirce (1839-1914), William James
(1842-1910), and John Dewey (1859-1952). Pragmatists assert that knowledge and
meaning emerge from practical experience and that, in regards to ethics, value must
be judged by practical consequences rather than intentions or relations to abstract
goods: it is strongly empiricist, meaning that it asserts that knowledge, meaning, and
values arise from practical actions and experience. For many social and environmental
ethicists and thus for people concerned with sustainability, pragmatism is appealing
because it represents an effort to achieve concrete, positive results without the need
to find consensus about abstract philosophical issues in advance (or ever).
While both pragmatism and Utilitarianism emphasize practical consequences as the
measure of moral worth, they differ in their understanding of what defines the good
and how people can know it.
Ethics and Human Interface : (Note-19) Social dimension of Ethics
Social ethics is a sub-field in both philosophical and religious ethics that is primarily
concerned with the ethical foundations, dimensions, and consequences of collective
decisions, attitudes, and actions. It is social both because it looks primarily at
decisions and actions that are collective rather than individual and personal and
because it is concerned with goods that are collectively defined and achieved.
In contrast, personal or individualistic ethical systems may be concerned with
actions that do not directly affect larger groups of people, such as personal choices
about sexual identity or behavior. Certainly even the most apparently personal of
decisions have larger implications, if only for the people close to the individual
concerned.
Further, even intensely personal moral decisions are made in a larger social
context and on the basis of values and attitudes that are the result of social learning,
social experiences, and social relations. Thus the line between personal and social
ethics is never hard and fast. Still, it is possible to distinguish between moral issues
that are primarily personal and those that have immediate and unavoidable social
implications.
Social ethics give attention to the values that are explicitly or implicitly upheld in a
given position or practice and to the moral consequences of collective decisions and
actions. It addresses not only individual values and issues, but also social costs and
benefits.
Social ethics may also be concerned with what vision of a good society is implied in or
supported by a particular instance, or which social groups might benefit or suffer the
most, or which collectively-shared goods might be advanced or reduced.
Some analyses can be conducted on a wide range of contemporary issues: How should
the traditional just war requirement to minimize civilian casualties be modified in light
of new weapons technologies that make it impossible, often, to avoid civilian deaths?
Who will benefit and who will be harmed by agricultural innovations such as genetically
modified crops or new pesticides? What moral duties does a society have in relation to
new immigrant groups, and vice-versa? The examples are endless, and the important
point is that social ethics raises and answers distinctive questions about distinctive
concerns, sources, and criteria.
Economic ethics is a sub field of social ethics. Economics by definition involves
collective decisions and processes. Even individual financial decisions are made only in
relation to and subject to the influence of larger economic forces. Economic ethics is
concerned with the moral foundations, characteristics, and consequences of economic
activities and institutions. Economic ethics may look at specific business practices or
industries or at broader issues such as the moral values, implicit or explicit, that
under-gird economic policies and practices.
When considering the ethical dimensions of economic systems, institutions, and
decisions, a number of significant questions related to sustainability must be taken
into account. One question concerns the definition of economic goals such as
productivity, efficiency, and security. Efficiency, for example, is usually defined as
the maximization of output in relation to certain inputs, and is a primary goal of many
economic practices, systems, and institutions. The inputs at stake can vary, and
depending on which ones are selected e.g., labor time, energy, or capital investment
judgments of economic efficiency will vary.
Economic and social goals are intertwined. Decisions about economic processes and
institutions inevitably favor one social good or another, which can ultimately favor one
social class over another.

Ethics and Human Interface: ( Note-20) Characteristics of Ethics of

sustainability:
An ethic varies according to culture, context, and a host of other factors. But it
is possible to outline some of the key features that an adequate ethic of sustainability
should possess to some degree.
First, it should be theoretically coherent. This means that the grounding
assumptions, the form of argumentation, definitions of key terms, and goals should be
consistent throughout, and the use of evidence persuasive.
Related to this, an adequate ethic must be both clear and consistent with regard to
its philosophical foundations about issues such as the definition of humanness, the
source of value (transcendent, natural, or other), and the philosophical scope or aims
of the ethic itself.
An ethic of sustainability must also have clear and coherent interpretations of
key foundational issues. Further, since the goal of sustainability is by definition
oriented toward the future, an ethic of sustainability must take into account the
relations between present and future generations (both human and non-human).
An ethic of sustainability, like any social ethic, should address the question of
rights or interests. A deontological ethic is more likely to assert that people (and
perhaps non-human animals, plants, or places) have rights, while a Utilitarian ethic
speaks of the interests that people or animals have in, for example, avoiding pain or
seeking pleasure. In both cases, individuals and groups may incur duties or
responsibilities in relation to the rights and interests of others. A coherent ethic
must be clear about the foundational grounds for asserting the existence of rights or
interests, the reasons for speaking of one or the other, the particular ethical claims
that will be met, and ways of adjudicating between conflicting rights or interests.
Finally, an ethic of sustainability should be feasible or practical. The purpose of an
ethic of sustainability is to help guide people in their efforts to address real world
problems and to build more socially, environmentally, and economically sustainable
institutions, practices, and societies.

Ethics and Human Interface : (Note- 21) The ethical Principles of sustainability
An ethic of sustainability must address a number of specific principles, which help
fill out the most important values of sustainability in relation to social, economic, and
environmental concerns. Obviously, not all ethics of sustainability will be identical in
relation to these issues. They will develop divergent positions on these issues, rank
them in different orders of priority, relate them to each other differently, and add
additional points. However, an adequate and complete ethic of sustainable must deal, in
some way, with the following principles.
1. Justice and obligations to future generations: According to Aristotle , Justice
is the mean between two different kinds of injustice: the injustice that takes too
much and that which takes too little. Building on Aristotle, classical Western ethics
has come to define justice as ensuring that each receives his or her due neither too
much nor too little. Aristotle and subsequent philosophers have identified several
specific types of justice: procedural (or formal) justicewhich entails fair processes
in governancecriminal justice, and other social practices and institutions,
including the allocation of resources.

Procedural justice establishes rules and standards by which these decisions are made,
which is necessary to ensure both political democracy and the rule of law. Standards
procedural justice are crucial for sustainability since a society cannot be sustainable,
many argue, when it is characterized by unjust political systems, lack of openness and
transparency, limited access to participation in decision-making, an individualistic rule
all evidence of failures of procedural justice.
Distributive justice is concerned with the fair or correct distribution of goods in a
society. For an ethic of sustainability, attention would have to be paid not only to
social and political goods such as housing, health care, food, and political power, but
also to environmental goods such as clean air and water and perhaps access
to recreational or wilderness land.
While distributive justice is concerned primarily with the relative allocation of
goods, substantive justice refers to absolute quantities. While distributive justice
might insist that a small amount of food be shared equally among starving people, for
example, the principle of substantive justice would seek to provide those people with
an absolute amount of food adequate to their needs, not just with a fair share of an
inadequate amount. Substantive justice has traditionally been less important in
Western liberal philosophical and political traditions than formal and distributive
justice, but it enters into many discussions of sustainability. A society that
distributes an inadequate amount of food equally among all its members, for example,
will not be sustainable, although it may be just (through distributive justice). A
sustainable society must meet the principles of substantive justice by ensuring that
peoples basic material and economic needs are met.
2.In relation to economic ethics, the most important principle for sustainability
concerns the regulation of markets in order to address the true costs of pollution and
other social and environmental harms. This issue is sometimes summarized as
the polluter pays principle, which states that the individuals, communities, or
businesses that create pollution must pay for the cost of removing it rather than
passing the cost of cleaning up that pollution to consumers or to society overall.
The polluter pays principle reflects the values of larger ethical and political
frameworks known as natural capitalism and full cost accounting. While these two
models are not identical, they both seek to create a more sustainable society through
a free market system. These revisions would reduce or eliminate perverse subsidies
that help make environmentally or socially unhealthy products inexpensive. Perverse
subsidies are especially widespread in agriculture, though they exist in energy
production and many other industries as well. Full cost accounting would not only cut
perverse subsidies but also would eliminate the public funding of clean-up for polluting
industries. Were businesses to lose perverse subsidies and pay their own clean up
costs, they would no longer be able to offer certain goods for low costs, including
certain types of produce grown thousands of miles from where it is consumed, beef,
and gasoline, among others. When unsustainable goods became expensive, market
principles would dictate that people would seek out goods that are truly inexpensive,
because they do not have previously hidden costs. In a full cost system, for example,
people would find food from small local farms much cheaper than food that is mass-
produced far away because fuel and other costs of transporting food across country
would no longer be subsidized. Eventually, a society with full cost accounting will
become more sustainable as unsustainable goods become prohibitively expensive and
fade away.
Some economic principles relevant to an ethic of sustainability go further in their
revision of the market. The social mortgage is a Roman Catholic concept that asserts
that all property, regardless of ownership, is part of a divine creation that was
intended by God for the good of all people. If people use their private property only
for private benefit, without concern for (or perhaps even to the detriment of) the
common good, the larger society may call in the social mortgage. This means, first,
that people are obliged to help the poor and needy and, further, that if such help is
not forthcoming, and if a person is in extreme necessity, he has the right to take
from the riches of others what he himself needs. The notion of a social mortgage
places a much more severe constraint upon the market and private property than does
the notion of full cost accounting.
3.A number of principles from environmental ethics must also be taken into account
in an ethic of sustainability. One of the most important environmental principles for
sustainability is the precautionary principle. In its simplest and most general form,
the precautionary principle states that in the absence of a strong scientific
consensus that an action or policy will not cause harm to human health or the
environment, caution should be used in implementing that action or policy. Strict
adherence to the precautionary principle would prevent the use of pesticides whose
wider ecological effects are not understood, for example. It might also restrict
damaging use of certain resources or landscapes such as mining or grazing if there
is no certainty that the damage can be reversed.
The precautionary principle places the burden of responsibility on those who would act
rather than on those who must, after the fact, suffer from or attempt to reverse
harm done by new or unproven scientific procedures. Like the polluter pays principle,
it reflects larger ethical claims. It assumes that progress or innovation is not an
absolute value; that individuals and organizations are responsible for the possible, not
just likely, effects of their actions. The precautionary principle also reflects a
particular understanding of the relationship between knowledge and morality, insofar
as it identifies as immoral actions that are taken without full knowledge of their
possible outcomes. The precautionary principle has been widely affirmed by
environmental groups and is central to sustainability.

Related to the precautionary principle is the reversibility principle, according to which

scientists or policymakers should not proceed on a potentially harmful course unless
its consequences can be reversed. People should not make decisions, other words that
cannot be undone by future generations. A primary example of an irreversible action is
the extinction of species. Again, this principle reflects larger ethical claims: that
people owe obligations to future generations (and perhaps to non-human nature) and
those immediate desires or interests should not be satisfied at the expense of the
interests of future generations.
As central tenets of sustainability, the polluter pays, reversibility, and
precautionary principles all assert that those who are responsible for implementing
technologies must be prepared to address the possible consequences of their
implementation. They also require decision-makers to consider as many different
options as possible before acting and to consider as fully as possible not just the likely
but also the possible outcomes of those actions. They assume, further, that
scientists, policy makers, and other citizens must consider both future human
generations and non-human nature as part of their deliberation. Individual human
interests, even the collective interests of a particular group or generation, are not
absolute; they are significantly limited by obligations to other people, including those
not yet born, and even to non-human nature. As specific statements of some of the
major values of sustainability, then, these principles add concreteness to some of the
more general guidelines for ethical decision-making

Ethics and Human Interface (Note-22) Creating a culture of Ethics in Public

sector
Ethics, the standards of behavior that tell us what we ought to do in our personal
and professional lives, applies to all individuals, organizations, and society as a whole.
High ethical standards are especially important in the public sector because they
are keys to credibility and lead to increased support for government agencies and
political leaders.
Creating a culture of ethics in an organization can best be accomplished with the
adoption of a values-based code of ethics. The ideal time to undertake the effort is
when the individuals and the organization are unanimous in their commitment.
Ethics codes cannot serve as a flu shot to prevent a problem, nor can the codes be
used as an antibiotic to cure an ethics problem. Once established, the code must
apply to everyone including elected and appointed officials, professional staff, and
commissioners, as well as volunteers, vendors, and contractors.

The simple adoption of a code will not ensure success. There are five keys to building
an ethical organization:
1. Leadership: Public policy makers and top administrators call for ethics as a
priority and demonstrate that in word and deed.
2. Commitment: All involved make the time, budget the money, plan the
program.
3. Collaboration: All the stakeholders work to develop consensus and
design the program.
4. Implementation: The program includes a strategy for making ethics an
integral part of the organization.
5. Reflection and Renewal: Ongoing assessment includes annual re-
 adoption of the code and exploration of ways to communicate to new
employees, vendors, residents, and members of the media

Ethics and Human Interface( Note 23) Ethics in Public life

Public life is that vast collection of political, cultural, social and economic structures,
including the workplace, which make up and underpin cohesive societies. People who are
engaged in leadership positions in those organizations and who actually influence the
lives of others are to varying degrees engaged in public life.
Healthy societies depend on the widespread participation by citizens in public affairs
and in the institutions that make up civil society. Each of us has the obligation to
contribute to the building of social capital, that is to say, to the forces and influences
which bind us in community spirit and concern for each other.

Ethics in public life have to be grounded in ethics in private life. The critical
examination of what one ought to do is foundationally important because there is no
universal agreement about what is right or wrong in every given situation. That is why
we are called to live this examined life and to be actively engaged with the ethical
dimensions of the choices we make every day.
An ethical life is one where the person engages actively and rigorously with hard
choices, accepts that words and actions have consequences and makes those choices in
that considered light. Such choices, as we are all painfully aware, are not just between
right and wrong. They can be between two alternatives neither of which is good or
desirable or right, both of which may have some bad or undesirable consequences. But
no other alternatives are available. One or the other it must be. Ethics involves the
attemptalways striving, perhaps never arrivingto give to you a coherent
framework, embedded in decency and integrity, within which to make such
choices.
The examined conscience enlivens our capacity to think richly and imaginatively about
our lives. It also enlivens our capacity to think about how we treat other people, both
on a day to day basis and in relation to the more challenging position of dealing with
people in need and people outside our circle of family and friends.

The work community is for many people the closest it gets to participation in
community life. One should always start with the principle that we treat people as an
end in them and not as a means to an end. This reasoning informs the obligation to be
open and honest with people about where they stand in the organization and how they
are progressing. It is also highly informative about how people should be paid.
Decent behavior is also important in how people are developed, promoted, counseled
and in some cases dismissed. How one treats people on the termination of their
employment is very often the ultimate test of ones ethical commitment to an
employee. At this point the relationship is ending. It is very easy to act peremptorily
and tell someone to pack their bags. It is much more difficult, more time consuming
and more expensive to engage in a conversation and process which is respectful of the
persons own sense of identity, integrity and self belief.
Corporations need to ask and answer the question of what they ought to do. We face
many social, economic and environmental problems in India. The influence of business
today is so pervasive that government on its own can no longer provide all the
solutions. Business, particularly big business, does not act in a vacuum and its impact is
felt in relation to many social, economic and environmental issues. The ethical
challenge for business is to create a value chain beyond the interests of its
shareholders and customers, and to contribute to the wellbeing of society at large.
This can be achieved consistently with the best interests of shareholders, including
making healthy profits and the return on their capital investments.

Ethics and Human Interface : (Note-24) Ethics in private and public life :
Questions
A. Public Understandings of Ethics and Ethical Education for Public
Understandings
What does the public understand by ethical conduct? How are we educated or
socialized into what ethical conduct in public life is? What is the nature, scope and
limitations of ethical education in promoting an ethical public life? To what extent
does moral education promote or impede ethical thinking? How do we understand and
evaluate political, cultural and educational ways of inculcating ethics in the public
realm?
B. Ethical regulations, Codes and Scrutiny in Public Life
What do ethical regulations, codes and scrutiny offer to more ethical practice in
public life? What form and character should ethical regulations, codes and scrutiny
take to effectively develop ethical practice in the public realm? Are current
regulations, codes and scrutiny effective? To what extent do regulations, codes and
scrutiny necessarily represent the cultural character and political interests of their
practitioners? How can we improve regulation, code-making and scrutiny in public life
and ensure its effectiveness?
C. Ethics in Social and Public Policy-Making: from Governance to Implementation
What do particular nations, agencies and organizations develop ethical governance for
more ethical practice in public life? What form and character should ethical
governance take in informing policy and practice in the public realm? How do those
involved in ethical governance ensure principles are implemented effectively in policy
and practice? To what extent does governance necessarily represent the cultural
character and political interests of their practitioners? How can we improve ethical
governance?
D. Intellectuals, Academia, the Arts, Culture and Ethical Knowledge
What special issues arise from intellectuals and academics engagement with ethics in
their work? How effective is the ethical governance and regulation of academia and
the arts? Is all intellectual and artist work (in all disciplines and fields) necessarily
subject to ethical thinking and regulation? To what extent should artists and
intellectuals be exempt from ethical regulation to speak to truth? In what ways can
culture and the arts be ethical regulated and yet free to express themselves?

E. Applied Ethics in Public and Private Life

How do different industries, organizations and fields (business, health and medicine,
education, politics and whatever other areas you have expertise in) perform ethically
in public life? What general lessons can we learn from considering the ethical
governance and regulation of particular examples in particular nations? What
different areas of public life set contemporary challenges for those who seek to
inculcate ethics in public life? How can ethical guidance inform ethical practice in both
public and private realms? What relationship is there and should there be between
ethics in public life and ethics in private life?
F. Ethics and Public Life: Historical Perspectives
What can we learn from historical examples of ethical governance, regulation, conduct
and practice? How far are historical writings and examples of ethical principles and
practice from the past applicable to the present?
G. Applying Ethical Theories and Ideas to Public Problems and Issues
How useful is ethical theory in guiding ethical governance, regulation, policy and
practice? How is theory applied to practice and how might it be better applied? What
forms of guidance on ethical thinking do theories offer to the project of ethics in
public life? What contemporary debates in ethical theory and ideas offer
opportunities for better ethical conduct and practice in public life?

Ethics and Human Interface (Note-25) Ethics in private sector

As the economy has become increasingly global, there should be some level of
control over different industries, organizations and fields (business, health and
medicine, education, politics etc) with ethics standards, and, often, the ability to
assess and even sanction violations of labor codes and environmental standards.
Globalization, nevertheless, has created new opportunities for companies, which now
can shift their production to parts of the world where the cost of labor is cheaper,
thereby increasing profit. Opportunities notwithstanding, companies are also facing
new restrictions. As people have become better informed, customer concern has
become increasingly focused on the ethical, environmental, and labor standards of
companies that become global by writing and calling companies to complain about
human rights violations, demonstrating against the companies, supporting company
anti-sweatshop organizations, filing shareholder resolutions, and in some cases,
boycotting products and companies that are allegedly not respecting basic ethical.
These ethical violations involve but are not limited to issues concerning child labor,
employee harassment and abuse, and solutions consisting of nondiscrimination laws,
freedom of association, collective bargaining agreements, health and safety
standards, and adequate wages and hours of work.
Customers rising ethical concerns have rapidly and radically reshaped the
environment in which companies operate. Reputation has now become a precious asset-
which not only dictates the economic success of a company, but its survival. Not
surprisingly, companies in the past years have made conscious efforts to protect their
reputation and reassure their customers of their adherence to a certain level of
ethical principles.
Private sector ethics standards are created to respond to that consumer-based
need. To do this, the private sector develops a list of obligations to adhere to human
rights standards, and the beginning of what would become the Corporate
Responsibility (CR) or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) movement.
Corporate social responsibility is the commitment of businesses to behave ethically
and to contribute to sustainable economic development by working with all relevant
stakeholders to improve their lives in ways that are good for business, the sustainable
development agenda, and society at large.
Determining CSR agendas requires examining the role of business and the evolution
of business thinking to reflect the new responsibilities globally, the market-based,
regulatory/legal and societal pressures on business to protect and or promote human
rights, and determining how companies decide what issues are relevant. Over the past
decade, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has risen in global prominence and
importance. Corporate governance scandals such as those at WorldCom, Enron,
Parlamat, Daewoo, and Tyco profoundly affected major capital markets worldwide, and
placed issues such as ethics, accountability, and transparency firmly on the business,
regulation and policy agendas. Additionally, issues such as peace, sustainable
development, security, poverty alleviation, environmental quality and human rights are
becoming increasingly interlinked, and are having a profound effect on businesses and
the business environment. Although not traditionally responsible for finding solutions
to these challenges, it is in the private sectors best interest to be part of the
solution rather than part of the problem.
Unfortunately, few companies, particularly in developing world,have the skills or
competencies to work in this new operating environment. Strategic capacity building
is imperative in educating these businesses about CSR, so they may access new
markets and improve their competitiveness on a national, regional and global scale.
To protect the company reputation companies are beginning to reassure their
customers by adopting codes of ethics and codes of conduct, by establishing
internal monitoring mechanisms and by allowing independent auditors to investigate
and report whether these companies manage to meet the ethical standards that they
set for themselves.
Codes and monitoring systems are viewed as a strategy to reduce reputation risks in
the marketplace. One poorly supplied can significantly damage a firms reputation and,
in turn, its sales and stock value. Informed stakeholders view firms with suppliers in
countries with labor issues. Codes of conduct and monitoring systems also offer
several advantages over traditional regulatory regimes in the` eyes of firms. These
systems build on some of the central organizational principles of contemporary
globalization outsourcing production, monitoring, and continuous improvement and
so can advance a form of regulation that multinational firms find compatible with
business strategies weak enforcement systems or poor tracking records on child labor
with suspicion. These firms in turn, need independent means of establishing their
good performance. Firms may also be advancing these programs as a strategy to
preempt stricter state regulation and to undermine the legitimacy of the state in
regulating.
Codes of conduct and monitoring systems are intended to perform both aninternal and
an external function. Ethics reforms are enacted to improve the ethical standards of
firms (internal function), but these reforms are enacted to address the ethical
concerns of the market (external function).

Ethics and Human Interface (Note-26) Elements of Organizational Ethical Culture

There are three types of Ethics related actions can have powerful influence on
building an ethical culture in an organization:
setting a good example

keeping promises and commitments

supporting others in adhering to ethics standards

How to promote organizational ethical culture?

 Organizations should use their ethics and compliance programs to foster a
culture committed to ethics throughout the organization.

organizations should focus training not only on informing employees about

compliance with regulations, but also on encouraging employees to behave in a
way that is conducive to a strong ethical culture

By identifying which Ethics related actions have a greater impact,

organizations can better target training to promote a culture committed to
ethical conduct in the workplace.

Organization can encourage leadership to set a good example of ethical

behavior, establishing organizational trustworthiness in keeping promises, and
helping employees to make ethical decisions

Upper management may need less emphasis on how to handle ethical dilemmas
and more emphasis on how to engage in Ethic Related Actions, while junior
employees may need instructions on how to proceed when faced with ethics
challenges.

Elements of ethical culture:

Communication of ethics as a priority

Setting a good example of ethical conduct

Keeping promises and commitments

Providing information about what is going on

Employees perceive that top managers are held accountable for ethics
violations

Support employees in following organizational standards

Considering ethics while making decisions

****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
***************************************************************************
ETHICS AND HUMAN INTERFACE PART-2
(Note-1)Personal Ethics
Ethics is a system of moral principles, by which human actions and proposals may be
judged good or bad, or right or wrong.
Personal Ethics include:
Responsibility: Responsibility is taking care of your duties. It is answering for
our actions. It is accountability. It is trustworthiness .It is a core value for
living honorably. It is being accountable for our behavior. It is being
dependable when we have things to do.
Respect: Respect means showing regard and appreciation for the worth of
someone or something. It means honor and esteem. It includes respect for
self, respect for the rights and dignity of all persons, and respect for the
environment that sustains life. Much of the universal values and virtues that
contribute to the good of the individual and society and affirm our human
dignity are derived from the value of respect and the value of responsibility.
We need respect to collaborate and to have a peaceful world.
Compassion: Desire to ease other suffering. Sympathetic awareness of
another distress combined with a desire to alleviate it. Kindness and caring
are shown. Service and generosity are ways that compassion can be
demonstrated.
Sharing: Sharing is giving, service, love, helpfulness. Sharing is kindness,
generosity, unselfishness, sacrifice.
Perseverance: It is commitment, hard work, patience, endurance. It is being
able to bear difficulties calmly and without complaint. It is trying again and
again.
Friendship: Friendship is an unselfish concern for the good of another. It is
our relationship with someone we like. A friend is someone who knows you as
you are, understands where you have been, accepts who youve become, and
still, gently invites you to grow.
Cooperation: Cooperation is the common effort of a group for their mutual
benefit. It is teamwork. It is working together peacefully.
Self-discipline: Self-discipline is self-control and self-restraint. It is self-
reliance and independence.
Honesty: Honesty is telling the truth. It is straightforward conduct. It is
being sincere, truthful, trustworthy, honorable, fair, genuine, and loyal with
integrity. It is not being fabricate, falsify, or misrepresenting in personal ,
societal and professional life. It is to not deceive colleagues, granting
agencies, or the public. It is that one should not make any false claims about
 the skills, abilities, credentials and experience of their organization or
themselves.
Integrity: Keep your promises and agreements; act with sincerity; strive for
consistency of thought and action.
Accountability: The obligation of an individual to account for its activities,
accept responsibility to others .
Trustworthiness: Share data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Be open to
criticism and new ideas. Being reliable.
Social awareness: Being aware of what is going on in your society and
participate in every possible aspect of your society.
Social responsibility: Strive to promote social good and prevent or mitigate
social harms
Non-discrimination: Avoid discrimination against people on the basis of sex,
race, and ethnicity.

(Note-2)Nature and Essence of Ethics [Part-2]

Most people learn ethical norms at home, at school, in religion, or in other social
settings. Although most people acquire their sense of right and wrong during
childhood, moral development occurs throughout life and human beings pass through
different stages of growth as they mature. Ethical norms are so ubiquitous that one
might be tempted to regard them as simple commonsense or intuition.
On the other hand, if morality were nothing more than commonsense or
intuition, then why are there so many ethical disputes and issues in our society?
One plausible explanation of these disagreements is that all people recognize some
common ethical norms but different individuals interpret, apply, and balance these
norms in different ways in light of their own values and life experiences.
It is important to remember that ethics and law are not the same. An action may
be legal but unethical or illegal but ethical. We can also use ethical concepts and
principles to criticize, evaluate, propose, or interpret laws. Indeed, in the last century,
many social reformers urged citizens to disobey laws in order to protest what they
regarded as immoral or unjust laws. Peaceful civil disobedience is an ethical way of
expressing political viewpoints.
Another way of defining ethics focuses on the disciplines that study standards of
conduct, such as philosophy, theology, law, psychology, or sociology. For example, a
medical ethicist is someone who studies ethical standards in medicine. One may also
define ethics as a method, procedure, or perspectivefor deciding how to act and for
analyzing complex problems and issues. For instance, in considering a complex issue
like global warming, one may take an economic, ecological, political, or ethical
perspective on the problem. While an economist might examine the cost and benefits
of various policies related to global warming, an environmental ethicist could examine
the ethical values and principles at stake.
Many different disciplines, institutions, and professions have norms for behavior that
suit their particular aims and goals. These norms also help members of the discipline
to coordinate their actions or activities and to establish the publics trust of the
discipline. For instance, ethical norms govern conduct in medicine, law, engineering, and
business. Ethical norms also serve the aims or goals of research and apply to people
who conduct scientific research or other scholarly or creative activities. There is even
a specialized discipline, research ethics, which studies these norms.
Ethics is important in promoting good, truth and avoidance of error. It promotes
the values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability,
mutual respect, and fairness. In public life it helps to ensure that officials or
governance can be held accountable to the public. It also helps to build public
support. It promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as
social responsibility, human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and health
and safety .It enhances quality and integrity
( Note-3) Ethical theories
(Note-4) Ethical theories
Here are some suggestions about how some of the chief ethical theories would
address various issues. This is all pretty tentative, in part because different ethical
theories tend to focus on different issues, so its not always easy to determine how
one theory would address the issues that are the chief concern of another theory.
Also, many of the categories in the table are not strictly parts of the moral theories,
but rather views on other topics (such as personal identity or the nature of
rationality) which seem to mesh well with a particular ethical theories.

Consequentialism Deontology Virtue Ethics

example utilitarianism Kantianism Aristotelianism

model of means-ends how do I what habits

practical reasoning: how determine should I
reasoning do I get what I whats rational? develop?
want/whats
good?

personal will & reason + will & reason will& reason +

identity (what desires (desires are desires +
is essential to thought of as character
the self?) outside forces traits
with the
potential to
thwart
rationality)

rationality getting what you doing what having the

want reason requires kinds of desires
(at a minimum, which reason
not having determines are
inconsistent or best
self-
 contradictory
policies)

central what ought I to what ought I to whats the best

question do? do? sort of person
(act orientation) (act to be?
orientation) (agent
orientation)

primary object consequences acts people (agents)

of evaluation (states of
affairs)

the good BASIC NOTION right action whatever

itself (? or results from
(for most
possibly states the actions of
consequentialists,
maximum of affairs good people?
happiness or brought about happiness?
something by right acquisition of
similar) action? or goods internal
states of to practices
affairs in which (MacIntyre)?
people who act
rightly are
rewarded?)

the right actions that BASIC the sort of

maximize the NOTION thing a virtuous
good person would do
in the situation

virtue being disposed to positive BASIC

maximize utility attitude toward NOTION
(for simple doing ones
(but may be
 versions of moral duty(?) analyzed, e.g. as
consequentialism, those
there will be just dispositions
necessary for
one big virtue;
the attainment
more complex
of happiness)
versions might
have many)

(Note-5) Ethics in India

Our country is one of the oldest civilizations with a rich cultural and ethical heritage.
Our Constitution as well as all our religious books is full of codes and directives on
high values and ethics to be followed by the state as well as the society.

Do not do unto others as you would not be done by (Atmani Pratikulani paresham na
samachary), is the principle given in Mahabharat. The definition of Ethics is well
concretized in this maxim. This means that we should not do anything, which is a
deviation from our intrinsic humanness Swabhav. If we are able to do this, our inner
core will spontaneously manifest itself. Ethics is human conduct in the light of moral
principles, which may be viewed as the individuals standard of conduct or as a body of
social obligations and duties. Our behavior outside is a reflection of our values within,
which we radiate outwards thorough our action and deeds.
But, there is perceptible change in the mind-set of the people towards achieving
materialistic goals and prosperity irrespective of the means to be adopted.
Ironically, the society also respects material prosperity only because of visible
glamour attached with it with little regard to higher values of simplicity, honesty,
hard-work, character building etc.

There is a saying that a country gets the kind of government it deserves. This is truly
reflected in our present day society and calls for a serious introspection and
concerted effort towards change in the social mind-set.

In our work situations, the organizational behavior theories of the west guide us. As is
obvious, these theories and practices which deal with only one-ninth of the Indian
population while the eight-ninth of the Indian population is traditional (normative).
The men in the fields of India are guided by the insights embedded in the structure
of Indian thoughts. Thus the western thoughts have not been able to lead us much
ahead. It is important to look into our own Indian thought and find solutions therein.

Once upon a time India was known as Golden Bird (sone ki chidia) for all its prosperity
and richness. The credit goes to all the saintly kings, from king Janaka to Ashoka,
Akbar, Harshabardhan and the like; who had put into practice human values ideology as
given in Vedanta and the other ancient Indian thoughts. It is because of these values
that we could sustain ourselves through all adversities and cruelties of the earlier
invaders and the British Rule.
Our leaders like Tagore and Gandhi have lived the human values like purity and
holiness, non-violence and moral courage. Gandhi forcefully and convincingly
demonstrated the power of spirit over material things. His greatest leverage was his
command over the Indian masses. He gained such a command because the simple folk
could understand that he was inspired from within. They called himMahatma. Merely
by his hunger strike, the Mahatma could control behavior of millions of people. He
firmly derived his political activities from dharmic principles and refused to
compromise with what was wrong.
The Indian philosophy has set the ultimate goals for humans and Indian psychology
provides practical methods in graded steps to march towards these goals and ethics is
imbibed in it. Thus Indian psycho-philosophy deals with both of these aspects to bring
in holistic development of the individual to make him/her full of values and ethical.

(Note-6) Indian tradition of Ethics

Ethics (ntstra) is a branch of philosophy that deals with moral values. It studies
human character and conduct in terms of good and bad, right and wrong. . Ethics is
primarily concerned with the moral issues of the world. A true knowledge of ethics
would be attained if one practices and imbibes these moral values.
True religion lays stress on moral virtues. People are required to discharge their
duties according to the moral code of ethics. In the knowledge tradition of India,
ethics has its origin in its religious and philosophical thinking. From time immemorial,
various religious faiths have flourished here. Every religious and every philosophical
system of India has a prominent ethical component. Ethics is the core of all these
systems. In every religious tradition, good moral conduct is considered essential for a
happy and contented life. Without following the path of righteousness no one can
attain supreme goal (moka) of life. For this one has to perform good deeds and avoid
wrong-doing.
Rigveda and Cosmic order : India has a very ancient history of thinking about
ethics. Its central concepts are represented in igveda, one of oldest knowledge
texts not only of India but of the entire world. In igveda, we come across the idea
of an all-pervading cosmic order (ta) which stands for harmony and balance in nature
and in human society. Here ta is described as a power or force which is the controller
of the forces of nature and of moral values in human society. In human society, when
this harmony and balance are disturbed, there is disorder and suffering. This is the
power or force that lies behind nature and keeps everything in balance.
Dharma : In Indian tradition, the concept of ta gave rise to the idea of dharma. The
term dharma here does not mean mere religion; it stands for duty, obligation and
righteousness. It is a whole way of life in which ethical values are considered supreme
and everyone is expected to perform his or her duty according to his or her social
position and station in life.
In Buddhism, the word dhamma is used, which is the Pli equivalent of the Sanskrit
word dharma. The guidelines and rules regarding what is considered as appropriate
behaviour for human beings are prescribed in the Dharma stras. These are
sociological texts that tell us about our duties and obligations as individuals as well as
members of society.
In the Hindu way of life, every individual is expected to perform his or her duty
appropriate to his or her caste (vara) and stage of life (rama). This division of
ones life into the four ramas and their respective dharmas, was designed, in
principle at least, to provide fulfilment to the person in his social, moral and spiritual
aspects, and so to lead to harmony and balance in the society. The four ramas are:
(1) brahmacarya, stage of studentship; (2) ghastha, stage of the householder; (3)
vanaprastha, life in the forest; and sanysa, renunciation.
Apart from this, the concept of four ends of life (pururthas) is also very important.
These four ends of life are the goals which are desirable in them and also needed for
fulfillment of human aspirations. These are (1) righteousness (dharma); (2) worldly
gain (artha); (3) fulfillment of desire; (kma) and (4) liberation (moka). The
fulfillment of all of these four ends of life is important for man. In this
classification, dharma and moka are most important from the ethical point of view.
They give right direction and purpose to human life. For instance, acquiring wealth
(artha) is a desirable objective, provided however it also serves dharma, that is, the
welfare of the society.
In the Bhagavad-Gt, selfless action (nikma karma) is advocated. It is an action
which is required to be performed without consideration of personal consequences. It
is an altruistic action aimed at the well-being of others rather than for oneself. In
Hinduism this doctrine is known as karma yoga.
The concept of right and wrong is the core of the Mahbhrata which emphasizes,
among others, the values of non-violence, truthfulness, absence of anger, charity,
forgiveness and self realization. It is only by performing ones righteous duties or
dharma that one can hope to attain the supreme path to the highest good. It
is dharma alone that gives both prosperity (abhyudaya) and the supreme spiritual good
(niryas).
Similarly, the importance of ethics and ethical values is highlighted in epics and
philosophical texts like, Upaniads, Rmyaa, darana-stras and dharma-
stras.
The darana stras are philosophical texts, which provide rational explanations of
the ethical issues; the universal moral problems faced by man in daily life are placed in
a philosophical context.
In the dharma-stras, emphasis is on the social ethics. In these texts the inter-
personal and social relations are placed in an ethical framework for guidance. In these
texts the ethical problems are discussed in an indirect manner.
Apart from these some of the texts directly deal with ethical issues:

1. Vidurant: Attributed to Vidura, the great Mahbhrata character. A rich

discourse on polity and dharma-stra.
2. Kamandakya Ntisra:A Sanskrit work belonging to c. 700-750 CE.
3. Ntivkyamtam: Literally the nectar of science of polity contains thirty-two
discourses in simple Sanskrit prose by a Jain scholar, Somadeva Suri.
4. aghu Arhannti: A small manual in Prakrit verse (c. 1088-1172 CE) on civil and
criminal laws by Hemachandra, a Jain scholar.
5. ukrantisara: An abridged Sanskrit text on polity which is attributed to
ukrcrya but believed by scholars to be a work of the early mediaeval period of
history.
6. Ntikalpatar: A Sanskrit treatise attributed to King Bhoja, available in manuscript
only.
7. Nti atakam: Bhartharis hundred verses on ethics.

(Note-7) Buddhist Ethics

Buddhism gives primary importance to ethics. Sometimes it is called an ethical
religion as it does not discuss or depend on the existence of God (the Supreme Being
with form and attributes) but instead believes in alleviating the suffering of
humanity. The ethical values in this faith are based on the life and teachings of the
Buddha.
These moral instructions are included in Buddhist scriptures or handed down through
tradition. According to Buddhism, the foundation of ethics is thepacala (five rules),
which advocates refraining from killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct and
intoxicants. In becoming a Buddhist, a lay person is encouraged to take a vow to
abstain from these negative actions.
In Buddhism, the two most important ethical virtues are compassion (karua) and
friendliness (maitr). One should have deep sympathy and goodwill for the suffering
people and should have the qualities of a good friend.
The most important ethical value is non-violence or non-injury to all living beings.
Buddhist ethics is based on Four Noble Truths. These are: (1) life is suffering, (2)
there is a cause for suffering, (3) there is a way to remove it, and (4) it can be
removed (through the eight-fold path). It advocates the path of
righteousness (dhamma). In a way this is the crux of Buddhist morality
(Note-8) Jain Ethics
Jainism places great emphasis on three most important things in life, called three
gems (triratna). These are: right vision (samyaka d), right knowledge(samyaka
jna) and right conduct (samyaka critra).
Apart from these, Jain thinkers emphasize the need for reverence (raddh).There
are other moral principles governing the life of Jains. Most important of these are
ideas of puya (merit) and ppa (demerit). Such deeds are very important from the
ethical point of view. Ppa is the result of evil deeds generated by vice and puya is
the result of good deeds generated by virtuous conduct. One should take the path of
a virtuous life to lead the way to spiritual growth. Right conduct is necessary for the
spiritual progress of man.
The most important thing in Jainism is practice of non-violence. It is required that
principle of principle of non-violence should be followed in thought, word and deed.
The other cardinal virtues are: Forgiveness, humanity, simplicity, non-
covetousness, austerity, restraint, truthfulness, purity, renunciation and celibacy.
(Note-9) Sikh Ethics
Sikhism is most recent faith in Indian tradition.It also lays great stress on ethics in
Human life. Its Founder Gurunanak dev said that truth is higher than anything else.
The cardinal virtue according to Guru Granth Sahib are: compassion (daya), charity
(dana) contentment (santokh), non-enmity (nirvair) and selfless service (seva). In
addition to these one is morally obliged to practice the general and eternal virtues.
(Note-10) The Bhakti Movement
During the middle ages, the Bhakti movement arose in India. It was an all-India
movement of social reform and spiritual awakening. It played a very important part in
reawakening moral consciousness in India. Jayadeva, Nmdev, Tulsds, Kabr, Ravids
and Mra are some of the prominent saints of this movement. Most of these saints
came from the downtrodden sections of society. Rejecting the distinctions of caste,
colour and creed, they spread the message of human equality. They were saint poets.
In their v (poetic compositions) they propagated the ideals of love, compassion,
justice and selfless service. These are the ethical values which we need even today.

( Note-11) What are Case Studies?

Case studies are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Although one of the most
frequently used tools for encouraging discussion, cases are only one of many possible
tools. Many of the principles discussed below for discussing case studies can be
generalized to other approaches to encouraging discussion about research ethics.

Cases are designed to confront readers with specific real-life problems that do not
lend themselves to easy answers. Case discussion demands critical and analytical skills
and, when implemented in small groups, also fosters collaboration.By providing a focus
for discussion, cases help trainees to define or refine their own standards, to
appreciate alternative approaches to identifying and resolving ethical problems, and to
develop skills for analyzing and dealing with hard problems on their own. The
effective use of case studies is comprised of many factors, including:
appropriate selection of case(s) (topic, relevance, length, complexity)

method of case presentation (verbal, printed, before or during discussion)

format for case discussion (Email or Internet-based, small group, large group)

leadership of case discussion (choice of discussion leader, roles and

responsibilities for discussion leader)

outcomes for case discussion (answers to specific questions, answers to

general questions, written or verbal summaries)

It should be noted that ethical decision-making is a process rather than a specific

correct answer. In this sense, unethical behavior is defined by a failure to engage in
the process of ethical decision-making. It is always unacceptable to have made no
reasonable attempt to define a consistent and defensible basis for conduct.
Leading Case Discussions:
For the sake of time and clarity of purpose, it is essential that one individual have
responsibility for leading the group discussion. As a minimum, this responsibility should
include:

Reading the case aloud.

Defining, and re-defining as needed, the questions to be answered.

Encouraging discussion that is on topic.

 Discouraging discussion that is off topic.

Keeping the pace of discussion appropriate to the time available.

Eliciting contributions from all members of the discussion group.

Summarizing both majority and minority opinions at the end of the discussion.

How should cases be analyzed?

Many of the skills necessary to analyze case studies can become tools for responding
to real world problems. Cases, like the real world, contain uncertainties and
ambiguities. Readers are encouraged to identify key issues, make assumptions as
needed, and articulate options for resolution. In addition to the specific questions
accompanying each case, readers might consider the following questions:

1. Who are the affected parties (individuals, institutions, a field, society) in this
situation?

2. What interest(s) (material, financial, ethical, other) does each party have in
the situation? Which interests are in conflict?

3. Were the actions taken by each of the affected parties acceptable (ethical,
legal, moral, or common sense)? If not, are there circumstances under which
those actions would have been acceptable? Who should impose what
sanction(s)?

4. What other courses of action are open to each of the affected parties? What
is the likely outcome of each course of action?

5. For each party involved, what course of action would you take, and why?

6. What actions could have been taken to avoid the conflict?

If consensus is not possible, then written or oral summaries should reflect majority
and minority opinions.

Is there a right answer?

ACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS:
Most problems will have several acceptable solutions or answers, but it will not always
be the case that a perfect solution can be found. At times, even the best solution will
still have some unsatisfactory consequences.
UNACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS:
While more than one acceptable solution may be possible, not all solutions are
acceptable. For example, obvious violations of specific rules and regulations or of
generally accepted standards of conduct would typically be unacceptable. However, it
is also plausible that blind adherence to accepted rules or standards would sometimes
be an unacceptable course of action

(Note-12) Ground Rules for Discussion of Case- studies on Ethics

1. The reasoning which leads to an opinion is important, not the opinion itself.
2. When discussing a case study, do not change the circumstances or the story of the
study.
3. Apply structured techniques to formulate and clarify thinking.
4. Identify the ethical component of an issue (what part of a dilemma requires an
ethical approach?
5. Identify the Subject related component of an issue (what part of the ethical
component is unique to subject?
6. Distinguish between positive arguments (do this) and negative arguments (dont do
this).
7. Distinguish between personal and professional ethical positions.
8. Distinguish between the requirements of logic, of law, of institutional policy, of
personal preference, of social convention, and of ethics
(Note-13) Philosophical system and Ethical system
Philosophical Systems

A philosophical system is a consistent set of values and criteria that apply to a wide
variety of issues. We have examined four systems:

Idealism: Reality is basically spirit or idea. Knowledge is gained through the mind.
Value is measured by conformity to ideals.
Realism: Reality is basically matter or the physical universe. Knowledge is gained
through the senses. Value is measured through conformity to nature.
Pragmatism: Reality is process or experience. Knowledge is gained through trial and
error. Value is measured by what is of practical benefit to society.
Existentialism: Reality is self-defined. Knowledge is gained through personal decision
making. Value is measured by responsible individual choice.
Ethical Systems

An ethical system is a consistent set of beliefs which can be applied to a wide variety
of ethical dilemmas. Some widely argued systems include:
Virtue: Ethical behavior is that which develops moral virtues. Focus on attitudes,
intentions, and character traits which enable humans to develop their potential.
Utilitarian (Bentham, Mill): Ethical choices produce the greatest good and the least
harm. Focus on consequences of actions.
Human Rights (Kant): Human rights are interests and activities which we must
respect and protect as a civilization. Every person has the fundamental right to be
respected and to be treated as a free and equal rational agent. This implies other
rights, such as privacy, truth, and freedom from harm. Focus on actions which do not
use people as instruments toward a goal.
Fairness/Justice (Aristotle): Treat people consistently the same, unless there are
morally relevant differences between them. Focus on fairness and consistency of
actions to distribute benefits and burdens among all members of a group.
Common Good (Plato, Aristotle, Cicero): Society is a community joined in a shared
pursuit of common goals. The good of the individual is inextricably bound to the good
of the group. Ethics advances the common good.

(Note-14) Some Techniques of Ethical Analysis in Case studies

Ethical analysis tries to identify the participating parties, their respective stakes and
responsibilities, and the essential issues. After this groundwork is in place, various
ethical guidelines (rules of conduct) and principles (philosophical systems) are applied
to the problem. Most discussion revolves around understanding the intent of the
guidelines and principles when applied to a particular case.
When addressing an ethical dilemma or a case study, try to answer these
questions:
1. What is the ethical issue? Is something morally wrong? Is the issue deeper than
personal or institutional concerns?
2. Who are the involved parties (the people and the organizations affected)? Who has
an important stake in resolving the issue?
3. What are the obligations between the parties?
Fidelity (a promise or a contract)
Reparation (making up for a wrong)
Gratitude (thanking for a right)
Justice (comparative merit)
Beneficence (helping a deserving person)
Non-injury (avoiding harm)
4. What would each party consider to be the preferred course of action?
5. Generate several courses of action (at least three, two extremes and a
compromise). Identify broad filters which might constrain the choice of options for
action.
6. For any choice of action, determine the impact on each of the parties:
a. Are any ethical guidelines violated?
b. What are the best-case and worst-case outcomes? Are they tolerable?
c. What benefits and harm will be caused? Does the good outweigh the possible harm?
d. Are there rules or principles which invalidate a choice of actions?
e. List the consequences, risks, and costs.
7. Choose a course of action, and identify which philosophical system it aligns with:
Ethical egoism
Utilitarianism
Human Rights
Ethical Relativism
Fairness and social justice
Common good
8. Which alternative actions produce the best overall consequences? Which respect
the moral rights and dignity of all parties? Which treat people fairly, without
favoritism or discrimination? Which advance the common good? Which develop moral
values? Which recognize the cultural context? Which are the most consistent?
9. Do different ethical systems generate different courses of action? Are there
issues to which none of the ethical systems apply? Which system is most compelling
for resolving the particular issue?
10. Finally make a clear and definitive decision about a course of action. Suggest policy
changes which will prevent the problem from recurring.
Summary of Ethical Analysis
1. Specify the FACTS.
2. Define the DILEMMA.
3. Identify the PARTIES and their interests.
4. Clarify the VALUES and PRINCIPLES at stake.
5. Formulate the possible ACTIONS.
6. Identify the potential CONSEQUENCES.
7. Make a clear DECISION.
(Note-15) Some Questions on Ethics and Human Interface
[Notice- I have seen the sample paper which is given by UPSC. After GOOGLING i
found these questions. I am not sure these will be asked. But for practice you can use
this if you want. You should ask your mentor/teacher about these questions and please
inform me what they said. In my view this is a new subject so questions would be not
so hard and twisting this year. Well we should be prepared for any circumstances. I
think you guys should strong yours theoretical part so you would be able to solve any
practical PROBLEM. All the best]

1. Answer any two the following in about 250 words each: ( 225)
(i) When in Rome do as Romans do? Explain it in the context of ethical
relativism.
(ii) Honest, upright, law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from the
distribution of their personal data. Do you agree or not? Give at least three reasons
for your position and one reasonable objection to it.
(iii) State the differences between deontological theories and teleological
theories of moral reasoning.
2. Answer the following in about 150 words each: ( 510)
(i) State two problems with consequentialist theories.
(ii) What are the two main kinds of deontological theory?
(iii) Explain the positive and negative concept of liberty?
(iv) Name and describe the theories of right action.
(v) What is moral autonomy?

3. Discuss the statements. You should include different and supported point of view
and personal point of view. (1010)
(i) Children are a gift not a right.
(ii) Religious people should never be wealthy.
(iii) Justice is more important than peace.
(iv) It is better to starve than to earn money immorally.
(v) If Hinduism is right, all religion must be wrong.
(vi) You should always stand up for unjust government.
(vii) We can treat animals in any ways we wish
(viii) Only god has the right to take the life.
(ix) It is duty of religious people to encourage contraception to avoid world
become overpopulated.
(x) Putting people into prison is waste of money.
4.Globalization raises many concerns in terms of market failure and sustainable
development. Discuss.(25)
5.Define ethics and emphasize its need to the contemporary society.(25)
(Note-16) When in Rome do as Romans do? Explain it in the context of
ethical relativism.
Sometimes we say, When in Rome, do as the Romans do, implying that this sort of
acting is morally correct. We can call views of this sort Cultural Ethical Relativism
(CER).

According to views of this sort: Moral appraisals are essentially dependent upon the
standards that define a particular moral code, the practices and norms accepted by a
social group at a specific place and time.
It implies, among other things, that:
* Right means socially approved by a give culture or society.
* We should choose moral principles by following what our society approves of.
* Such terms as obligatory, required, forbidden, good, bad, virtuous, etc. can
be defined in an analogous way.
One can support this because:
Morality is a product of culture and nothing which is such a product can be
objective or universal.
Cultures and societies disagree widely about morality.
It is simply good when we have a variety of cultures
One can be against this because:
It is hard to define a culture. Without such definition, we do not know what
CER implies.
Sometimes an action takes place within more than one society. In such a case,
would an act be right or wrong or neither or what?
If it is true, then moral decisions are either too easy or too difficult.
If it is true, then moral progress or reform is impossible. Also, we cannot
learn from other cultures.

Thus, Ethical Relativism holds that each situation must be judged according to its own
merits, and that universal standards cannot be applied to judge the morality of a
decision. A relativist believes in when in Rome do as the Romans do.
(Note-17) Ethics and human interface
Honest, upright, law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from the distribution
of their personal data. Do you agree or not? Give at least three reasons for
your position and one reasonable objection to it.
Information considered as personal is financial, medical and national identity related
information.
Article 21 of the constitution guarantees every citizen the fundamental right to
personal liberty which includes right to privacy and by extension private data not
available in public domain. This right extends to data in electronic forms and
information technology act 2000 in which there is a provision of punishment for
violation of privacy, so it facilitates protection of such data.
Since independence broad technological changes have taken place. The ability of
organizations to collect, store and process personal data has increased. Not many
digital technologies are designed to obtain detailed logs of their usage by individuals,
which are then accessible for surveillance and marketing purposes.
Online activities are particularly closely monitored. Even where users are not required
to provide personal data when accessing services on the Internet, individuals can be
identified through the Internet Protocol (IP) address of their computer, and often
through digital cookies or electronic identifiers left on their browser by Web sites.
Internet communication and browsing tends to leave logs of Web pages visited, email
and instant message senders and recipients, voice over IP callers, goods examined and
purchased, advertisements viewed and searches.
What is more, this development is widespread, not only on the Internet. Cameras are
used for surveillance. Mobile phones sending location information to the network
providers enables contextual advertising and mapping. Debit and credit card payment
systems record amounts spent and stores visited. Store loyalty cards enable
databases of purchases to be compiled. Biometrics, measurements that uniquely
identify individuals, such as fingerprints and photographs, nowadays also include DNA
matching, and face and voice recognition. The rise of Web 2.0 technologies, allowing
user-to-user contact, has resulted in sites for sharing pictures, videos and movies on
Web logs (blogs), and last but not least, the nowadays enormous global social networks.
Data mining tools have been developed to find patterns in large collections of personal
data, to identify individuals and to attempt to predict their interests and
preferences. Companies use these technologies to obtain large customer bases.
Governments are increasingly analyzing and exchanging information on their citizens.
Individuals are shopping online and using social networking sites to share information
about themselves and their family, friends and colleagues.
Overall, collection, storage and usage of personal data have become a part of everyday
life at all levels of society.
So, nowadays it is a necessity of disclosing personal information:
1. Disclosing personal information is an increasing part of modern life
2.The government asks for more and more personal information
3.Nowadays one needs to log into several systems using several usernames and
passwords.
4.There is no alternative than to disclose personal information if one wants to obtain
products or services
5.Disclosing personal information in return for free services online, such as a free
email address.
But there are so many risks factors also:
1. Your information being used without your knowledge and information being
shared with third parties without your agreement.
2. Your identity being at risk of theft online.

3. Your information being used to send you unwanted commercial offers.

4. Your information being used in different contexts from the ones where you
disclosed it.

5. You can become a victim of fraud

Ideally it is correct that an honest man should have nothing to fear because he has
done nothing wrong. However, digital information is easily transferred threats exist
and accidents happen. Perhaps an honest man does have something to fear.