Success and Ethics
The American Paradox of Authority
Sep 18, 2008 John Leonard Lovik
Professional ethics are constantly criticized in the United States as failed despite their importance and ignored despite the amount of attention violations garner in the media. This has led to a fatalistic view ethics as being an idea existing simply to be failed and pessimistically as an unobtainable goal.
This pervasive attitude ignores efforts at reform and the several examples of sucessful ethics in the U.S. However, the perception is justified by multiple scandals that occur in the military as well as federal and local governments. However, advocates of either side of the issue are ignoring the nature of authority itself and, by doing so, the root tension that many find in U.S. politics.
Success as Human Value
As the world globalizes and the borders between nations and cultures become more transparent, many people are led to rely on the success of the individual as the uniting aspect of life. In the western world the success of an individual is seen as the defining characteristic of a person and less so their culture and the reputation of the nation they belong to. This establishes personal success as a major force in establishing value to individual lives in the twenty-first century.
But, deeper than this is the idea that it is the successful who should be granted our greater positions of authority. As more value is placed on individual successes, more respect is being bestowed on persons who are perceived as showing themselves to be more remarkable, via their accomplishments, than others of the same culture.
As nations weigh successes to decide the value of persons and, consequently, those worthy of authoritative positions, ethics become a paradoxical issue.
Establishing Authority Before Ethics
Success dictates a person's value and thus their elevation above other suitors for authority, it is only after a person has used these societal virtues to gain authority that ethics are critiqued. With success valued before ethics, it promotes a laissez-faire attitude towards tactics to establish a career.
Because of this situation where ethics are not established until after authority has been granted, it gives a perception of every person being unethical in their ascent. Only when two persons of authority begin to compete for higher positions do ethical violations gain relevance. This belated concern leaves many in the position to worry over ethics only when deciding to pursue higher office and promotes tactics that simply conceal the path that had to be taken for success's sake.
What do you think about this article?
More in Politics & Society
Latest Articles