Ethical Behavior: People Live In Harmony Within One Communit

Ethical Behaviorpeople Live In Harmony Within One Community By Upholdi

Ethical behavior is fundamental to maintaining harmony within a community by fostering social cohesion and mutual respect. Society develops and enforces values, beliefs, and practices that promote peaceful coexistence and collective well-being. Moral principles serve as guidelines influencing individual conduct, especially when faced with complex ethical dilemmas where distinctions between right and wrong are blurred. Resolving such dilemmas necessitates critical thinking and balancing personal values with societal expectations (Friedman et al., 2019).

This paper reflects on an ethical dilemma I encountered involving a personal relationship and the importance of honesty, discretion, and moral judgment. The situation unfolded during a social gathering, revealing a conflict that challenged my understanding of ethical conduct and decision-making in sensitive circumstances.

A close friend, Joanne, invited me to her birthday celebration at her home, aiming to enjoy a convivial environment with friends from her childhood. During the party, Joanne and I were surprised when Mike, another childhood friend, arrived with a woman named Michele, whom we both recognized as the wife of our supervisor. Mike introduced Michele as his fiancée, which was shocking because we were unaware of any divorce involving our supervisor. Michele quickly ended the conversation and withdrew with Mike, leaving us puzzled.

After the event, I learned that Joanne decided not to attend work the next day to avoid revealing her knowledge of Michele’s relationship. She expressed concern about informing our supervisor, fearing it would damage his reputation and their professional relationship. Additionally, Mike contacted Joanne, seeking advice on what red flags might indicate issues before marriage, suggesting he was unaware of Michele's true circumstances. Recognizing the sensitivity of the situation, Joanne chose not to disclose this information directly to Mike or the supervisor but instead planned to confront Michele herself about the matter.

Reflecting on this decision, I believed that Joanne's choice to confront Michele was ethically justified, considering the circumstances. Although honesty is a core ethical principle, in scenarios where disclosure could cause unnecessary harm, prosocial deception—lying to protect the greater good—may be ethically permissible (Lupoli et al., 2017). In this instance, revealing Michele’s deception could have resulted in significant personal and professional repercussions, including breaking a marriage and damaging workplace relationships. Therefore, protecting disclosure to prevent harm seemed not only prudent but also ethically sound.

The dilemma revolved around balancing moral duties: the obligation to be truthful versus the need to prevent harm and preserve harmony. Joanne believed Michele was responsible for the deceit and was morally obliged to disclose the truth. Her decision aligned with ethical frameworks that prioritize compassion and the minimization of suffering. By confronting Michele privately, Joanne aimed to uphold moral integrity without inflicting harm indiscriminately on the innocent parties involved.

Critics might argue that withholding facts or lying compromises honesty, undermining trust within relationships. Nonetheless, in complex morally ambiguous situations, ethical decision-making often involves weighing competing values—truthfulness, loyalty, kindness, and the prevention of harm. The concept of prosocial lies suggests that sometimes, small fabrications serve a greater good, especially when sharing the truth might cause disproportionate suffering (Lupoli et al., 2017).

In conclusion, my stance is that Joanne's decision was ethically justified given the context. Confronting Michele allowed her to address the issue directly without unnecessarily damaging other relationships. While honesty remains a vital moral principle, circumstances exist where discretion, compassion, and strategic communication are necessary to maintain social harmony. Ethical behavior often requires nuanced judgment rather than strict adherence to rules, emphasizing the importance of context in moral decision-making.

References

• Friedman, H. H., Friedman, L. W., Frankel, M. R., & Amoo, T. (2019). Enhancing Critical and Ethical Thinking with Scenarios. Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management, 7(1), 22381. https://doi.org/10.1177/22381
• Lupoli, M. J., Jampol, L., & Oveis, C. (2017). Lying because we care: Compassion increases prosocial lying. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(7), 1026-1033. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000280
• Burkholder, J., Burkholder, D., & Gavin, M. (2020). The role of decision-making models and reflection in navigating ethical dilemmas. Counseling and Values, 65(1), 23–35.
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). How Good People Make Tough Choices. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Rest, J. R., & Narvaez, D. (1994). Moral development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics. Psychology Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Johnson, C. (2001). Moral Courage: Reclaiming the Ground of Conscience. In S. M. Gordon (Ed.), Moral Courage: Rebuilding Trust in Risky Times. Jossey-Bass.
• Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2016). Morality, Ethics, & Justice. Cengage Learning.
• Gert, B., Culver, C. M., & Clouser, K. D. (2006). Bioethics: A Systematic Approach. Johns Hopkins University Press.