伦理氛围与亲组织非伦理行为:道德辩护的中介效应

与纯粹的私利性非伦理行为不同,亲组织非伦理行为是个体为了组织利益而实施的非伦理行为。探讨了伦理氛围对亲组织非伦理行为的影响以及道德辩护的中介作用。实证研究结果发现,自利型、关怀型伦理氛围分别对亲组织非伦理行为具有正向影响,规则型伦理氛围对亲组织非伦理行为具有负向影响,道德辩护分别在三种伦理氛围与亲组织非伦理行为关系间具有部分中介作用。     

Normativity in Comparative Religious Ethics

This essay seeks to clarify the meaning and nature of normativity in metaethics and offers reasons why comparative religious ethics (CRE) must properly address questions about normativity. Though many comparative religious ethicists take CRE to be a normative discipline, what they say about normativity is often unclear and confusing. I argue that the third‐wave scholars face serious questions with respect to not only the justification of moral belief but also the rationality of moral belief and action. These scholars tend to view the justification of moral belief to be a matter of process (that is, discursive social practice) rather than evidence‐possession, thus overlooking crucial differences between the two. They also run the risk of confusing motivating and explanatory reasons with normative reasons for moral belief and action. Consequently, their account of normativity would be insufficient for determining the rationality of moral beliefs and actions as well as for justifying moral beliefs.     

Placebo in the investigation of psychotropic drugs,especially antidepressants

The paper presents major ethical, legal and methodological problems related to the use of placebo in mental disorders, especially in depression. It is pointed out that although authoritative groups of experts and numerous publications in the field of psychopharmacology indicate advisability of the double blind design with placebo in clinical trials of antidepressants, in recent years there have been more and more voices questioning legitimacy of this method. Objections of an ethical nature are raised, and reliability of this approach is put into doubt from the methodological viewpoint. These issues are discussed in more detail in the paper. Available alternative solutions should be implemented in psychotropic drug studies. The author shares these objections and doubts of an ethical nature, and believes that the placebo procedure is not a necessity in clinical trials of antidepressants. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an international conference, “Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 12–13 April, 2003.     

The importance of meta-ethics in engineering education

Our shared moral framework is negotiated as part of the social contract. Some elements of that framework are established (tell the truth under oath), but other elements lack an overlapping consensus (just when can an individual lie to protect his or her privacy?). The tidy bits of our accepted moral framework have been codified, becoming the subject of legal rather than ethical consideration. Those elements remaining in the realm of ethics seem fragmented and inconsistent.Yet, our engineering students will need to navigate the broken ground of this complex moral landscape. A minimalist approach would leave our students with formulated dogma—principles of right and wrong such as the National Society for Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics for Engineers—but without any insight into the genesis of these principles. A slightly deeper, micro-ethics approach would teach our students to solve ethical problems by applying heuristics—giving our students a rational process to manipulate ethical dilemmas using the same principles simply referenced a priori by dogma. A macro-ethics approach—helping students to inductively construct a posteriori principles from case studies—goes beyond the simple statement or manipulation of principles, but falls short of linking personal moral principles to the larger, social context. Ultimately, it is this social context that requires both the application of ethical principles, and the negotiation of moral values—from an understanding of meta-ethics.The approaches to engineering ethics instruction (dogma, heuristics, case studies, and meta-ethics) can be associated with stages of moral development. If we leave our students with only a dogmatic reaction to ethical dilemmas, they will be dependent on the ethical decisions of others (a denial of their fundamental potential for moral autonomy). Heuristics offers a tool to deal independently with moral questions, but a tool that too frequently reduces to casuistry when rigidly applied to “simplified” dilemmas. Case studies, while providing a context for engineering ethics, can encourage the premature analysis of specific moral conduct rather than the development of broad moral principles—stifling our students’ facility with meta-ethics. Clearly, if a moral sense is developmental, ethics instruction should lead our students from lower to higher stages of moral development.     

The use of moral dilemmas for teaching agricultural engineers

Agricultural engineers’ jobs are especially related to sustainability and earth life issues. They usually work with plants or animals, and the aim of their work is often linked to producing food to allow people to improve their quality of life. Taking into account this dual function, the moral requirements of their day-to-day professional practice are arguably greater than those of other professions. Agricultural engineers can develop their ability to live up to this professional responsibility by receiving ethical training during their university studies, not only by taking courses specifically devoted to ethics, but also by having to deal with moral questions that are integrated into their technical courses through a program of Ethics Across the Curriculum (EAC). The authors feel that a suitable pedagogical technique for achieving this goal is the use of moral dilemmas, following Kohlberg’s theory of levels of morality (1981), with the final objective of attaining a post-conventional level. This paper examines the possibilities and limitations of using moral dilemmas as a pedagogical technique for training agricultural engineers. The cases, discussions, and evaluation used in the Agricultural Engineering Department of the Technical University of Valencia (Spain) are also presented. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2005 conference, Ethics and Social Responsibility in Engineering and Technology, Linking Workplace Ethics and Education, co-hosted by Gonzaga University and Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 9–10 June 2005.     

Teaching for adaptive expertise in biomedical engineering ethics

This paper considers an approach to teaching ethics in bioengineering based on the How People Learn (HPL) framework. Curricula based on this framework have been effective in mathematics and science instruction from the kindergarten to the college levels. This framework is well suited to teaching bioengineering ethics because it helps learners develop “adaptive expertise”. Adaptive expertise refers to the ability to use knowledge and experience in a domain to learn in unanticipated situations. It differs from routine expertise, which requires using knowledge appropriately to solve routine problems. Adaptive expertise is an important educational objective for bioengineers because the regulations and knowledge base in the discipline are likely to change significantly over the course of their careers. This study compares the performance of undergraduate bioengineering students who learned about ethics for stem cell research using the HPL method of instruction to the performance of students who learned following a standard lecture sequence. Both groups learned the factual material equally well, but the HPL group was more prepared to act adaptively when presented with a novel situation.     

Practicing What We Teach – Ethical Considerations for Business Schools

The raging cynicism felt toward businesses and business leaders is a by-product of perceived violations in the social contracts owed to the public. Business schools have a unique opportunity to make a significant impact on present and future business leaders, but ‘practicing what we teach’ is a critical condition precedent. This paper presents frameworks for ethical practices for assessing the social contracts owed by business schools in their role as citizens in the larger community. We identify the ethical implications of business school practices to guide the development of tools for self-assessment and to focus on delivering the implied duties owed to the stakeholders of business schools.     

The roots of empathy and aggression in analysis

Empathy and interpretation have complementary roles in analysis. Empathy diminishes psychological arousal, ego-defences, and promotes the therapeutic relationship. Interpretation, when adopted in the service of character analysis and the uncovering of unconscious conflict, represents one element of a larger set of interventions termed analytic aggression, whose primary goal is to promote insight. Psychoanalysis has been increasingly influenced by derivative theories that promote the therapeutic relationship. Clinical observations suggest that the application of analytic aggression has diminished and that many modern treatments may have become overly skewed towards empathic approaches. This paper explores ethical humanism, Jamesian typology, and feminine psychology, as factors that have contributed to the diminished emphasis on analytic aggression in practice. Eastern myth and Buddhist psychology are used to explicate the core features of narcissistic mental structuring and to support the continued importance of analytic aggression in its treatment. Case material is examined to elucidate the benefits and limits of analytic aggression.     

Called to repair injustice: Connecting everyday practices to societal phenomena,creating momentum for solidarity and change

I have been working with a model of witnessing for more than 30 years (Weingarten, 2000a). In this article, I add layers to its conceptualization by discussing several related concepts: the implicated subject (Rothberg, 2019) and ethical loneliness (Stauffer, 2015) among them. What distinguishes the Witnessing Model positions from the implicated subject is that the implicated subject is always aligned with power and/or domination, whereas a witness may not be. Certain responsibilities accrue if we take our implication seriously. Just as I have suggested there are steps one can take from positions two, three and four of the Witnessing Model to enter, return or remain in the aware and empowered position, a position from within which accountability is more likely, I offer ideas about how one can respond accountably when one acknowledges one's implication. Throughout this article, I raise questions, some of which I cannot answer. For instance, can empathic repair be undertaken by one party to a ruptured relationship, one segment of a society, without an unfolding process of mutual recognition and compassion? The contemporary moment in which we are living presents us with dire outcomes if the answer is “no.” The entire article is an extended meditation on the following central question: How can we, implicated subjects, practice solidarity to diminish ethical loneliness and create movement toward the personal, interpersonal and structural changes necessary to address the truths that our implication entails?     

Dennis Engels: A Humanitarian and Ethical Scholar

Dr. Dennis Engels retired in 2011 after a 35‐year career as a counselor educator, during which he contributed over 30 years of service to the Association for Spiritual, Ethical, and Religious Values in Counseling. In this profile article, the author reviews the highlights of Dr. Engels's distinguished career and presents an interview in which Dr. Engels discusses (a) his journey as a counselor educator, (b) ethical standards and credentialing, and (c) the future of counseling.