TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Legal/Process needs to be aligned with Ethics

In my experience legal procedures and many business activities have yet to aspire to the level of Ethics. In this day and age, everyone knows to speak to ethics, but is it really practiced by government, business, etc...? For example: What happens when acting ethically is not aligned legally? If you act with integrity but, do so "at legal liability" what is the lesson? It sends a message of act legally and in line with process even if it means compromising ethics. Acting/Doing something the right way (acting ethically) is not always the legal way. Why does this exist as a conflict? Do we compromise integrity to follow rules & laws that lack authenticity in spirit? There needs to be a cultural bridge construct to align these presently diverse concepts on the same plane.
Open to your strategies on how to address and improve.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    Gail . 50+

    • +2
    Mar 2 2013: It is impossible to be a part of American culture without violating ethics. It is impossible to participate in the global fiscal scam without violating ethics. it is impossible to hold most jobs without violating ethics. If laws were designed to produce ethical behavior, our entire global economy would collapse, and most governments with them. If laws promoted ethics, there would not be such a vast disparity of wealth. If laws promoted ethics, we would not be raping our earth, destroying our habitat, and threatening the survival of much of life on earth - including humanity.

    how to bridge the divide? Make a distinction between ethics and morality. Morality is something that is "taught" - be it by religious leaders or secular societies who pass laws with specific intents. But ethics is something very different. Morals do not need to be ethical, rational or reasonable.

    If I were Pharaoh of the world (a concept that could be legal while not being ethical), I would so change the educational paradigm that school would not be unrecognizable by comparison. I would elevate the student by teaching EQ. I would stop focusing so heavily on IQ. It would teach critical thinking skills (how to solve problems) and in this way inspire creativity. Parents would start learning better life-strategies from their children. Eventually, I would be de-throned because there is already enough untaught information discovered through science that it would dramatically change the world if people were willing to dare consider its implications.

    But it wold probably be easier just to let our unsustainable fiscal system (and Abrahamic religions) collapse sooner rather than later, forcing individuals to think for themselves, because when money has no value, neither do the governments and religions that are sustained by it. Then we have a chance.

    those who want to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization want what never was & never will be (thomas Jefferson)

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.