The first question that readers of this review – academics
concerned with teaching and research on ethical behaviour –
will ask is whether it is a useful book. The answer has to be a
strong but not unqualified “yes”. To the question on
whether it is a possible textbook, however, the answer has to be
clear no.
To the general reader concerned with the ethical values and practices
in our society, the book is a mixed bag, some aspects extremely
useful, others dangerously simplified and even misleading.
Its strength lies in the first part of the book, in which Mackay
lucidly outlines a series of philosophical concepts that provide
a strong basis for making ethical decisions. Their strength lies
in the the complex and often conflicting arguments of academic ethicists.
His opening chapter, Freedom to Choose, is a cogent analysis and
series of arguments for autonomy of the individual, and the responsibilities
entailed by our ever-increasing liberation from paternalistic social
values. It is an indirect endorsement of Immanuel Kant’s formula
for autonomy Always treat humanity, whether yourself or any
other, never as a means but always as an end,
But subsequent chapters demolish Kant’s concept of duty,
pointing out that in many aspects of our lives , we can have more
than one right answer – Under certain conditions it can be
ethically correct to lie, to steal, even to kill. Mackay is an unabashed
Utilitarian, arguing that we should try to produce happiness and
reduce suffering, ensuring in the process the greatest overall benefit
or least suffering.
Mackay then explores a number of issues – where our values
come from (which he argues come from our sense of community); the
relationship between morality and religion; and then asks the question
on why we should be good. This last question, examined over two
chapters, produces for us answers which are not fully convincing
– one is a restatement of autonomy – that our need to
be taken seriously should engender in us a commitment that others
be taken seriously. A second is that we achieve happiness through
virtue. But they introduce Mackay’s strongest concept, that
of moral mindfulness. He poses a number of ethical dilemmas - abortion,
tax avoidance, selling your car with a hidden defect.. He proposes
a series of tests by which we can reach a conclusion on difficult
ethical issues, including what he calls the four ‘super-tests:’
• Will anyone be harmed by the action?
• Would I do this if it were the one and only action by which
I would be judged?
• Do I own the values implied by this action?
• Is the benefit to me clouding my judgement?
Either consciously or unconsciously he adopts a series of ethical
principles widely used in bio-ethics, medicine and other health
related fields:
The book’s weaknesses are in putting his concepts into practice,
perhaps best exemplified in his diatribe against codes of ethics.
Mackay is against regulation, quoting the chairpersons of Qantas
and the Commonwealth Bank in saying that laws might make us more
obedient, but less morally responsible. Business people, of course,
have long railed against regulation, so the quotes carry little
conviction. His own argument is that freedom of choice is the essence
of moral decisions and more regulation diminishes that choice. Mackay
seems to forget that the problems with the HIHs . FAIs and Enrons
of this world is the freedom of choice in the hands of unethical
people at the top of organisations. Our problem is stopping those
people whose free choice is totheir own advantage and for that we
need the stronger codes with external reporting, investigations
and sanctions that are currently being adopted. We also need the
improved legislation on public interest disclosures and whistleblower
protection that is being introduced.
The weakness in implementing his moral precepts in practice continue
with the second part of the book, Putting moral mindfulness
to work. Mackay covers wide-ranging issues - rules for sex,
breaking relationships, going to war, racial tolerance, lies, euthanasia,
abortion and a series of bio-ethic issues. Despite a promise not
to preach, this section is little more than Hugh Mackay’s
views on these issues. Despite having set up powerful analytical
tools for deciding on the rights and wrongs of ethical issues, he
fails to use them. On some of the issues – sexual relations,
the stolen generation, good lies and bad lies – he uses his
‘Does it do harm?’ argument, but for the most part,
we will get a stronger analysis from the daily newspapers.
|
