Home · Thoughts · Dates · Policy
03-25-99 · 04-13-99 · 11-06-02
The cause of people deciding what is better ethics is a difficult way to define. There is no true way to define it. Ethics are part of each of us, and every person around us. The ethics of one person will vary to the next person because everyone is different. Different experiences and different forms of knowledge causes each person's ethics to change accordingly.
Ethics are basically defined as the things that guide people to do his/her decisions. If something seems wrong, a person's ethics will cause him/her to do the decision that is best for that person's ethics. That decision can be logical to other people, or it may be a decision that doesn't make sense in the first place. Different people will have different opinions with every situation.
The mind of any given person changes over time. If the person is not warlike at the start of a war, that person at the end of the war will have a form of hatred towards something/one. The hatred comes to the person because at any given war, everyone takes sides. The hatred will exist, and it will take a while to lose that hatred. No matter how much experience in the war the person will have, his/her opinion about the war will change for one side or the other. I will never stay neutral.
For the mind to work properly the person's ethics must be used properly. If the person's ethics are never used, that person's mind slips closer and closer to be classified as insane. The person will no longer have ethics to guide them and the mind of that person will see everything to be right. The person would usually go insane and start killing people just to satisfy his/her mind enough to be able to seem like everything is normal. The mind will start to play tricks on the person, it can/will get dangerous after time if it isn't stopped.
Ethics do rule everyone whether the person is able to deal with the ethics positively or just not deal with them at all. If a person decides to not use his/her own ethics to the proper potential, the mind will start to breakdown to cause the person to have greater difficulties to decide things than a normal person would. Ethics and the mind go hand to hand as long as they both are being used properly. If they are not being used properly, then the person may seem to start to have some metal problems. An unethical person would seem like a cruel person (sometimes lawyers) however they pay for it in the end when his/her mind decides to no longer allow it from happening. The mind will start to cause some hallucinations which may cause the person seem like they have a mental problem. This is a simple defense that the mind has over any given person.
Ethics are defined differently for everyone. People may have good ethics or bad ethics; it all depends on the perceptions of the ethics themselves. It doesn't matter that the ethics are good or bad because they are still ethics, which means everyone has ethics.
Personal ethics and working ethics always seem to clash in the work place. If the personal ethics seems to be better than the work ethics, the personal ethics would come out on top. Personal ethics define the type of person that we all are. If you are willing to go against what you believe is proper, others will classify you to have bad personal ethics. You are defined like this because you are going against your personal ethics. This means that your personal ethics are not good enough to keep you from doing bad things, or you are just a bad person. Either way, your personal ethics should be adjusted to meet the need for ethics.
Ethics are truly the way to define any given person. If the person refuses to do logical things that everyone believes is proper, then the person has a high chance to have bad ethics. If the person chooses to hurt others, the ethics of that person are bad ethics too. To develop bad ethics is not good for anyone. People may feel they are doing something right, but if his/her ethics allow them to break the law, the law will react to it with great force. The ethics of the person will be in question, and the law will punish the person as it sees fit.
If the ethics of one person is applied onto another person, the result could be a bad one; preferred to be a good one, but has a high chance to be a bad one. It all depends on how the other person's ethics would react to the circumstances. The person has a high chance to be violent when his/her ethics are being proven to be wrong, so the one that is proving the ethics to be wrong may have to defend him/herself for a physical attack.
Technically speaking, ethics are only a form of emotional reaction to any/all circumstances. If the ethics decided to react in a positive way, the ethics would seem to be good; and it works the other way too. Ethics are controlled to make a decision that is all, nothing more.
If logic stands in the way to determine a solution, the person's ethics would have problems with the solution. If the logic of a decision is not applied, the impulse from the ethics could have no true reason, which would make a conflict happen. Once logic is not applied, ethics seem to have no real meaning/control of anything.
In conclusion, if ethics do not have a true meaning logically, then technically speaking, ethics would just be impulsive reactions to every situation/circumstance that arises. Without logic, the impulse will have no guidelines to follow to be determined as being a good/bad ethical decision.
For every person, there are certain ethics that they will follow because ethics are the make of every person. If a person starts to question his/her ethics, that means the person may be questioning themselves to be a good person or not; or it could be the person questioning his/her ethics vs. a businesses ethics. In either case the ethics should not conflict against each other, usually when ethics are questioned in any case there is something wrong.
A person's personal ethics & business ethics will be different. A person may not question doing something extra for them because his/her personal ethics may not be in conflict with the situation, however his/her business ethics may have a conflict with the situation. At a business (work) a person's business ethics are usually what the person feels is the right approach to all situations. A person's personal ethics may be in conflict with his/her business ethics at times due to one set of ethics is usually converted from the other set of ethics.
An example of a conflict of ethics would be if a person at a business starts to cover a problem up by him/herself without telling anyone. A person's personal ethics usually would be to see why the person is doing such a thing, however a person's business ethics usually would be to stop the person from covering the problem up. The problem could be missing money or even missing product, in this case it doesn't matter.
To make it easier we will say that it is missing money. If money was going missing for an unknown explanation, one of the employees that are responsible may try to cover it up. In this case the person doesn't know if someone is stealing the money, however the person doesn't want to have someone above him or her to find out, so he/she covers the loss with his or her own money. This person is using more of their personal ethics than they are his/her business ethics. The person is more fearful that they are going to be held responsible for the loss, so they are replacing it now before someone finds out and has this situation cost him/her a job. Depending on the person, the job could be something that they cannot afford to lose.
If a person uses his/her personal ethics & business ethics equally as a way to determine how to deal with a situation, he/she will always be in a battle within his/her own mind. It is always good to have the two sets of ethics setup, however to have them always battling each other will cause a person to second-guess everything that the person does. When a person second-guesses him/herself in a situation, the person will find that he/she is receiving a little bit more stress due to the situation. If a person is not sure what to do in a situation that his/her ethics are involved, that means that the person is either not sure which set of ethics to deal with, or the person hasn't been in the type of situation that has just happened. A robbery is a good example of this, however it is not a pleasant thing to happen though. If you are robbed you will automatically call the police to come down (this is standard). A person that has never been robbed before will start to panic, and his/her business ethics will start to apply more (whether the robbery happened at work or home). The person will explain the situation to his/her best ability to the police without question of what happened. The person may say things that do not apply to the situation because they are starting to panic. However if the person had been robbed before, the person's personal ethics will take control and try to make a conflict with the business ethics of the person. Thoughts that the business may hold you responsible will float around, and if you are the only person around when the robbery happened, your personal ethics may tempt a person to lie to the police about what happened. If you saw nothing, you may make up a description so that you can look a bit better. This is never good.
The bad thing about a conflict of ethics is that a person will start second-guessing him/herself a lot more until that conflict is over. With most cases, a conflict of ethics causes more harm than good and the person will usually have to go through counseling to recover from the situation.
© COPYRIGHT 2004