Ethics Conversation

I recently read a book by Stanley Cavell called Cities of Words: Pedagogical Letters on a Register of the Moral Life (2004). Despite its title, it is not about cities; in fact, much of the book uses movies to discuss this Harvard professor's ethical philosophy. What is relevant about this book to government ethics is Cavell's idea of "moral perfectionism," which isn't about being perfect, but about constantly seeking improvement in how one thinks and acts. Most important to Cavell is making oneself intelligible to oneself and to others through "moral conversation" with "friends."

The open discussion of relevant ethics issues at government meetings is central to a good ethics environment. Conversation about ethics with one's colleagues, as well as with ethics advisers and in training sessions, as an ordinary professional practice, is the principal means for improving one's responsible handling of possible conflicts and other ethics matters. Ethics conversation also creates a sense of community in looking at the appearance of actions to the public and in raising certain issues that might otherwise be uncomfortable to raise, such as another person's conduct. An organization's values and procedures are formed in this way.

There is another important aspect to such conversation. It provides government officials with experience honestly providing reasons for their conduct. This is a good thing to practice in private so that it can be done well in public. Explanation is essential to transparency and to trust and, ultimately, to democracy. Insisting one is a good person – the norm – satisfies no one but oneself.

Cavell's approach is also valuable to the extent it takes into account people's emotions. His concept of moral perfectionism "recognizes difficulties in the moral life that arise not from an ignorance of your duties, or a conflict of duties, but from confusion over your desires, your attractions and aversions."

Emotion is too often ignored in government ethics. The emotions that get in the way of the responsible handling of conflicts include such things as the importance of loyalty (including not snitching or questioning another's conduct) that are deeply instilled in us by our families and our childhood friendships. When faced with, say, a requirement to report unethical conduct, officials are confused, conflicted not in their interests but in their feelings. It is the rare official who does not have mixed feelings about ethics rules. These need to be recognized and talked out.

Here is a quote from Cavell worth chewing on awhile. It relates to the views of philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein: "it is precisely philosophy's business to question our interests as they stand … It is our distorted sense of what is important — call this our values — that is distorting our lives."

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---