What I noticed about chapter 3 was the kind of ways we can interpret and decide on the kind of ethical reasons we chose. I personally know that I use a little of all of them depending on where I am in my life and who I am with. Though, I also know that I use some more than others such as Contextual, Narrative, Dialogic. In that order. Obviously the use of the other two are a given, but preference is still held for those three.
The reason I say what my main ethic interpretations is because we all have our preferred way of looking at things in life. Those are mine. The Codes, procedures, and standards; Universal-humanitarian; Democratic communication ethics always seem to be in different situations for me. The Universal- humanitarian approach seems to me like a do or die situation like save a 10 murders or save a CEO of a really big and important company (yes, I know, it's hyperbole but bear with me.) and the codes is to hold on to codes no matter what like if you were to be the CEO's assistant and you signed your life away to protect him at all costs but are conflicted between saving him or say you family. You did sign your life away so you chose to save the CEO. Again those are a big jump, thats the first thing that popped up into my mind.
So really what I am trying to say is that given your situation, you could hold preference to any of those approaches. It is all for good, we know that learning is good, we just don't know what the cost of learning is sometimes; we like to try to understand others, though we may not know how difficult it may be and the investment of effort and time it is; we like to hear stories, and we may not like how a story ends but what we learn is necessary to move on. Process. Process. Process.
I felt the same way about chapter 3. We have such a broad idea of what is good. To add on that, we understand in some situations we may encounter that we need to change our style. The approach we go into a conflict with or how we address certain situations may be the line that can be a thin one to walk when we think of offending someone. If we can be open minded and see other ideas this may work.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand as we see in the ideas of codes (like in a company) we have to have a strict set of guidelines to lead the way. In my blog post I speak about working in a restaurant and always having to follow the same rules. For 1 it is fair to all, 2 we can keep a common goal, and 3 I never have to punish someone on the basis of a fluke idea or my own prejudices. I feel this has been the best approach for me as of yet in my business and professional settings. I like the way you address that the situation can change and so our opinions or options may change for how we handle things ethically. NICE WORK