doing the right thing in a corrupt system benefits that corrupt system — Tex

How so?

That's a very good question. Thank you.

I think I should have phrased the question differently.

My revised question:

If someone is forced to participate in a corrupt system, is that person obligated to do the right thing?

If an action is right it could be argued the system it is in is immaterial. Unless you can demonstrate that the right thing will lead to direct harm to others.

General, non-specific discussion like this are hard to respond to and generate a range of sprawling scenarios. The briefly stated specifics of a situation are the best guide to assessing a potential response. But sometimes privacy issues are more important.

Thank you Tom. I was purposely being non-specific because I didn't want to believe that doing the right thing is situational. So is it true in Philosophy that doing the right thing can be situational?

I can understand the reticence when it comes to doing the right thing in a corrupt system. Doing so can lead to adverse consequences, maybe some sort of sanction or violence. I cannot oblige someone to do something that may risk his livelihood, and therefor he is under no obligation from me. The motivation to do the right thing must come from his own conscience.

Thank you Tom. I was purposely being non-specific because I didn't want to believe that doing the right thing is situational. So is it true in Philosophy that doing the right thing can be situational?[/quote]

Situational ethics (a form of consequentialism) is an approach to assessing right and wrong, so yes. Philosophy can provide you with many contradictory schools and approaches.

If someone is forced to participate in a corrupt system, is that person obligated to do the right thing? — Tex

Yes. The question is, what is the right thing? Sometimes that is living to fight another day. Sometimes that is staying out of jail to take care of loved ones. Sometimes corrupt systems know you are thinking all these thoughts and use your indecision against you. Sometimes doing the right thing is being the Gray Man, insurgency, guerilla ops, etc. Some people even convince themselves they are working for change within the system. As others have pointed out, a lot is situational and relative. Without specifics, it's hard to say. But not providing specifics can be smart.

Then again, you can always use philosophy to render you immobile with doubt about what is right. I've been doing that with regards to philanthropy. I'd love to sit around a fire with Melinda Gates for a few hours. Anyway, all the best.

The motivation to do the right thing must come from his own conscience. — NOS4A2

As others have pointed out, a lot is situational and relative. Without specifics, it's hard to say. — James Riley

Philosophy can provide you with many contradictory schools and approaches. — Tom Storm

Thank you all for your responses. I was trying to get Philosophy's position on the issue. What I'm understanding now is that Philosophy has no distinct position on the issue but rather is up to the individual to determine based on his own philosophical principles.

is up to the individual to determine based on his own philosophical principles. — Tex

Well, yes kind of, but it's not just a case of making up whatever you think is right or wrong. Having some personal views isn't the same thing as doing philosophy. Often people will settle on a position on morality after reviewing, to the best of their ability, a range of established positions. Philosophy offers a web of ideas and situations. During this process it isn't unusual to find that you have changed your mind.

Often people will settle on a position on morality after reviewing, to the best of their ability, a range of established positions. — Tom Storm

So it sounds like it depends on which, or a mix of, brand of Philosophy that the individual settles on. A mix a philosophy sounds like it will often lead to inconsistency which I find unsatisfying.

Yes, it's deeply unsatisfying but it may be better than ignorance. I say this as someone who knows very little about philosophy. I'm here largely to learn and see what I have been missing.

However, I also had the thought that doing the right thing in a corrupt system benefits that corrupt system. And that's where I found myself in a quandary. — Tex

In a system where you can leave it behind and go somewhere else, doing the right thing while in that system benefits that corrupt system.

My initial and gut feeling is that yes, doing the right thing is the right thing to do. Not only for your integrity but also your conscience. — Tex

:rofl:

doing the right thing in a corrupt system benefits that corrupt system
— Tex

How so? — James Riley

Say that you're working in a construction company where the official policy is to report all damaged tools, all accidents and near-accidents. If the company is corrupt, you following the official policy will be bad for you as you will be held responsible and will have to pay for the damage and the accidents.

If the company is corrupt, you following the official policy will be bad for you as you will be held responsible and will have to pay for the damage and the accidents. — baker

I get that (bad for me), but how does that benefit the corrupt system?

According to the official policy, the damage would be for them to pay for and they would have to ensure safety at work. Now they can blame you and wash their hands.

also feel that doing the right thing shouldn't be a situational decision which makes me learn towards my initial opinion of doing the right thing no matter what. — Tex

:rofl:

Before you can do the right thing, you must know what the right thing to do is. The former, for certain, isn't a walk in the park but the latter is known for causing people to tear their hair out in extreme frustration.

According to the official policy, the damage would be for them to pay for and they would have to ensure safety at work. Now they can blame you and wash their hands. — baker

Okay. I guess I'm just having a hard time seeing how doing the right thing in a corrupt system benefits that corrupt system. They had to pay damages and ensure safety at work. I guess that could be a benefit to them, like punishing a criminal *might* benefit him. But it would be less so if they laid blame elsewhere. Doing the right thing is not something to be blamed for. Rather, it should be lauded. Regardless, I digress in considering the person doing the right thing. My question was about the system benefiting. Doing the right thing only benefits the corrupt system by making it less corrupt. That would benefit the system, but not the corrupt system.

My question was about the system benefiting. Doing the right thing only benefits the corrupt system by making it less corrupt. That would benefit the system, but not the corrupt system. — James Riley

I think the OP meant "benefit the corrupt system" in the sense that the corrupt system benefits by not doing what they have otherwise legally obligated themselves to do, by finding ways not to pay what they would otherwise have to pay for, by perpetuating itself.

I'm having the impression the OP is implying that the corrupt system is being kept alive by wellmeaning, naive "good citizens" who are honest, humble, and obedient.


Take, for example, covid-19 vaccination. The system is telling us to be good citizens, to do the right thing, and to get vaccinated. But all covid-19 vaccines are currently still just experimental medications and health insurance does not cover the treatment of negative side effects of experimental medications. If you get negative side effects from the vaccination, you're on your own, and left to the mercy of doctors and their willingness to twist the facts a bit and say "Oh, but we're not sure it's from the vaccine". The companies making the vaccine are also not liable. They get to make money, but you have put your life on the line.

I'm having the impression the OP is implying that the corrupt system is being kept alive by wellmeaning, naive "good citizens" who are honest, humble, and obedient. — baker

Okay. I was agreeing that "doing the right thing" was being honest and humble, but I got hung up on the "obedient" part. Obedience in a corrupt system would definitely help the corrupt system. I just don't think obedience is the right thing in a corrupt system. A person just has to decide what constitutes "corrupt" and "right thing."

With the covid example, I agree our health care system is corrupt. I think it is the insurance companies and their ownership of our politicians, and our tolerance of it, that make it so. But I don't think the corruption weighs too much in the decision as to whether compliance with directions is a good thing or not. It could be good to mask up, distance, get the shot; not for the system, but for you.

For instance, corrupt systems can do good things. If one goes along with the corrupt system because of the good it does, doing so might indeed benefit the corrupt system. So one is then forced to consider what is more right and what is less right. The only other alternative is war or insurgency, the successful prosecution of which might involve going along with the corrupt system like the French Underground.

I say no. Because I wouldn't want anyone to feel guilty. Life is hard enough already. You just do what you have to do.

Call it self-mercy, self-compassion, self-forgiveness or whatever you like. It helps me to live with myself.

For some reason I'm quite emotional right now. I don't know what it is.
Perhaps I'll change my mind about it in the future. For now this feels sincere.

I say no. Because I wouldn't want anyone to feel guilty. Life is hard enough already. You just do what you have to do. — TaySan

I tend to agree. Especially if doing the right thing has the potential of harming other uninvolved parties. I'm okay bearing the burden but not quite so okay for uninvited repercussions to affect someone else.