Imogene Badpenny works as a supervisor for the Grantham County Sheriff’s Department and the University City Police Department. She has a perfectly clean background and a flawless 16-year career in her position. As of late, however, Badpenny started dating a person once sentenced to prison due to drug sales, distribution, and manufacturing. In order to avoid problems at the workplace, Badpenny puts effort into hiding her boyfriend’s identity from co-workers, which can hardly be considered morally and ethically right.
Badpenny faces a situation that is usually referenced as an ethical dilemma. According to Pollock (2019), an ethical dilemma is an issue that requires an individual to act either not knowing the right course of action or knowing that the right course brings negative consequences. In this context, Badpenny is indecisive regarding revealing the personality of her current boyfriend to her colleagues due to the fear of being scolded for her romantic preferences. In the worst case, she might be fired because of the connection to a socially dangerous person. Badpenny might also be torn between identifying her openness as a duty – morally imperative action – or supererogatory – a commendable but not imperative action (Pollock, 2019). The fact that she did not reveal the boyfriend’s persona just yet might imply that Badpenny leans toward the latter.
Badpenny’s motives make it difficult to categorize her behavior according to existing ethical systems. An ethical system is a term that refers to “a structured set of principles that defines what is moral” (Pollock, 2019, p. 25). Throughout human history, various philosophers, such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics, contributed to the development of ethical systems. Socrates believed that morality is bound to virtue through wisdom, attributing any immoral action to ignorance (Kropotkin, 2021). This perspective does not apply to the given case since Badpenny is well aware of the negativity of her actions. Based on Socrates’ idea of wisdom as a virtue, Plato also considered the qualities of courage and moderation as virtuous (Kropotkin, 2021). Moreover, Plato attributed virtuous qualities to specific social classes. As a member of a police force, Badpenny belongs to the soldier class in Plato’s classification, making courage her virtue (Kropotkin, 2021). Therefore, while Badpenny does fit into Plato’s ethical framework, she does not behave morally from its perspective.
As a student of Plato, Aristotle used his teacher’s ideas to formulate his own vision. Particularly, he redefined the concept of virtue by separating it into intellectual and moral (Statman, 2019). He also introduced the idea of the Golden Mean – a principle of moderation in the search for personal happiness that implies a balance between two behavioral extremes (Statman, 2019). However, since Badpenny’s case does not illustrate any middle-ground approaches, Aristotle’s ethics do not apply to it. Finally, the Stoics put a great emphasis on reason in moral decision-making (Kropotkin, 2021). In addition, they perceived passion as ill and immoral, implying that one should prefer logic over emotions (Kropotkin, 2021). This is why stoicism is not applicable to Badpenny’s case – the desire to be with her boyfriend goes against the logic of a police workforce.
Nevertheless, there is an ethical system that can potentially justify Badpenny’s actions. Pollock (2019) defines egoism as a system that considers it morally good for an individual to pursue personal interests. In this framework, the concept of psychological egoism – the pursuit of self-interest as an inherent human quality – fits Badpenny perfectly. Unfortunately, egoism as an ethical system has the major flaw of utterly dismissing the rights of others in one’s search for happiness, which makes egoism ethics incredibly debatable.
Overall, Badpenny’s decision to hide her boyfriend’s identity can only be morally justified from the perspective of an ethical system of egoism. Having to face the ethical dilemma, Badpenny sees the confession to her colleagues as a supererogatory action. Apparently, her decision-making is significantly influenced by self-interest and romantic passion despite knowing of potential danger. This fact renders her acts immoral within the ethical frameworks of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics, leaving egoism as the only justification option.
References
Kropotkin, K. (2021). Ethics: Origins and development. Black Rose Books.
Pollock, J. M. (2019). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Statman, D. (2019). Virtue ethics: A critical reader. Edinburgh University Press.