Moral values created in society impose many controversies on people in terms of their decision either to reveal or conceal the knowledge. The strong relation between ethical responsibility and knowledge possession is evident because numerous events, cases, and well-known examples testify to the negative consequences of concealing the truth.
On the one hand, individuals possessing important information about a specific event, object, or person may stay neutral in a situation. On the other hand, ignoring the situation may lead to unpredictable circumstances that can even cause harm to a person.
Therefore, possessing specific knowledge does impose an ethical responsibility on individuals, as well as on their decision whether this information should be unveiled or not, because there are cases when concealing knowledge leads to inevitable outcomes, such as injury, moral pressure, or even crime.
Living in a social medium, people should adhere to the social principles and act following the established codes of ethics, morale, and law.
Therefore, they should also be concerned with everything that happens around them and follows the ethical responsibilities imposed on them as members of a civilized community. Ethical decision-making, therefore, is a crucial ability of each person, because it indicates his/her understanding of what is ethically justified or not.
Therefore, everyone who possesses certain information is forced to evaluate the outcomes of exchanging, sharing, or concealing knowledge. Both withholding and releasing knowledge can also have a negative impact on the person taking advantage of it. Second, ethics is considered a field of moral philosophy that defines what action is right and which one is wrong; it refers to the philosophy of survival.
However, this philosophy survival does not refer to an individual, but the entire community in general. Irrespective of cultural background, social organization, and other ethical realms, possessing knowledge endows an individual with a certain power that should be controlled in compliance with the rules accepted in society.
Thus, while making a decision, a person should, first of all, think of the consequences because the fact of the interdependence of community members creates the possibility that unethical action can have a negative influence on this particular person.
The knowledge of history is premised on the extent to which people release information they have at their disposal. Controversies and ambiguity arise because of the reluctance of individuals to disclose the truth.
The history also provides evidence on how knowledge possession and disclosure can change the lives of many people. The example with intellectual property rights and their influence on the development of the third world proves that knowledge possession imposes an ethical responsibility on individuals.
Since such developed countries as the United States should exercise justice and morally attitude to the developing economies, they should be responsible for informing emerging countries about the basic principles of intellectual property to prevent any potential risks related to the case.
Besides, there is also a cultural controversy that correlates with various outlooks on knowledge possession. From a western perspective, individuals and organizations have the right not to release information to sustain a competitive advantage. However, the example shows that the Cold War period does not bring in any benefits for social development.
In interesting assumptions about the ethical implications of possessing knowledge is associated with the politics of water. Hence, the fact that the developing countries suffer most from environmental pollution because of the ignorance of the humble population of the potential risks this ecological situation has on them.
Displacement of people, therefore, is the result of inappropriate politics of knowledge sharing. Ethical responsibility imposed on the power authorities is ignored and, therefore, people are unaware of the consequences of their reforms and actions.
The pollution of water is specifically typical for African countries, as well as for the Eastern region. The government and private organizations possessing knowledge about environmental hazards should hold an ethical and legal liability for distributing information and preventing harm to the population.
The search for knowledge is often presented as a neutral, objective activity. Therefore, being ignorant can be an acceptable option from an ethical viewpoint. Such an opportunity can also be applied to independent knowledge acquisition. However, the knowledge itself will not be of value because it is not used for various purposes.
As soon as it is used in a context, it acquires a specific meaning. Knowledge is valuable only when it is applied to a particular situation and, therefore, people should carry an ethical responsibility for the way they employ their experience because it might also influence other people’s perception. For instance, the doctor’s ethics does not allow them to reveal information about their patients because it involves both moral and legal responsibility.
At the same time, there are occasions when this principle can be ignored because it contradicts personal outlooks on morale and ethics. During the Olympic Games, many doctors should keep the information confidential about their patients. However, in case they are involved in doping crimes, they are morally responsible for the consequences.
Nowadays, knowledge does have ethical significance, but people are also entitled to choose a neutral position because of their right to either give ethical meaning to knowledge or not. Ignorance of facts concerning situations can be regarded as neutral.
For instance, in case a scientist knows something significant that might change the outlook on science, in general, has full right to stay neutral and keep this knowledge concealed. Under these circumstances, disclosure of information might influence others, but its concealment will not provide any negative influence either.
Therefore, certain stances allow people to stay neutral toward certain positions. Any information can be used both for harm and for good. Thus, the outcome of knowledge exchange depends, first of all, on individuals possessing the knowledge, as well as their ability to make moral and ethical judgments about situations.
Therefore, ethical responsibility is imposed on an individual rather than on knowledge possession itself. Within this context, people should take responsibility for their actions, which can be ethically justified or not, but not on the knowledge they possess. Also, there are cases when people become victims of circumstances and acquire knowledge against their will. For instance, they become witnesses of a murder scene.
On the one hand, their rights as the members of the community are to sustain public welfare and security. Their moral obligation is to go to the police and testify to what they see. On the other hand, becoming the witness of such a situation can threaten their own lives, which may be the reasons for concealing information.
Although individuals are free to decide whether knowledge should be disclosed or concealed, the ethical dimension of knowledge cannot be ignored. Even if a person believes that knowledge should not be released, it will have ethical consequences.
Similar to the concept of free-will and survival, the concept of moral duty should be considered in the realm of knowledge ethics. This is of particular concern to the case when ignorance and indifference to the knowledge possession can harm other people or create contingencies.
Regardless of contexts, should it be scientific research on nuclear power or individual’s decision to keep friend’s secret, the ethics of knowledge is evident because the abstract existence of certain information will not have any meaning unless it is engaged into an ethical context. Therefore, the moral dimension of knowledge possession must make people be more conscious of their actions toward other people.
In conclusion, it should be stressed that individuals possessing knowledge should take ethical and moral responsibility for their actions. Both releasing information and concealment of specific facts can have severe outcomes for those who hold this knowledge, as well as for other individuals who depend on this information.
Moral dilemmas also occur when an individual selfishly takes advantage of knowledge, which might cause harm to society in general. Knowledge cannot be regarded as an individual property because any information is generated in a social environment.
The constant confrontation between personal space and the social construct in which people act can be resolved as soon as knowledge becomes transparent. At the same time, knowledge depends on individuals’ perception of ethics and morale and, as a result, most of the information is focused on the individual’s awareness of intellectual property.
