General Studies Paper IV (Section A) by Manoj K. Jha

Model Answer

Question #1. Ethics is not only about right and wrong but also about the gradation of right and wrong. Comment on this statement in the wake of rationing of medical supplies in the times of CoVID-19.

Approach

1. Explain the meaning of the quote briefly in your own words. (75 words)
2. Apply this statement to evaluate the allocation of medical supplies during covid-19. (75 words)

Hints:

Understanding what is ethics

Ethics often asks the question: “what is the right thing to do?” Having asked this question, ethics as a discipline tries to find an answer to this question based on some established standards to evaluate what is right and what is wrong. These standards to weigh a situation have evolved over time in different societies in different ways. So, we find that in some societies, for instance, taking care of your old aged parents is an ethical act and an individual will be judged strongly if he deviates from this set standard of human conduct. In some other society, we find that individuality and autonomy are more cherish able values and people prefer to fend for themselves and not to depend on others. Having said that, one should not assume that there are no universal values that all societies by and large adhere to. Truthfulness, trust, reciprocity, kindness etc. are some values which no society can out rightly deny.

Explaining the quote

Having introduced ethics, one should realise the fact that in real life scenario, such questions don’t come in the shades of black and white. Often, the choice is not between right and wrong. If it would have been that way, there wouldn’t have been so many theories of ethical decision making. The whole challenge is to pick between competing conceptions of good. These questions are grey in nature. One theory, say virtue ethics, may point towards one direction and other, say utilitarianism, may point towards another. Both of them will have their own set of explanations. There is no absolute right and wrong here but only degrees of right. Finally, it boils down to “decision-making” and taking a call about which “good” one wants to prioritize in which situation. This decision making is ultimately a choice one makes.

Relating with Covid-19

We can better understand it by reflecting upon how governments across the globe have tried to deal with the issue of Covid-19. Nobody can deny the fact that medical supplies are in limited quantity. In epidemics, resource crisis is natural. When there are more patients in need of, say oxygen cylinders, ventilators etc., we as a society need to devise some mechanism for how to allocate these limited medical supplies. According to Kantian injunction of ‘never using human beings as means but always as ends’, we must value all lives equally. Utilitarianism will, however, suggest to go for ‘greatest good of greatest number’. On the one hand, we value all loves equally but on the other we know that there is lesser chance of survival of people with co-morbidity. Both of these are values that we adhere to in normal times but in crisis situations, we need to grade these values. Some countries have reserved medical supplies for elderly while others want to focus on those lives which can be saved with more probability. People with serious conditions are brought to hospital and those with lesser symptoms are advised to home quarantine. Countries are limiting exports of drugs like HCQ despite their adherence to cosmopolitanism.

Conclusion

What we infer from above analysis is that real challenge with ethical decision making is not to distinguish between right and wrong but grading different right things one is supposed to do in a particular situation. Ethical theories can be of limited help. It is finally about ‘prudential decision making’.

Question #1. "Relativity applies to physics, not ethics". Do you agree with this statement? Give arguments and illustrations to clarify your position.

Approach       

1. Discuss the meaning of the quote briefly. (75 words)
2. With contrasting examples, comment critically on the notion of ethical relativism. (75 words)

Hints:

Ethics: absolute or relative?

Relativism is of the view that moral or ethical systems, which vary from culture to culture, are all equally valid and no one system is really “better” than any other. This is based on the idea that there is no ultimate standard of good or evil, so every judgment about right and wrong is a product of society. Therefore, any opinion on morality or ethics is subject to the cultural perspective of each person.

It defines “good” as what is socially approved. Ultimately, this means that no moral or ethical system can be considered the “best,” or “worst,” and no particular moral or ethical position can actually be considered “right” or “wrong”, but good is what society decides.

A pluralist society is one in which there are different views on questions of politics, morality, religion. The conflicts of ideas and practices are an inevitable and permanent part of human society. But to maintain peace and tolerance in the society, the concept of cultural relativism came up. It states that individual person’s beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual’s own culture. This enhances tolerance towards other beliefs and norms.

However, moral values are relative as there is no objective truth. It changes with context and situation, that is,

a) It changes with society to society and region.

b) It varies with cultural heritage.

c) It varies with era.

d) Faith-based morality may differ from secular humanist-based morality.

Criticizing moral relativism

Absolute moral relativism is self-contradictory and impossible because the ultimate end of all moral values is inner happiness. To suggest that there is absolutely no universal conception of good is to deny any change in existing idea of good. This is because improvement is contingent upon allowance for critique and critique is possible with respect to a universal benchmark. To deny moral universalism in any sense is to disallow any change.

This gets best reflected when Islamic feminism enters into debate with human rights discourse. They are classical embodiments of multicultural and universal discourses. Sticking to multiculturalism can give an argument to keep oppressing a particular section of society and deny them human dignity. This is where we need the guarantee of a basic minimum for all human beings.

Conclusion

Ideal solution is to appreciate the fact that moral values and ethical ideas are in constant fermentation. But through this process of fermentation, we have distilled certain key values like freedom, justice, nonviolence etc. The role of multiculturalism should be to make the debate on ethics and the idea of good more rich by bringing competing conception of good and bad and not to throttle the possibility of debate by using this as a safeguard against criticism.