Ethics is everywhere, even in the books we read, which sometimes are written wit

Ethics is everywhere, even in the books we read, which sometimes are written wit

Ethics is everywhere, even in the books we read, which sometimes are written without ethics specifically in mind. Here is a summary of a book that looks at actions that affect others, followed by questions that ask you to reflect on the ethical connections.
Why Can’t We Be Good?
Jacob Needleman
(Tarcher/Penguin, 2007)

Jacob Needleman is a professor of philosophy at San Francisco State University, who writes about a fundamental question of ethics (and also of criminal justice) “Why do we not do what we know is good?” If we agree on major principles for behavior, taken from the Socratic, Jewish, Christian, and other major philosophical and religious traditions, why do so many of us not act consistently in accord with these principles?
A quote from the Torah is used by the author to express the simple basis for good behavior, summarizing it in one sentence: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor.” In the Jewish tradition, Christianity, and other perspectives, the “golden rule” is a central, organizing theme, and “all the rest is commentary” on this basic principle. Therefore, we might expect adherence to this principle to be more universally practiced.
According to the author, good actions are preceded by good thoughts, and he turns to the philosophy of Socrates, Marcus Aurelius, and Epictetus as well as classroom techniques that involve thinking and listening while taking a specific action. The objective of these efforts is to identify the secret for transforming good ideas and thoughts into good actions, “which underlies the hypocrisy that haunts our lives, enabling us to go on and on betraying our ethical ideals while at the same time believing that we are doing what is good or, in any case, that we are doing all that we possibly can.”
Needleman uses the film Obedience as an example of how individuals justify immoral acts when told to do so by an authority figure (the film depicts the application of electric shocks for wrong answers to questions). He finds it difficult to explain the disjunction between widely held moral beliefs and the common instances we see of injustice, disrespect, and violence.
Needleman believes that the transition between thought and action “between what we are in our deepest heart and what we actually do and say” is what he calls “remorse of conscience.” That is to say, only when we see in full consciousness our capacity (weakness) in avoiding doing the good, that we are able to cross the threshold from moral thought into moral action. Needleman believes that clear awareness of our (in) capacities when crossing between the “two worlds” of thought and action is what gives us the strength to act in accordance with our principles.
Questions to answer
1. If good ideas alone are not enough to produce good actions, are there practical ways to encourage desirable actions (e.g., reporting crimes, acting as a Good Samaritan)?
2. How would Aristotle evaluate the linkage between moral virtues and actions? Would he see a similar separation between moral thought and action?
3. What is your personal reaction to the reading? Do you generally agree or disagree with Needleman, and why?