Right vs Wrong
Obviously, this is an important topic. How do we decide when we are wrong and what do we do about it?
In many situations, it is obvious. Being unjust, unfair, or dishonest are wrong. Doing unnecessary damage to someone is wrong. If some action breaks the law, that is a strong clue that it is wrong. (We say clue because some laws are counteracted by newer laws or may be outmoded and very old.) We avoid wrongdoing not only because it can result in legal action and stigma against us, but also because wrongdoing can degrade our community. An act of wrongdoing by someone can result in problems for many.
Note that a verdict of "not guilty" in a court of law only means that there wasn't enough evidence to convict. Actually, the person on trial may be in fact be guilty. So a court verdict can be limited in that a wrong thing has actually been done, it just can't be proven in court. But the guilty person is still in an immoral situation because morality can be larger than a verdict in court. An immoral act is one that breaks accepted standards in some way; an ethical debt has been incurred. There is another situation which is referred to as unethical. Unethical often means that a professional standard has been broken. All of these are faqctors in moral and ethical behavior.
What do we do when we are wrong? We set things right. We may have to apologize and make amends to someone or a group. Hopefully, the wrong is not something that requires legal consequences such as fines, incarceration or worse. Maybe assistance is needed by a lawyer, mediator, or clergyperson.
Right or wrong doesn’t easily apply in some situations. In these cases, it may be helpful to focus on doing as little harm as possible, or on what is more desirable. There may be two sides to an issue. Consider paying taxes. Those who pay are deprived of the money (wrong for them?), but those who benefit, such as sick or poor individuals, need the funds (right for them). In some situations, within reasonable limits, right and wrong can be seen as unhelpful criterion. We may need to shift to considering what benefits whom and what is more reasonable and desirable.
Related topics have been discussed in other places that address collegial ethics. Good vs Evil: https://sites.google.com/view/evil-overpowers-good. First do no harm and unintended consequences: https://sites.google.com/view/no-harm-and-consequences. How to apologize: https://sites.google.com/view/how-to-apologize.
Is blame ever 100%?
If you blame someone for a wrong outcome at work or in the community, you might want to consider the possibility that nothing is ever 100% anybody’s fault. Of course, depending on the situation, it could be very near 100%. Considering this may require expanding your perspective.
Suppose someone robs a small pizza store. Certainly, that person is rightfully blamed. However, the situation might be such that blame can be shared with others. Maybe there were gang members who forced the perpetrator to commit the robbery. Or maybe the robber had a starving or sick or addicted family that couldn’t find help. There are obviously many possible scenarios where others can share some blame. But it does not eliminate blame.
Intention matters. If someone intentionally breaks the law for gain, that is more blameworthy than someone acting out of complete ignorance. But the legal system says that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Some blame can be assigned.
One can also consider a failure at work. The failure is blamed on the person with the failed assignment. But there could be more to consider. Perhaps training was not adequate, or work overload led to tiredness and sloppiness. Perhaps the person assigned to the task was not skilled enough for that job. It may take a courageous colleague to step forward and share some blame.
So, if you find someone being blamed, maybe try stepping back to consider what other factors or people contributed to the wrong result. Many factors can influence culpability. While this may not greatly change the situation for the person blamed, it can reduce blame and inspire compassion. It can change what happens going forward. For example, more security in the convenience store or more training time at work.
In most cases, the perpetrator will likely carry most blame. Assuming the perpetrator is an adult and sane, they bear at least some responsibility for their actions. This essay does NOT intend to trivialize their accountability for immoral and criminal actions. It only intends to add some thoughts to the situation; hopefully we can improve various factors going forward so that problems are minimized or eliminated.
The following articles relate to this essay: https://peteranthonygales.com/2010/03/17/nothing-is-ever-100-anybodys-fault/#iLightbox[gallery1009]/0 Accessed on 8/14/23.
Culpability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culpability#:~:text=In%20criminal%20law%2C%20culpability%2C%20or,behaviour%2C%20Strict%20Liability%20being%20prohibited. Accessed on 12/21/24.