An Introduction

Greetings. If you are reading this, then you have managed to find my little corner of the internet. This entry will serve as a general guide for the rest of the posts to follow. Below are several of the types of entries one may encounter while on this blog:

"A Few of my Favorite Things": These entries will deal with something I feel the need to draw attention to. It may be about English Football, or it may be about a musician I am currently enamored with.

"For Your Information": Entries under this title will be posted with the intention of drawing attention to something. I am a college student, so chances are many of these posts will pertain to my university. Another likely topic is politics. Joy.

"Rant and Rave": These cheery fellows will focus on issues that irk my ire enough to prompt a written statement from me.

"Yay or Nay": Yay or Nay posts will be dedicated to reviewing a multitude of different media.

"For Your Entertainment": FYE posts have no point other than to be read and enjoyed. These may be short stories, soliloquies, or poems.

For Your Information #4: Ethics in my Generation

For Your Information #4: Ethics in my Generation

My last post was on immigration, and I posted an edited version of a paper I wrote for a class. I rather liked this idea, as it actually gives my papers more meaning than to just be turned into one teacher once and be forgotten. So, I now present to you my paper on my personal ethical code. This paper really seeks to question how we do ethics in the digital age.

Statement on Personal Ethics Code

To be frank, I feel a slight association with the character Gordon from the movie Billy Madison. Gordon and the titular Billy find themselves competing for the right to take over the company Billy’s dad owns. During the competition described as an academic decathlon, Gordon is asked to define modern business ethics in light of recent insider trading and loan scandals. After rambling several incoherent introductions to his answer, he pulls out a gun and demands for another question. Gordon reacts in this way because he is unable to even attempt a definition of business ethics. While this is supposed to be comical moment, it does accurately portray the level of understanding many have of ethics (Billy Madison 1995).

Personal codes of ethics are vital to a person’s life. One of my core values is the need to understand why I believe something and ultimately why that belief leads me into action. In light of last weeks lecture, and in consideration of further research, I would describe myself as an unethical person. This statement does not mean that I am corrupt, but that I do not view myself, as I am today, as a subscriber to a specific ethical code, therein making me unethical. I believe that I have subscribed to the modern epidemic of what I will Millennial Ethics (ME). ME is most noted by the ability of its practitioners to invoke the axioms of any other ethical code when it is convenient to do so. ME provides an opportunity for its practitioners to hold beliefs and make decisions on things we know little to nothing about. Those of us with ME often unwittingly refute the principles of a specific code in one discussion, but then appeal to its arguments in another discussion. To further explore ME this paper will discuss the context in which ME was born, the ways in which it varies from the Pluralistic Theory of Value (PTV), and explore whether or not ME is a legitimate ethical code to subscribe to or not.

My Persuasion and Attitude class last semester discussed the issue of how modern Americans formulate opinions and beliefs. I believe that experience can help inform this discussion on ethics. We learned that the number of competing messages a single person encounters in any given day is beyond measurable. With this understanding, we identified our tendency to formulate poorly researched or supported opinions. Some may claim that it is necessary to form these unsupported opinions due to the increasing demand for awareness and our inability to adequately research 1000s of topics. However, the fact remains, we posses an immeasurable amount of beliefs that we are unable to fully support. I believe this climate has enabled the proliferation of ME.

If ME provides its subscribers with the opportunity to make decisions based on bits and pieces of other ethical codes, how does it vary from PTV? In short, it is about intent and self-awareness. PTV provides the opportunity to reflect on competing values, and this opportunity accounts for the ability of individuals with PTV to invoke the precepts of different codes at different times. I argue that this contains a certain level of understanding and awareness of both ethical codes, and oneself. ME is contrastingly different as it facilitates decision making and the formation of opinions without identifying the competing values. To summarize, PTV understands that any given opinion or decision will be made in light of competing values, and ME provides its practitioners with the ability to hold opinions and make decisions without consideration of existing values.

I would argue that ME is not a legitimate or ethical standard. In class we defined ethics as a rational process founded on principles. Therefore, ethics begin when elements within a moral system conflict, and they are not so much the study of right and wrong, but a look at conflict between equally compelling values. My previous definition of ME states that individuals with ME do not need to reflect on the conflict of values. People with ME may not know this, but they value having an opinion more than having an opinion they understand. The conservative versus liberal argument is a popular one on campus, and I am familiar with both my tendency and the tendency of others to cling to party lines on any given topic. There is a small blog on campus called the Conservative Voice. The blog serves as an article distribution and comment board. People on this board often establish what party they identify with and then rarely ever express views that differ from the platform of said party. I have seen many participate in discussions on topics they have no understanding in, myself included, and I contribute this to the value that it is more important to have an opinion than to have an informed opinion. Since ME does not provide specific measures in belief formation or decision making, and since it does not demand an understanding of competing values, I would argue that ME is not a legitimate ethical code.

I started this paper by saying that I do not think I am an ethical person, and I defended that statement by identifying my ME code. However, at this point, I reject the ME as a legitimate code and believe that my self-awareness and gained understanding of competing values has me on the road towards PVT. This assignment has helped me identify my personal ethics and the awareness of the different codes has provided me with the challenge to hold myself to a higher standard.

For Your Information #3: Immigration

For Your Information #3: Immigration

I recently wrote a paper for my senior seminar class on immigration. The paper sought to answer thee question, "What would an ethical code look like that had immigrants best interest in mind?"

The research and writing process were very helpful to me, and I want to share the paper here.

Ethics for the Strangers

“Ultimately, the danger to the American way of life is not that we will be overrun by those who do not look like us or do not yet speak our language. The danger will come if we fail to recognize the humanity of [immigrants]--if we withhold from them the opportunities we take for granted, and create a servant class in our midst” (Obama).

Immigration, both legal and illegal, is a large contributor to the growing population of impoverished people in the United States. The Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) has predicted that as of the 2006 census, about 57% of all illegal immigrants and 30% of all legal immigrants in the US are Mexican-born (Mexican Immigrants). In both categories, the Mexican population is higher than that of any other demographic. For this reason, this paper will explore the ethical consideration behind immigration policy and how the current system affects undocumented Mexican-born immigrants.

This paper contends that illegal immigrants from Mexico are one of the demographics that most needs to be served in the US, that ethical treatment of these people is not happening currently, and that the ethical treatment of immigrants is in accordance with several of the main ethical codes discussed in class. This paper will begin by justifying the need for critiquing the country’s ethical code in regards to the treatment of illegal immigrants. With an understanding of the severity of the issue, this paper will then explore what considerations need to be taken into consideration when forming an ethical code that seeks to meet the needs of these people. Finally, this paper will defend the position that America has failed to live according tomany of its own established ethical systems, since it is within the precepts of said systems to provide for immigrants.

Creating a system that treats Mexican-born illegal immigrants ethically is of utmost importance to the integrity of the United States, and the well being of a large number of people. The population size, and the surrounding economic realities are reasons why the US needs an ethical code governing the treatment of Mexican-born immigrants. Statistics report that there are roughly 20 million illegal immigrants in the US, and that over 57% are Mexican-born (Mexican Immigrants). This number, coupled with the number of legal Mexican immigrants accounts for over one-tenth of the entire population born in Mexico (ibid). Of this population, 78% reside in just four states (Beyond the Border). California alone has nearly half of the population of Mexican-born immigrants (ibid). Mexican immigrants are a huge demographic in the US, and they must not be ignored due to the scope of those affected by the lack of ethical treatment.

The US Census of 2006 found that, “60.2 percent of the 8.9 million Mexican-born adults age 25 and older had no high school diploma or the equivalent general education diploma (GED), compared to 32.0 percent among the 30.9 million foreign-born adults”, and that, “only 5.0 percent of Mexican immigrants had a bachelor's or higher degree, compared to 26.7 percent among all foreign-born adults” (Mexican Immigrants). While these numbers are disheartening enough, the impact is magnified when considering the correlation between education and crime. The Department of Justice reports that, “about 75 percent of America’s state prison inmates, almost 59 percent of federal inmates, and 69 percent of jail inmates did not complete high school” (Harlow). Another recent survey of dropouts concludes that they are more than eight times as likely to be in jail or prison (Bridgeland, DiIulio, and Morison). These numbers mean that a lack of education is a direct predictor of the likelihood of criminal behavior or at least receiving court appointed jail time. This means that over half of the Mexican-born population is at an increased risk of engaging in criminal behavior and and/or receiving jail time.

Furthermore, the US Census Bureau has reported that education directly impacts annual earnings (see fig. 1; see fig. 2). Findings show that over a lifetime, a person with a Bachelor’s Degree will earn, on average, almost twice as much as those with a high school diploma (Job Salary Earnings). The data shows the effect education has on an individual’s annual earnings, and the trends project that over 60% of Mexican-born immigrants earn under $23,400.

High levels of incarceration and low levels of projected income are not the only problems facing Mexican-born immigrants. These people are often the victims of horrific stereotyping and hate crimes. A similar demographic in New Zealand has recently struggled through an event that could easily occur in the US as well.

To put a very long story short, a New Zealand newspaper published a story based on the reputed findings of a university economist. The economist, Dr Greg Clydesdale, reportedly found evidence that the country’s economic woes were stemming from the education levels, crime rates, and low employment of the people group known as the Pacific Islanders (de Bres 149). An article written by Joris de Bres refutes nearly every claim made by Clydesdale. De Bred points out that Clydesdale’s report is often inaccurate and borderline criminal due to seemingly purposeful omissions, half-truths, and uncited sources. However, it is the reaction that Clydedale’s report produced that should concern the Mexican-born immigrants in the United States. The initial storied received a total of 216 comments on the first day, “a high response rate for a news story. The vast majority accepted the findings of Clydesdale’s reported study as fact…Many…welcomed the findings, which, in view of the some- times very unpleasant nature of the comments, clearly confirmed their own prejudices” (151). The response from the native born citizens was overwhelmingly negative. The aftermath left a divided community, with one group justifying their prejudices with unsound information, and the other group deeply hurt and “gutted” (153). Is this far from reality in the US? Or is it already happening?

On a recent blog discussion, an APU student voiced his opinion that illegal immigrants cost the state of California $10 billion a year, and that they should therefore be sent back to where they came from. When presented with the idea that this would only force oppressed people back into oppression, he responded by saying it was not his concern. (Re: The Bible). At this point, this paper has established the size of the Mexican-born immigrant population, the affects their education levels has on their earnings and likelihood of incarceration, and the prejudices of the general population as reasons why the United Stated needs to reconsider what ethical treatment of Mexican-born immigrants entails.

In order to relieve the oppression the Mexican-born immigrants are living in, an ethical code must derive from the values of meeting human needs, hospitality, and providing for children. Since I am a Christian, I have a difficult time separating my ethical code from my Christian values and morals. Therefore, this section of the paper will often look to Christian justification for many of the values in an ethical code constructed with Mexican-born immigrants in mind. The first value in what shall be called Ethics of the Strangers (ES) is the value of providing every human their physical needs. In the United States, the prominent ethical codes often fall one step short of this value and value meeting the physical needs of US citizens. The concept of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is engrained in most US children. However, ES is dependent on foregoing national ties. ES values looking out for all people equally, not just American citizens. This value is important because it will motivate people to put the quality of life of none-citizens above the desire to bask in immeasurable fortune. Furthermore, and more importantly, it will inspire people to make sacrifices for the truly oppressed, even when the US citizen is not overly comfortable. It is easy to say that a rich person can neglect buying her sixth car in favor of buying an immigrant the only meal they will eat that week, but it is much harder to say that a poor woman should pay for that same meal when it means she will not eat for the first time that week. It is much harder to think in the latter, but that belief is what ES is dependent on: putting everyone’s needs on the same level and relinquishing convictions to one’s own people. This facet of ES needs to be applied to the Mexican-born immigrants because our system is setting them up for failure. Our system allows us to neglect their needs while attending to the most frivolous desires of groups who do not have to worry about every being uncomfortable due to a lack of resources. Our current system enables statistics like 60% of Mexican-borns do not have high school level educations, and are expected to live on close to $20k a year. The danger is that it not only allows those realities, it then grants the US citizen the right to look down on the Mexican-borns and even dare to accuse them of being responsible for some inconvenience. Valuing all people is about giving up comfort. ED is about giving our vast amount of comfort to those with none. ES must then value hospitality.

Hospitality in ES has both Judeo-Christian roots and American roots. In Romans 12:13, the Bible says that Christians must, “Practice hospitality” (Holman Christian Standard Bible, Rom. 12.13). Biblical teaching is that we must, “regard the foreigner who lives with you as the native-born among you. You are to love him as yourself, for you were foreigners in the land of Egypt” (Lev. 19.34). Similarly, Deuteronomy charges Israel with the need to, “love the foreigner, for you were once foreigners in the land of Egypt” (Deut. 10.19). These Biblical teachings are foundational to ES. The value of hospitality is important because it promotes the understanding that we share “our” land with others, and that they deserve the same provisions we once received when we were strangers. From an America standpoint, the country was founded by immigrants who were strangers in the land. Both the original settlers and the founding fathers of the Union were strangers in their land at one point. The American people have striking similarity to the Israelites of the Old and New Testament, and they should therefore appreciate the Israelite value of hospitality. This component of ES should be applied to those in need because it validates their existence and communicates the fact that we see them as humans. Humans who have both physical and emotional needs that need to be met. This component of ES is important because the absence of this value results in dehumanization, which expresses itself in smugness, indifference, and uncompassion.

Finally, ES must value the desire to provide children with hope. This value may seem simple, and in reality it is. One of the biggest contributing factors for immigration is the hope that a child will have a better life in the new country (de Bres 153). Barbara Dreaver, one of the Pacific Islanders from New Zealand identifies her mother’s desire for Barbara to have a chance at life as a motivation behind their move to New Zealand. “She is hard working, clever, beautiful and well spoken…Like other islanders she has dared to dream big dreams for her kids” (ibid). Dreaver identifies the reality that our current ethical system tends to value money, and that that value dehumanizes immigrants. Dreaver says that according to Clydesdale’s report, and the current value of money, “my mum is not the sort of immigrant wanted in this country because economically she's not worth a lot” (ibid). ES is about shifting our values from money and material resources to the value of people. The element of trying to provide for children is one specific shift that is needed because it will allow US citizens to categorize people’s hard work and care for their children as more valuable than the money they can provide the system with. As Dreaver says, this value will allow the United States to realize that immigrants such as her mother are, “worth everything decent”, despite, “[not being] economically worth a lot” (ibid).

Truthfully, Ethics of the Stranger is not that different from several existing ethical codes. Of the existing codes discussed in class, Kant’s Categorical Imperative, Utilitarianism, and Joseph Fletcher and Situational Ethics are all codes that are prevalent in the United States, and they all have elements that should look similar to ES. Kant’s “do unto others” is very similar to ES’s value of hospitality. Utilitarianism’s value for doing the largest good for the largest amount of people is also a similar value to ES’s value of providing for all people. Joseph Fletcher and Situational Ethics’ value in, operational definition, and conceptual definition of love are all in line with ES’s commitment to justice and the rejection of indifference.

Ethics of the Stranger doesn’t so much make a point to say something new, but to say the same thing louder, and with more conviction. ES believes that United States citizens need to embrace the axioms of many of the already prominent ethical codes within the country. The country tends towards Millennial Ethics (as described in my last paper) which allows its citizens to pick and choose standards which benefit the self, but in order for the oppression of the Mexican-born immigrants to decline, the citizens need to embrace the values of advocating for all people, showing hospitality to strangers, and respecting qualities such as fighting for children above economic contributions. For it is as President Obama says, we need to recognize their humanity and acknowledge our opportunities, but ES is about then giving our opportunities to those that do not have them.

Works Cited

"Beyond the Border - Immigration Issues |." PBS. Web. 11 Mar. 2010.

Bishop, Sharon. "Thinking About a Professional Ethics." Language Assessment

Quarterly 1.2/3 (2004): 109-122.

Bridgeland, J., DiIulio, J., & Morison, K. (2006). The silent epidemic: Perspectives of

high school dropouts. Washington, DC: Civic Enterprises.

de Bres, Joris. "10. The Clydesdale report: Issues of media and academic responsibility."

Pacific Journalism Review 15.1 (2009): 149-167.

Harlow, C. (2003). Education and correctional populations. Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Holy Bible, Red-letter Edition: Holman Christian Standard Bible. Nashville: Holman

Bible, 2004. Print.

"Job Salary Earnings Comparison - College Degrees and High School Diploma." Top

Online Colleges & Universities | Online Degrees & Education at EarnMyDegree.com. EducationDynamics. Web. 10 Mar. 2010.

"Mexican Immigrants in the United States." Migration Information Source. Web. 13 Mar.

2010.

Lopez, Rod. Personal interview.

Obama, Barrack H. Speech at National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed

Officials. Washington D.C. Jan. 2008. Speech.

"Re: The Bible and Immigration." Web Log comment. Facebook. Web.

United States of America. U.S. Census Bureau. Average Annual Earnings—Different

Levels of Education. Earnmydegree.com. EducationDynamics. Web.

"Your Education and Your Earnings." Political Calculations. Web. 10 Mar. 2010.