tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post7621235803762202176..comments2024-03-03T13:55:46.243-08:00Comments on Ambling Along the Aqueduct: "Economic Disobedience": Morally Justified?Timmi Duchamphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-82794386542390694222010-02-24T16:35:09.479-08:002010-02-24T16:35:09.479-08:00Oh my, a lot of interesting things to think about ...Oh my, a lot of interesting things to think about here.<br /><br />First off, Kohlberg's Stage 3 seems to have a contradiction that wouldn't exist in a just society. It's driven by "interpersonal accord" and "conformity." That is, people follow rules in order to treat each other with "respect and gratitude." But these two values are in direct conflict in the situation here, where a manager is expected to follow a company's rules even where it will hurt a worker. <br /><br />Now for the listener's comments, which confused the terms "company" with "neighbor."<br /><br />The listener wrote: "The examples Ms. Dodson gave . . . are acts of theft from the companies, yet they are described as if somehow moral and virtuous. It's one thing for me to see someone in need and open my wallet; its quite another to address that need by giving something I've stolen from my neighbor.''<br /><br />If a company is a neighbor, then a company is a person. A company is not a person.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07261156769469311687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-91822303105432101672010-02-24T15:53:49.248-08:002010-02-24T15:53:49.248-08:00Spot-on, Nancy, in all your points. First, about t...Spot-on, Nancy, in all your points. First, about the Kohlberg scale: a couple of decades ago, Carol Gilligan expressed significant dissatisfaction with the Kholberg scale when she began researching "moral development in women." Kohlberg's terms, she decided, rendered most women's moral judgment infantile or adolescent because his scale excluded factors & reasoning that didn't fit into his nice neat categories. Her conclusion was that his scale was sexist. I imagine this is at least partly because feminist theorists in the early eighties didn't think they had the standing to challenge the whole shebang & so Gilligan concentrated on its inapplicability to the women she was studying.<br /><br><br />Second, what Dodson calls "economic disobedience" and <i>The Boston Globe</i> in its headline is calling "civil disobedience" certainly doesn't fit my notion of civil disobedience. More comparable, I think, is the way juries and jury pools in Seattle (& no doubt elsewhere) have on occasion forced prosecutors to think twice about some of the drug charges they bring, and have even brought them to change the law to accommodate the community sense of what is just & fair. <br /><br><br />When juries refuse to convict because they think the charges & penalties are unreasonable, they are flouting the rules (because they've been specifically told they have no business doing anything but applying the evidence to the judge's instructions); on the other hand, when in that same situation too many members of the jury pool get themselves dismissed for cause during voir dire for saying that they are disposed to a not-guilty verdict because they think the law is unfair, they are taking the role of whistle-blowers (though without any deleterious consequences to themselves, of course, except to be denied a further role in the proceedings). <br><br />Although jury duty is a time-sink, I must reluctantly acknowledge that speaking out thoughtfully during voir dire sessions (which at least here in Seattle are no longer constituted by a series of one-on-one interrogations but instead have taken a sort of talk-show format, complete with a roving microphone for the jurors) is a form of civic participation (particular when one gets excused for cause or because the prosecutor thinks I'd be bad news for his/her case).Timmi Duchamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00673465487533328661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5360814020056871156.post-28718723507826038712010-02-24T08:18:04.993-08:002010-02-24T08:18:04.993-08:00I probably shouldn't comment, because I haven&...I probably shouldn't comment, because I haven't really studied the Kohlberg scale, but based on the way you set things out, I don't think this behavior fits neatly into either 3 or 6. I think it's simply the kind of things most people do when they know the rules are unfair -- probably even when they'd publicly state that rules are rules and must be obeyed. <br /><br />As someone who would make those same choices as a manager -- though always with the concern that I don't give too many breaks to one person at the expense of the other workers (someone has to fill in, after all) -- I get outraged every time I hear those "rules are rules" people opine on the subject. The worst in my mind are those who think the undocumented must be punished for breaking the law by crossing the border. I cannot for the life of me equate crossing a line on a map with any morally reprehensible crime, and fail to see how people can be such sticklers for such a petty law. <br /><br />In traditional civil disobedience actions over laws viewed as wrong, it is considered important to state one's objections publicly and take the consequences. That is partly because it is a political act intended to force change. The small breaks managers give their workers help the people out, but they do nothing to change the system. If one was to critique their actions morally, one might want to say they should take a stand against the unfair wages and polices (and, of course, be fired themselves, leaving both them and their workers in a worse spot).<br /><br />People standing up do make real changes, but at great personal cost. I suspect there's a lot to be said for small, unknown acts of disobedience that give ordinary people a break so they can get through their daily life with less stress.Nancy Jane Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01030267999537291250noreply@blogger.com