Federal prosecutors had contended that the former councilwoman, Sandy Annabi, 41, accepted about $195,000 in secret payments over the years from the operative, Zehy Jereis, 40. In return, they said, Ms. Annabi dropped her opposition to a proposed luxury mall and housing complex, known as Ridge Hill, and a second, smaller project.
The answer to this question, what's wrong with bribery, is reflective of ones own ethical sytem. For example, an Act Utilitarian would say that consequences should only be focused on a single act, and not the results of that act. In this system, we'd ask, is taking, or offering a bribe, in and of themselves wrong? The answer being, if the consequences of each act, individually in and of itself leads to an outcome that is detrimental to the parties involved to the degree that it would be a detriment, then it would be percieved as being wrong. However, if we were to view it through the lens of a Cultural realist, which is a person who lives according to their own moral code and not that of any particular societal norms, then its all, literally, "relative" and nothing is ever wrong, under any circumstances. My position is reflective to that of Imanual Kant, which states that for an act to be acceptable, it must be acceptable to all, at all times, without conditions, the "catagorical imperative".
So if it's ok for somebody to bribe another, then it's ok for everyone to do it all the time, and based on this, if an individual were unable to afford the bribe then, they would be unable to pursue the same options as one who can afford those means. Bribery addresses intergity, character, fairness and equality on social and economic fronts, this is not a simple matter that applys only to those viewing it as an ethical matter.But before anything can be resolved, we have to answer the question and agree on how to interpret it; which is what is wrong with bribery?
No comments:
Post a Comment