Heather Pentecost

Comm 494, Dr. Chase

November 23, 2015
Critical Ethics
From Isocrates and St. Augustine to Hildegard of Bingen and Mahatma Gandhi,
men and women throughout the ages have debated about morality. With their guidance,
todays generation has the power to make ethical decisions on a daily basis. These
decisions, whether concerning the most trivial of interactions or matters of life and death,
should consider more than personal feelings or a few old scholars. We must also consult
experts, pay attention to the feelings of others (Patterson and Wilkins, 2011), and above
all, commit to upholding the Word of God in everything we do.
For instance, Wheaton College recently required professors to mandate the use of
gender-inclusive language in their classrooms. I fully support this move and appreciate
the colleges effort to make academic writing less male-focused (in the sense that it is
jarring to read older papers that exclusively use he/him pronouns). In my public and
private communication, however, I want to move beyond simply acknowledging the
presence of women to actively empowering them. It is easy, even popular, to tear down
other women based on their looks or lifestyles, but I commit to celebrating womens
accomplishments. This combats the logic of domination (Warren, 1990) that has
historically subdued women and discouraged their advancement.
When discussing other difficult issues, like racial profiling or religious
discrimination, I commit to listening as often as I speak. Sometimes, when certain
Christian voices seem too conservative or outdated, I struggle to accept the proponents
logic or sources, effectively dismissing their opinions. If I do not listen to their
arguments, though, I am no better than the bigots I perceive them to be. Having the tools

CRITICAL ETHICS

of rhetorical theory in my belt, it would be easy and satisfying to correct or combat

people I disagree with, but as with any tool, my speech should be used carefully. As the
adage goes, if you dont have anything nice to say, dont say anything at all!
Conversely, when speaking with non-believers, the Bible tells us to always be prepared
to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you
have...but do this with gentleness and respect. (1 Peter 3:15). There are occasions to
debate with someone, but the prevailing theme should be one of mutual admiration.
Along with the power to confront, communication has the ability to advocate for
others. When various groups feel powerless, it is again necessary to listen first, and then
speak when necessary. Something specific I have heard recently from a few friends is the
desire to be addressed by certain pronouns. Even if I dont personally agree with or
understand their choices, I commit to using the gender pronouns a person requests, out of
respect for the fact that they are just that: a person. This builds on Baxter and Akkoors
idea of aesthetic love as an all-encompassing attention to the whole of the Other
(2008). Gender is very much a part of the whole of a person, so I wish to show my love
for my friends by honoring their requests.
This commitment also extends to using the racial distinguishers people ask for.
For example, one of my friends does not like to be called African-American because
his recent ancestors are from Haiti, not Africa. In a recent news story, celebrity Taye
Diggs asked for his son to be called mixed rather than black, so that his white
mother, Idina Menzel, doesnt surprise anyone. The Braithwaites (2003) similarly
advocate for the use of one term over another: persons with disabilities first and
foremost emphasizes their personhood. I learned recently at a Natural History Museum

CRITICAL ETHICS

why Inuit is a much kinder descriptor: Eskimo is a highly offensive term in the
natives language, meaning eater of raw flesh or savage, whereas Inuit simply
means people, and is how they refer to themselves. Clearly, these identifiers matter to
many people, so they will matter to me. It is not simply an issue of being P.C. It is an
issue of respect, and I seek to convey that through my communication.
History is another important way to grant a people group respect. Since
historians interpret evidence through the eyes of their own world view (Crabtree,
1993), history is never objective. This allows for more close-minded scholars to leave
minorities out of the collective memory. Already, the histories of African-Americans and
women have been largely left out of history textbooks, relegated to special topics
courses. When I discuss the history of America, then, I want to acknowledge the special
contributions of immigrants, women, and non-Protestant groups. By speaking about
historically disenfranchised classes, I honor their legacies and remember my duty to
continue their work around the world.
Furthermore, I believe the Earth itself deserves our respect. The King James Bible
translates Gods command in Genesis 1:28 like this: Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth, and subdue it. The word replenish has been replaced by fill in
recent translations, but I note an important difference between the two words. Whereas
fill gives humans permission to have countless offspring and spread out across the
Earth, replenish allows for more than humans to thrive; animals and plants are also
given a chance to flourish. Environmental ethicist Aldo Leopold explains in A Sand
County Almanac that a thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and
beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it does otherwise (1949). For our

CRITICAL ETHICS

communication to be truly ethical, I believe that it should protect the environment.

Business interests often beat out preservation efforts, but as effective communicators we
can be advocates for changes in public policies. Even when it is the less profitable course
of action, I commit to protecting Gods creation and holding to my own values.
In school, we grow accustomed to answering prompts. Our grade depends on our
ability to respond to specific questions and on giving the professor the paper they want to
read. Similarly, bosses dictate what they want in press releases, newsletters, and general
publications. An issue arises here, however, when their ethics do not correspond with an
employees. As the Interim Director at an international school last year, I was in charge of
monthly newsletters, responsible only to the Indian-American Chairman. He asked me to
collect stories from students and teachers that would garner sympathy, and therefore
donations, from American supporters. However, I struggled with this request because it
sometimes manipulated the real struggles of Indian families for the American conscience.
Yes, it was for their own good, to raise money for their community, but the funds
would not address the immediate needs of the orphaned children I interviewed. The
money might help fund teachers salaries (or a building project), but there was no
guarantee that these teachers would interact with the students who earned them their
income. A utilitarian view would ask me to excuse manipulation and exaggeration as
acceptable means to an end, but I seek to move beyond such a formulaic stance, even
though it is one utilized by many non-profits. Yes, a good education will ultimately
benefit the students, a fact I am grateful for, but we must be careful how we achieve it.
Another related issue is that of consent. In order to collect stories, the
headmistress and I would typically ask teachers for information that they would like to

CRITICAL ETHICS

share with the American team (a new group of 20 college students coming every
summer for short-term missions). The fundraising purpose of the sharing was hidden
deliberately to protect the dignity of the teachers, so they would not feel like they were
begging. However, I believe it was also an effort by the Chairman to prevent anyone from
making up a problem in order to get direct foreign support. While this is a reasonable
pursuit, I remain uncomfortable with the fact that the teachers were spoken for without
their consent. Neither were the students made aware that their stories and photos would
end up online to raise money. In America, administration officials would need to send out
release forms to get permission from each parent, but in India, no such legalities were
necessary. I commit, therefore, no matter where I am geographically, to obtaining consent
for published photographs and interviews.
One step past consent is the issue of plagiarism. As I found out my senior year of
high school, it is possible to get permission for the use of material and still plagiarize by
not giving proper credit. As the Salutatorian of my graduating class, I was asked to speak
at our graduation ceremony. I had just read my friends blog detailing the small joys of
life and was enamored by her choice of examples, such as raspberries. I quickly asked her
if I could incorporate some of her entry into my speech, to spice it up a bit. She
responded that she would be honored if I quoted her and thanked me for asking.
However, during the editing stages of my speech, my English teacher told me that it
sounded too clunky to include my friends name, especially because she didnt go to our
school, nor was she famous. So I listened to him, and passed the words off as my own. I
still regret not giving her proper credit during the speech itself, although I did try to
convey my source to my friends and family who commented on the raspberries. Even

CRITICAL ETHICS

though I got explicit permission and wrote the majority of the speech myself, I did not
honor the author of the captivating intro, a disappointing move on my part. I promise,
therefore, to give credit where credit is due, even when it is inconvenient or clunky.
To a different degree, Christianity can also be a potentially inopportune subject.
The gospels tell us that even Peter, a close friend and companion of Jesus, denied their
relationship when social pressure emerged. In many instances, it would be easier to
downplay faith than to face antagonism, but I pledge to be honest, especially about
following Christ, trusting that He will either take away obstacles or teach me through
them. Armand Veilleux, a particularly eloquent monk, quotes chapter 72 of the Rule of
Saint Benedict, which ends with this beautiful sentence: Let them prefer nothing
whatever to Christ, and may he bring us all together to everlasting life (2010). May I
never prefer comfort or popularity to Christ, and may He bring people to Himself through
my words.
Finally, as Donald Miller explains it, I want to communicate in a way that keeps
people on the lifeboat. Through affirmation and encouragement, I commit to including
people and pointing them to God so that they are no longer as tightly bound to proving
their dignity. Naturally, this is easier said than done, especially when my own ego gets in
the way, but it is eternally important that people are confident in their identities as
daughters and sons of God. I want to communicate love and respect to all of Gods
children, taking care to listen to and engage with differing perspectives.
Situations may vary, and times certainly will change, but if ethical dilemmas can
be anticipated and prepared for (Patterson and Wilkins, 2011), what I have enumerated
here should be a good start to living out a moral life in my words and deeds.

CRITICAL ETHICS

7
References

Baxter, L., & Akkoor, C. (2008). Aesthetic love and romantic love in close relationships.
In K. Roberts & R. Arnett (Eds.), Communication ethics: Between
cosmopolitanism and provinciality. New York: P. Lang.
Braithwaite, D., & Braithwaite, C. (2003). "Which is my good leg?": Cultural
communication of persons with disabilities. Intercultural Communication: A
Reader, 10, 470-483.
Crabtree, David. (1993) The importance of history. Gutenberg College Great Books.
McKenzie Study Center.
Kaufman, D. (2015, November 19). Taye Diggs' brave defense of his half-white son.
Retrieved November 21, 2015, from The New York Post
Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County almanac. New York, New York: Oxford University
Press.
Miller, D. (2004). Lifeboat Theory. In Searching for God knows what. Nashville: Nelson
Books.
Patterson, P., & Wilkins, L. (2011). An introduction to ethical decision making. In Media
ethics: Issues and cases (7th ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill.
Veilleux, A. (2007, February 2). Identity with Christ: Modeling our lives on RB 72. Talk
presented at Conference of Benedictine Abbots and Prioresses in Mercy Center,
Burlingame, California.
Warren, K. (1990). The power and the promise of ecological feminism. Environmental
Ethics, 12, 125-146.