Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Cassandra N. Tribe-Scott
Bill Gates is the subject of much controversy when discussed in terms of virtue ethics.
Depending on the phase of life examined he can be seen as behaving in both ethical and
unethical manners. This case will focus only on his actions since leaving Microsoft and
concentrating on running the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This case proposes that while
Mr. Gates has evolved to fulfill many of the individual virtues described in the virtue ethics
school that the same school of thought would find his current public behavior to be most
unethical. The cause for this judgement rests not in the individual acts he commits, but in the
This case assignment looks at the two virtues, sincerity and prudence; and the one vice,
insensibility, as they relate to Bill Gates. The 2017 online version of Merriam-Webster
dictionary provides the following definitions for these words. Sincerity is considered to be the
state of being free from hypocrisy. Prudence implies skill and good judgment in the use of
resources. Insensibility refers to the state of lacking delicacy or refinement. While there are
several other permutations offered by the dictionary for these words the portions of the
definitions listed here are those which most apply when considering value ethics and the actions
of Bill Gates.
Sincerity
The definition of a word in a dictionary of common usage relates only somewhat to its
definition in philosophical terms. Sincerity, which Merriam-Webster (2017) defines as the state
of being free of hypocrisy is defined further by Brusseau (2014) as the ability to reveal yourself
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 3
to others with confidence that youll be respected. It fits between the extremes of frigidity and
emoting. Virtue ethics considers the state of sincerity to be the mean between the deficiency of
Merriam-Webster (2017) we can see that the common definition of boastfulness is excessive
pride in oneself while ironical and depreciation combine to be defined as incongruity between
the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result, and to lower in
Gates falls within the ideal mean of this virtue, achieving sincerity, while simultaneously
engaging in both its deficiency and excess. McIlvaine (2016) points to Gates mellowing and the
ironical depreciation he engages in when out on speaking tours to promote the works of his
foundation. When contrasted with his assumption that he and only he can correct the market
inequities in his target areas, he then enters into the excess realm of boastfulness (Bowman,
2012).
It is that very overconfidence in himself that allows him to be sincere in other aspects of
his life. Mr. Gates firmly believes that poor and underserved persons cannot act in a rational
manner that would contribute to society and that society is not making an effort to act to change
this state. While he may reject the title of philanthrocapitalism, he engages in it fully with his
foundation (The Economist, 2006). Gates has devoted his work to the end goal of creating a fully
rational society achieving a profound level of sincerity in the direction, action and intentions of
his life. That said, there are interpretations of this virtue ethic that would claim him to be most
insincere as his engagement of both extremes of the scale implies that he is not publically and
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 4
repeatedly honest about his motivations and intentions in executing what is perceived as good
The same arguments put forth under the evaluation of Gates, his foundation and the
principals of philanthrocapitalism apply to the assessment of how well he fulfills the virtue of
prudence. It can be said, on the surface, that he is a master of prudence using a shrewd
investment strategy to fund his philanthropy. On closer examination that mastery falls apart. As
Piller (2014) points out the investment strategy pursued by the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation is dependent on the success of industries that cause the issues they then fund
initiatives to resolve. With this knowledge it can be determined that Bill Gates is prudent only in
the short term but is actually wasteful with his management of resources. A more prudent action
would be to divest from industries that create the problems you profess to and engage in invo
want to solve.
If there is one vice that Mr. Gates seems to exemplify through the work with his
foundation it would be that of insensibility. That is defined by Brusseau (2012) as being the state
of being insensible, or actions and words not making rational sense. Again, by virtue of his
practice of the deficiency of sincerity (ironical depreciation) Mr. Gates appears to have humbly
embarked on a path that reflects a sincere self that engages in prudence. As Piller (2014)
demonstrates the relation of his deficiency in prudence is that which then creates the vice of
insensibility. On the surface Mr. Gates appears the epitome of sensibleness, but on closer
examination the long term ends of his practices would be deemed insensible by political and
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 5
business evaluations.
the poster child of promoting its adoption, is it hides the reality that the US government has
radically decreased funding for initiatives to reduce instances of disorder and disease, aid
programs and investments in research that holds the promise of creating lasting change
(McGoey, 2013). The monies given by Mr. Gates, while astonishing, are far less than what was
given by the US government in the 1950s for resolution efforts. As astonishing as Mr. Gates
funding is, it is also far less than what was historically given by industrialists to promote social
In assessing whether or not Mr. Gates ranks as one of the worlds most generous
philanthropists one must be careful about which statistics are examined. Martin and Loudenback
(2015) created a list that also puts forth a generosity index (GI) based on the amount of their
total net worth they have donated. It is interesting to note that Mr. Gates only scores 32% GI. His
rating is far overshadowed by the 966% of Sulaiman bin Abdul Aziz Al Rajhi, who gave away
that much of his personal fortune within 3 years of leaving industry to head his foundation; and
The United States of America is now ranked #2 on the World Giving Index, a fall in
ranking from the top position that occurred within the past two years (Charities Aid Foundation,
2017). Over 70% of Americans donate an average of 3.8% of their income, with the majority of
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 6
donations coming from those who earn less than $30,000 per year (and give 4.1% of API). The
higher the income the less the percent of API donated, but the sums are larger.
Mr. Gates stands out in contrast to the culture by giving 33% of his income while
pledging to eventually give away all of his wealth. For the US culture, which emphasizes gain
for personal use, this is an anomaly. The perception of Gates as a profoundly generous man is
based upon the sum given and the promise not on the reality of the percent given and what that
percent means. The perception of the ruthless and cutthroat business man of the
less and less and needs to feel comfortable about it (Eskine, 2012). If Gates can transform later
There is alarm in the medical and public health community over the reality of Gates
foundation grant gifts. With less than 1.5% going to public-sector health agencies and less than
6% going to countries that were middle or low income there is a concern about the true
intentions of Mr. Gates purpose (Bowman, 2012). Having staffed his foundation with persons
with ties to the US pharmaceutical agencies, aggressively lobbied against agreements that would
produced in low income countries at a lower price) and gone on record at Davos (ibid) as stating
that the purpose of life is to pursue self-interest and care for others -- many public health
researchers and providers wonder who Mr. Gates is including on his list of worthy of helping.
Conclusion
The potential for undue policy and procedure influence by a foundation with no oversight
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 7
and massive funding resources is concerning people. As is the effect of philanthrocapitalism in
reducing larger aid and research block resources and creating a patchwork of smaller funds
with greater competition. These concerns suggest that the ruthless and cutthroat business
man has not changed, but only changed the industry he wishes to dominate and control. Mr.
Gates exists within the extremes of virtue ethics, and may be a modern cautionary example of
virtue usurped.
THE MYTHOLOGY OF VIRTUE 8
References
Bowman, A. (2012, Apr 1). The flip side to Bill Gates' charity billions. New Internationalist.
Brusseau, J. (2012). Chapter 4.4: Virtue theory. Business Ethics. Lardbucket Books. Retrieved
from: https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/business-ethics/s08-04-virtue-theory.html
https://www.cafonline.org
/about-us/publications/2017-publications/caf-world-giving-index-2017
Eskine, K. (2012, May 15). Wholesome foods and wholesome morals? Social Psychological and
/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550612447114
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insensibility
McGoey, L. (2013, Apr 23). Philanthrocapitalism, the Gates Foundation and global health - an
philanthrocapitalism-gates-foundation-global-health-with-linsey-mcgoey/
McIlvaine, A. (2016, February 4). Bill Gates ruthless management style of yore. HRE Daily.
ruthless-management-style-of-yore/
Piller, C. (2014, August 24). How the Gates Foundations investments are undermining its own
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prudence
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sincerity
The Economist. (2006, Feb 23). The birth of philanthrocapitalism: The leading new
philanthropists
http://www.economist.com/node/5517656
Yount, D. (2012). Aristotle's ethical theory: Virtue ethics. Retrieved from https://www.saylor.
org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/BUS205-11.3.1-Aristotle%E2%80%99s-Ethical-Th
eory.pdf