Harm to Others

Abstract

This chapter explores the question of harm to others, either inflicting it or alleviating it, and whether it is the overriding determinant of ethical conduct. The purpose behind this exploration lies in the benefits that a dominant measure, or perhaps even a single measure, could bring to ethical behaviour in our companies and government agencies. A single measure bypasses the multiplicity of competing and conflicting ethical theories on what constitutes ethical or unethical behaviour.

The chapter points out the problems arising from the conflicting moral theories, and the benefits that would arise for ordinary people if we could simplify the process. It then documents those moral philosophers who assign a high ethical priority to avoiding the harming of others, or redressing harm already incurred.

One problem is that harm can be defined widely. The possibilities of harm in the future, of offending others, or failing to respect others are examples. We also frequently face a choice between two harms. Numerous examples include business or government decisions which will be of advantage to one party, but of disadvantage to another. Analytical techniques to help make these choices are of limited applicability.

Helping others is part of the harm scenario, for we almost invariably help them overcome some possible or actual harm they are facing. But such thinking is normally considered as an altruistic act, not avoiding harm. A more universal approach is a three-part guideline ‘do-no-harm/correct for or prevent harm/do good’.

Citation

Bowden, P. (2012), "Harm to Others", Schwartz, M. and Harris, H. (Ed.) Applied Ethics: Remembering Patrick Primeaux (Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, Vol. 8), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 133-147. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1529-2096(2012)0000008014