Willard’s Questions and Personal Worldview
Dallas Willard asks what counts as knowledge of reality, who is really well off, and who is really a good person. The answers to Willard’s questions are centered around religion (Willard, 2011). As he indicates, Jesus has answers to all these questions, as do other notable philosophers. In ethical decision-making, however, morality and religion are different entities that could contradict each other. Religion is not always the answer to the ethical decisions and dilemmas presented (Kretzschmar, 2018). While most religious figures are a great source of ethics, absolute adherence to a specific religion as the only or main source of ethics could be misleading. A secular approach is independent of religious control. It looks at each case in fairness and neutrality and without imposing religious dogmas. It looks at reality from a point of knowledge rather than emotion or service to a deity. It facilitates neutrality because it provides freedom of belief. Religious values can be a good source in the construction of a global ethic but in secularism, a particular faith or belief in God is not necessary.
Who is really well off? Plato, in “The Republic” argues that the just man is a happy man, and the unjust one is not just unhappy but miserable. In fact, the more just one is, the happier they are. Paul Kurtz state that to have a good life, one has to live within four common moral decencies; integrity, trustworthiness, benevolence, and fairness. Aristotle claims happiness from living a life of virtue and that virtues are acquired by behaving in an ethical and virtuous manner (Kretzschmar, 2018). Adam Smith states that people who yearn for respect and admiration and wish for greatness and achieve this through foul ways are disappointed because they are never happy. Emmanuel Kant has a completely different view from these scholars. He argues that happiness should not be a motivating factor for being ethical. Egoists that by being just, benevolent, and cooperative, individuals improve their well-being but will not necessarily be happy (Walker, 2015). I would not take an absolute stance and support this school of thought or the other. Happiness, or in this case the good life, is an abstract term that is individual to a person. What one considers a good life is not necessarily what the other person deems a good life (Grenz, 2016). But I agree with these writers’ view that being just or fair has its benefits. But I do not think that being just and ethical makes you happier and vice versa. A person’s happiness may not be correlated with his happiness.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Who is a good person? Would I have killed the joker if I were Batman? Probably yes. Would I have killed one of the indigenous South Americans to save nineteen in Bernard William’s story? Probably not. These scenarios are offered in Crash Course 36 to illustrate Kantian ethics and utilitarianism. According to utilitarianism, we live in a world where sometimes people do terrible things. If we were in their shoes, we will do the same bad things to make other things better. Like in the case of Jim. The ‘easier’ and ‘logical’ choice will be to kill one indigenous person and save the other nineteen. The narrator calls batman pretty Kantian in his ethics. Emmanuel Kant believes in universalizability, a principle where one should act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law (Crash Course #36). This is the reason why Batman does not kill the joker, because he believes killing is wrong, irrespective of who is being killed.
But if I were Batman, I would have probably killed the joker because all the killings the joker did would have stopped. In the case of Jim in the jungle, I would be hesitant to kill for two reasons; I can’t live with myself for having killed an innocent person and I can’t trust the military officer will keep his word. I find the question of who is good person less complicated than the second question on who is really well off. People know what is right and wrong. It is therefore a bit straightforward to know what constitutes a good person. Only situations complicate this reality. It is wrong to kill, but in both the Batman vs the joker case and Jim in the jungle, one is suddenly made to really ponder killing ‘for a good reason.’
Synopsis
Questions about how happy one is cannot be answered objectively. Happiness or living a good life is subjective. There are many factors associated with happiness including level of income, relative income, distribution of income, health, age, gender, education, the status of employment, class or social-economic status, nationality, marital status, family, personality, altruism, and behavior. It is hard to evaluate the direct effects of each variable because these factors are interrelated in their causation effect to happiness or having a good life. One of the most assessed variables in relation to happiness is income. As the old adage goes; money does not buy happiness. This is neither true nor false. For someone with income levels too low to satisfy basic needs, money can buy happiness. For people with higher income levels, money cannot buy happiness. Increased income over time does not translate to sustained increases in happiness. Income also constitutes only a small portion of total happiness. Another important aspect, people generally consider their income relative to others rather than their absolute income. For instance, if their levels of income increase but at a lower level than their friends, happiness levels decrease.
People tend to strongly associate income as the most significant determinant factor to happiness followed closely by family and health concerns. Other important factors in this order include personal, emotional, social, and psychological factors. Where do ethics and morality feature in all these? Research suggests that people who consider fairness, justice, respect, and honesty as very important are on average happier. Personal values play a significant role in impacting social values and behavior on individual well-being and the collective happiness of societies. Increased generalized trust in a society or an organization will positively correlate with happiness.
People who seek to help others may have a better life than those who seek pleasure only for themselves. Generosity causes happiness and vice versa, income affects both. This has a direct effect on psychological well-being. You are really well off if you have a genuine concern for others. There is evidence to support these claims as there are people who engage in activities that support psychological well-being such as volunteerism, public service, and volunteerism. Much like Elizabeth Smith volunteering emergency medical services in Smalltown. Service to people makes her feel satisfied and she is appalled when she finds corruption in her non-profit organization. Altruistic individuals tend to get self-satisfaction by satisfying others. Evidence also suggests that those who volunteer themselves are more satisfied than those who do not. Research suggests that individuals who are intrinsically motivated have higher happiness levels than those who manifest extrinsic incentives.
There is a relationship between a person’s attitude and his behavior. If there is a conflict between a person’s beliefs and his behavior, he can either change his beliefs or his behaviors to reduce the dissonance. If someone believes he is a good person and he knows something to be wrong, she will either justify the wrong action or do something about it. Elizabeth Smith encounters such scenarios on multiple occasions. Like when she observed her unknown colleagues recording points on behalf of another member who was not present (Klepper, 2018). Though unethical, her colleagues were doing so as a positive thing and as a favor to their friend. People who behave in an unjust manner tend to conclude that their actions are acceptable (Crash Course 35). This is not the case with people who believe that an unjust action is just that; unjust. A Kantian will adhere to the latter; an altruist will follow the former. A Kantian will never kill the indigenous person in the jungle to save the rest.
Leadership
The three major characteristics that will define a leader in my worldview are justice, integrity, and respect. Employee’s perception of fairness and justice has a direct correlation with outcomes. Justice perception entails an employee’s perception of fairness of its leaders and organizational processes. It also involves how that employee perception of how outcomes are distributed and how employees are treated by an organization and its leaders. Leaders should devote more time and attention to procedural justice to avoid unfairness or the feeling of it among employees. Allowing and encouraging employees to voice their opinions and suggestions is an important step in this process. The term justice entails a sense of equality, fairness, and morality.
Employees who think their organization and its leaders are fair and just are happier, perform their jobs better, and work more effectively as a team. Justice in the workplace can be classified in three ways; procedural justice, distributive justice, and interactional justice (Collins, & Mossholder, 2017). The first relates to how employees perceive the fairness in which decisions are made. The second pertains to how outcomes are appropriated. The last one involves interpersonal interactions and treatment. Leaders should be fair in the processes they use to reach their decisions. They should be transparent and impartial in their actions. They should provide their employees with a chance to voice their concerns and opinions.
Great leaders have integrity as one of their guiding pillars. Leaders should be honest, reliable, and trustworthy. They should practice what they preach and own up to their mistakes instead of blaming others or making excuses. A leader’s behavior reflects on their reputation and that of the organization. Greater integrity leads to greater performance and a sense of trust and satisfaction among employees. People want to work for ethical leaders and organizations. Organizations with strong ethical cultures and management teams enhance their ability to get the best talent in the market. They are also regarded highly by customers, investors, and shareholders. Ethical behavior starts at the leadership level and allows the organization to create a culture of honesty and integrity. Employees can determine how trustworthy their leader is based on her benevolence and integrity. It is a critical component of a leader-employee relationship. Employees judge their leaders based on their competence and character. A leader who is both competent and honest is an asset to an organization. Leaders should proactively nurture and reinforce integrity for themselves and their employees regardless of the job description.
Leaders should always be honest and treat people well. They should not exaggerate their organization’s success or be quick to hold themselves in high regard for their own success. They should hold themselves accountable not only to their superiors but to their subordinates as well. They should interrogate how others view them. People lose faith in dishonest leaders. It is critical for leaders to behave with integrity if the organization is to succeed.
Respect is a crucial element of ethical responsibility in an organization. Ethical leaders respect everyone equally. If leaders do not show respect to their employees, it can create a negative or hostile work environment. If a leader does not show respect to everyone, employees might think they are being treated unfairly. As a leader, respect is about listening as people feel respected when their concerns and opinions are heard and understood (Mele. 2020). Leaders do not necessarily have to agree with the employee’s viewpoint, but taking to listen to them is respectful. There are many ways that leaders can demonstrate respect to their subordinates. Power, status, and role create an environment through which respect is perceived. A leader should show interest and appreciation of other people’s perspectives, knowledge, and skills. They should show gratitude and even reward the contributions and efforts of the employees.
Communication is a vital component of not only respect but ethics as a whole. Leaders should openly communicate openly the policies and procedures of the organization. No employee should feel left out in seeking information that pertains to the organization (Mele. 2020). Employees should also feel that their concerns are taken seriously when they feel wronged. Finally, respect is a continuous process that requires leaders to pay attention to the employees.
I have witnessed unethical behavior severally in my personal and professional capacity without taking action. Like Elizabeth Smith in her encounter with her unknown colleagues, the experience disturbed her but she did nothing about it (Klepper, 2018). She would later experience more serious cases of unethical behavior but this time she decided to investigate and act. This course has been critical in shaping my view of ethics and ethical behavior within an organization. It has challenged my personal worldview and enhanced my belief that honest behavior should be central to an individual and organization’s life. The majority of unethical and illegal conduct in the workplace goes unreported. This trend should change to the positive.
Virtue is its own reward. Virtuous people and organizations perform better than their peers over time. Ethical behavior leads to higher employee job satisfaction, legal compliance, organizational commitment, improved cooperation, and better health for employees as stress levels are low. Ethical behavior cuts across all Dallas Willard’s questions. It a reality that people know right from wrong (Grenz, 2016). Those who are just and who demonstrate ethical behavior tend to be happier. A good person is one who is guided by a code of ethics. Employees who strive to adhere to an organization’s ethical obligations are more ethical than those who try to justify their conduct through their personal lens.
Conclusion
Understanding one’s personal worldview is a critical step to living successfully. A personal worldview shapes an individual’s understanding of truth and reality. It contains fundamental assumptions and understanding about day-to-day activities and life in general. It constitutes an individual’s view of reality and provides the foundation to live and inspiration to one’s conduct (Suereth, 2016). Everyone has a worldview, even if they are not conscious of it. A worldview is important because it determines people’s pool of options. It is a life guide. People interpret actions from what they already believe. Having a worldview will facilitate answering Dallas Willard’s questions and forge a foundation on what base one ethics on. There are many worldviews such as Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist, secular, and so on. The ideal worldview should have logical coherence, fits reality, and has subjective satisfaction. A worldview should, therefore, be sensible and provide human beings with a purpose to live.
References
Collins, B. J., & Mossholder, K. W. (2017). Fairness means more to some than others: Interactional fairness, job embeddedness, and discretionary work behaviors. Journal of Management , 43, 293-318. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-01810-001
CrashCourse. (2016, November, 8). Kant & Categorical Imperatives: Crash Course Philosophy #35 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bIys6JoEDw
Crash Course. (2016, November, 8). Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSI
Grenz, S. J. (2016). The moral quest: Foundations of Christian ethics. InterVarsity Press.
Haidt, J. (2008, March). The Moral Roots of Liberals and Conservatives [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_the_moral_roots_of_liberals_and_conservatives?language=en#t-111517
Klepper, W. (2018). Volunteering for conflict? Columbia Business School .
Kretzschmar, L. (2018). Convergence and divergence: A Christian response to Prozesky's 'global ethic' and secular spirituality. Journal for the Study of Religion . http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1011-76012018000100008
Mele. D. (2020). Organizational Factors in the Individual Ethical Behavior. The Notion of the “Organizational Moral Structure.” https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41463-020-00080-z
Suereth, H. (2016). Your Worldview and Why It Matters: 3 Questions to Determine Worldview. https://www.veritasacademy.com/headmasters-blog/your-worldview-why-it-matters-3-questions-to-determine-worldview
Walker, H. (2015). Values of happiness. Journal of Ethnographic Theory . 5 (3): 1–23. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.14318/hau5.3.002
Willard, D. (2011). The Nature and Necessity of Worldviews - The Veritas Forum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6hwsG7AUZ0
