| OCR Text |
Show Chapter VI. Moral Interiority 282 Without this prior, theory-laden conception, we would have no way to know what empathic and sympathetic inner states of our own might correspond to the other's, and thus no cognitive basis for the felt psychological connection with the other that a visceral understanding of her interiority requires. Then it is equally unclear what would motivate our moral behavior toward him. In order that we experience the direct moral emotions - such as compassion - on which Humeans and Anti-Rationalists insist, a strictly impartial moral theory that saturates our modal imagination of others' interiority must be presupposed. 8. Explaining the Whistle-Blower Now to recur to the problem raised in Volume I, Chapter VI.5.2, of how to explain the whistle-blower's actions, if not in the familiar Humean terms. Recall that we acknowledged that some whistle-blowers' actions might be explicable in these terms;16 but that most probably were not because the projected satisfactions of seeing justice done were so rare, uncertain or bittersweet at best. The majority of whistle-blowers cited different reasons for making public their employer's harmful or unethical workplace and/or business practices: disgust or outrage with others' arrogance and dishonesty;17 a belief in open information, truth, justice, or reason;18 loyalty to the public;19 conscience or personal ethical or religious principle;20 a sense of personal responsibility or obligation to others21 - even though they had everything to lose and nothing to gain. Many whistleblowers felt that they had no choice, that they were forced or compelled to expose the corruption of their organizations.22 We also looked at the explanation offered by Socrates, the See Myron Peretz Glazer and Penina Migdal Glazer, The Whistleblowers: Exposing Corruption in Government and Industry (New York: Basic Books, 1989), 209-215, 217. Also see Clyde H. Farnsworth, "Survey of Whistle Blowers Finds Retaliation but Few Regrets," The New York Times (Sunday, February 22, 1987), 22. 17 Glazer and Glazer, ibid., page 19, 100., 122, 138, 223, 246. Also see Mary Schiavo, "Flying into Trouble," Time (March 31, 1997), pages 52-62. 18 ibid. pages 33, 43, 70, 96, 107. Also see Philip J. Hilts, "Why Whistle-Blowers Can Seem a Little Crazy," The New York Times (Sunday, June 13, 1993), Section 4, page 6). 19 Ibid., pages 17, 40, 45, 129. 20 Ibid. pages 43, 70, 88, 96, 101, 103, 104-5, 117, 119, 122, 141, 248-9. Also see Clyde H. Farnsworth, op. cit. Note 16; and "In Defense of the Government's Whistle Blowers," The New York Times (Tuesday, July 26, 1988), B6. 21 Ibid., pages 70, 88, 117, 122, 123, 124-5, 129, 130-1. Also see Liz Hunt, "Whistleblowers 'put their health under threat'," The Independent (Friday, 10 September 1993), Section 1, p. 6. 22 Ibid., pages 77, 86, 101, 105, 109, 110, 118, 121, 122. Also see N. R. Kleinfeld, "The Whistle Blowers' Morning After," The New York Times (Sunday, November 9, 1986), Section 3, page 1; and Don Rosendale, "About Men: A Whistle-Blower," The New York Times Magazine (Sunday, June 7, 1987), page 56. 16 © Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin |
