You had it right. It?s about taking more than you give so you can do more and take more than everyone else - we call it money! And it has been about that since our form of life began evolving. Even a one celled creature needs to consume more than it contributes to continue to exist. So in our attempts to balance this seemingly unfair situation (not sure where the balance concept comes from - I need more research there) we could call it inborn "greed," so we develop things like religion, ethics and just plain justification. We all have needs and wants and that "fine line" is how we justify those against the balance concept. It's OK to cheat on taxes (because the government...), it's OK to speed (because everyone else does) and it's OK to treat others with disdain (hey - they treat me that way...), so where does the real "line" exist? Isn?t it only really in my mind?

I, like many folks believe that there is a common, accepted "line" but as you intimate, it's not binary and for most that makes for serious issues. I prefer to handle this by choosing to deal less with those who exist or choose the "other side" of my line and that is how I sleep at night. I am sure you do the same. SO, how do these folks sleep is easy to understand. Some where along the way, they saw or experienced the act of taking more than what was given and that proved to be successful with less pain. That lesson stuck and now they practice that!

Think about that the next time you have someone with you (maybe even your children) and you cut in line, brag about paying less in taxes, speed and cut someone off to cut in the front of traffic, speak badly about your neighbor, cuss out your work place or management, complain about going to Grandma's or download that neat piece of software that YOU think should be free.

Life is about surviving lessons and we experience them all the time. AND we learn from them all the time. Ethics - Lack of Ethics - simple... These folk?s life experience and lessons are different than mine. Do I have to like them, do I have to deal with them, do I have to support them - most of the time no? But then we move to real life and add in politics and things get real messy, real fast. I cannot run away completely so I have to rely on someone to help and that drags me into the cycle. So I try to stay on a safer edge, but if they catch me, I am sure you will contribute to my betterment ? right?

You can follow your trail of lack of ethics all the way around to yourself. You have the power to change this, but you have to choose to change it. You have to choose where the limits (yes they will be artificial) are and then you have to place some benefits or cost around those limits. Is it easy, is it "right," is it "fair?" That is your decision and that is your life, your "culture,? your "religion" or your "beliefs." And in doing so, we create the dilemma that you are refereeing to. To make the change move in the direction we might want, we have to provide more value over there than here and until we understand that, this age old challenge will continue ? forever I suspect.

An old adage went something along the lines of being careful about pointing at someone because when you pointed at someone there was only one finger pointing at the other person - BUT - there were three pointing back at you...

You could say security and ethics start at home (you add your own definition of home here please) and I would tend to agree with that. BUT, I would also tend to agree that such a decree would also require a balance of the forces we call punishment, restitution, remuneration and fair. When you are ready to do something to make that happen ? we can start the journey. Until then, we can talk about it.

After all, isn't fair the concept that got us here in the first place?

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/416/33920#33920