Ethics is often presented as a system of values: rights and wrongs, duties and obligations, virtues and vices. These frameworks assume that:
-
Harm can be assessed in terms of moral violation.
-
Responsibility is tied to fault or intent.
-
Care is a moral disposition or virtue.
-
Ethical systems can extend indefinitely, promising resolution or redemption.
The series we have developed rejects these assumptions. Here, we contrast the two approaches and clarify why structural navigation is superior for real-world ethics.
1. Harm: Moral vs Relational
Traditional view: Harm is a breach of moral or legal norms; ethics involves judging right and wrong.
Structural view: Harm is relational destabilisation. It is measured by disruption to the system of potential and the field of relations.
Implication: Structural harm is observable, measurable, and actionable without invoking contested values. Moral categorisation often obscures dynamics or inflates harm into symbolic moral crisis.
2. Responsibility: Fault vs Exposure
Traditional view: Responsibility equals blame; moral or legal culpability is primary.
Structural view: Responsibility is exposure to relational consequences. It is proportional to capacity to influence outcomes and participation in the system, not intent or abstract moral duty.
Implication: Structural responsibility allows practical action, assigning answerability where it matters, rather than expending energy on moralistic attribution.
3. Care: Virtue vs Skill
Traditional view: Care is a moral disposition — empathy, compassion, or affection. It is uneven, subjective, and often assumed to require virtue.
Structural view: Care is disciplined sensitivity to relational pressure. It is a skill, observable and trainable, that operates at individual, institutional, and systemic scales.
Implication: Structural care is scalable and actionable, unlike moralised care, which falters in large or complex systems.
4. Limits: Moral Absolutes vs Ethical Realism
Traditional view: Ethics can, in principle, address every harm; moral codes are universal and unbounded.
Structural view: Ethics has inherent limits. Some harms are irreparable; some breakdowns cannot be repaired. Recognising these limits is part of ethical discipline, not failure.
Implication: Structural ethics avoids escalation and secondary harms caused by moral absolutism, focusing instead on what can be practically navigated.
5. Operational Advantage
Why the relational approach works where moral frameworks fail:
| Feature | Moral/Value-Based | Structural/Relational |
|---|---|---|
| Basis | Abstract norms, right/wrong | Observed relational constraints, fields of potential |
| Responsibility | Blame/fault | Exposure and actionable influence |
| Care | Sentiment/virtue | Skill in registering and responding to constraints |
| Decision-making | Often symbolic, rhetorical | Grounded in capacity and impact |
| Handling irreparable harm | Moral crisis or escalation | Recognises limits; avoids secondary destabilisation |
| Scalability | Limited by virtue/empathy | Scales via systemic design and coordination |
6. Practical clarity
By abandoning moral absolutes, this approach allows:
-
Prioritisation of effective interventions.
-
Reduction of secondary harm caused by performative moralism.
-
Clear allocation of responsibility based on structural impact rather than moral status.
-
Ethical engagement at scale, even in complex global crises.
In short, ethics becomes a tool for action within relational fields, not a theatre for moral spectacle.
7. Conclusion
Moral and value-based frameworks are intuitive and culturally entrenched. They appeal to identity, emotion, and ideology. But in high-stakes or complex contexts — from war zones to global crises — they are often ineffective, ambiguous, or counterproductive.
Structural, relational ethics:
-
Defines harm without moral judgment.
-
Situates responsibility in exposure.
-
Treats care as operational skill.
-
Recognises limits without moral panic.
This is ethics without moralism — precise, scalable, and actionable. It is the culmination of the Ethics Without Moral Foundations series: a framework that works in the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment