People define morality in different ways. What is right or wrong depends on the norms and values of a particular social group, ethnic group, or a state, but there is the universal law which is applied to everyone. It is good to keep promises as the act portrays our truthfulness, although there are circumstances that force us to break the pledge. The nature of the choice an individual makes should be influenced by the duty to do what is right and the consequence of the decision. Considering my friend's case, I would tell the truth despite the promise I had made just to stay true to my moral and ethical beliefs.
It is my duty to tell the truth because that is what my moral and ethical beliefs guide me to do. Knowing that my friend did a wrong thing and keeping quiet about it would be incorrect. I would confess to the right authority on what he did so that he may face the law accordingly. Even though deontologists believe that it is unsound to break promises and that our actions should not be valued according to their consequences, I believe that sometimes we can breach pledges just to fulfill what we believe in and save other people from it. I would never forgive my self-knowing that an innocent person has been accused of a crime which my friend has committed. Obeying my moral and ethical believes would promote my wellbeing as it “means that individuals (in this case myself) will not behave in self-interested, opportunistic ways when doing so would be socially desirable” (Shavell 603). Doing what is right is what determines what is moral or not despite the agreement in place, such as the promise.
I know that confessing the truth would affect our friendship, but I would prefer to lose the friend to pave way for justice for the innocent person. I think every action should result in a good thing for it to be moral, and that is what we believe in. Breaking the promise would result in justice, and it will probably prevent the friend from doing the act again after he faces the law. According to Sheinman, “it won’t be wrong to break a promise if keeping the promise will lead to a disaster” (223). Deontologists ignore the fact that every ethical decision results in either a bad or good thing, and that the nature of the consequence should determine its effectiveness. Keeping the promise would only save my friend, but let the innocent person be jailed and suffer psychologically because of being accused of something he has not done. However, when I break it and tell the truth, I would save the innocent person, myself, and the friend. My friend will never be at peace knowing that he carried out a criminal act and another person was accused of it. It is good to evaluate how one’s decisions will impact the affected people and society at large.
Whether or not to break a promise can be an ethical dilemma if an individual considers other things like theories rather than what is right and socially desirable. Breaking the promise I made to my friend would be the correct thing I would do in order to let him understand that he did the wrong thing, and that an innocent person should not suffer because of his action. Keeping a promise is significant as it portrays the virtue of trustworthiness, but breaking it for a greater good would be accepted.
Works Cited
Shavell, Steven. Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law. Harvard University Press, 2009.
Sheinman, Hanoch, ed. Promises and Agreements: Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press, 2011.
