Reading Log 2: "The Case against Character"

I have always believed that it is hard to define people’s personalities, morals, and ethics in absolute terms and this excerpt only furthered these feelings for me. I agree with the situationist mentality that the environment a person is in will affect their decisions as well as  what they believe is a fundamentally ethical action. As Appiah says, “We all know all know that such traits aren't served up in a fixed combination like a categorical Happy Meal”. Most people go through many varying states of ethical conducts throughout the day as they cycle from work, school, sports, etc.

In high school, I knew a person was incredibly smart, took many AP classes, and would have never considered taking any short cuts to receive or further her academic success. She was a prime example of a model student. However, after school when it came to the cross country team she could not have been a more polar opposite. She cut corners on courses, walked when the coach wasn’t looking and would think of any possible way to do less work and still be a part of the team. What stood out to me was how long it took my teammates and I to notice what was happening. Since she worked so hard academically we had correspondence bias and believed that she put the same hard work into everything she did. Unfortunately this was not the case but it was a valuable lesson for the girls on the team that people’s ideas of what is ethical are not always consistent.

The anecdote from Lydia Davis used to start the article was very relatable and connected with many of my experiences as well. We all have different people inside of us such as the “playful man” or the compassionate man”, and each of these different people has a slightly different set of morals. What is important to remember is that each of these situations and personalities combine together creating a personal set of ethics for each individual to live by.