Anthropology (catch all)

[marct]

Hi John,

Is an antropologist (or other social scientist) who joins the Clandestine Service of his country unethical?

In a word, "No". I would say that there are inherent "ethical dangers" inherent for an Anthropologist or anyone else for that matter, who has internalized the verstehen methodology acting as a covert operative, but I certainly wold not say that it is "inherently" and absolutely unethical. I would say that the danger of becoming affected by covert actions is much higher than by acting solely as an analyst, but not that it is an absolute, 1:1 equation.

Just because I have a PhD doesn't mean that I define myself always and for all time as an academic. Professionally, I have been a military officer, an intelligence officer, an academic, and a consultant - some of those during the same time periods (interesting what a Reserve Officer can do). The ethical issue, for me, is one of role.

I totally agree, John. Look, one of the reasons why I use this rather oddball definition of morality and ethics is because I act in so many different roles that, after a while, they are like masks in a play. I either am / have been / or have acted as a professional academic, actor, singer, career counsellor, priest, game designer, market researcher and social worker.

Given the disparity of professional roles that both of us have used at one or more times in our lives, I think we can probably both agree that "code of ethics" tend to be limited to singular professions. What is "ethical" for a law enforcement officer may be "unethical" for an academic researcher, and vice versa (one of my students got caught in that particular one). This is why I shifted my definition of "ethics" to "right action in accordance with natural law" (okay, Buddhist, I know, but it was the best model I could come up with).

So, and getting back to your original question, I am more concerned with the effects of action on the, for want of a better term, "spiritual well being" of the individual than I am with the specifics of any particular action per se.

But what if, in the course of my research, I discover information that would be both useful and of interest to my and the host government - and, it would be helpful to society to see that the governments in question received that information. Should I report it or not? In the real world case - which was the diversion of legal coca into the illegal drug trade - I saw no ethical problem with reporting it so long as I protected my sources, which I did. Some might well disagree with my choice but it seemed the ethical one to me.

And here is where I find myself in an absolute, categorical disagreement with the position of Gusterson and Price. I would, in all probability, have done exactly the same thing as you. For me, it is not a question of "professional ethics" ("morality" in my terminology), it is a question of true ethics - what must I do, as a competent and self-aware individual in order not to "destroy my soul"?

Maybe I have internalized too many Protestant concepts, despite going to an Ursuline convent for school , but I hold, as a categorical position, that each individual must ultimately stand before their God(s) and account for their actions. One corollary of this is that I, as an individual, cannot rely on the judgement of anyone else to define what I consider to be "ethical". Another corollary of this is that if I do not ask for advice from "those who know", then I am a fool, and the final corollary is, IMHO, best stated by Cromwell - "Brethren, I beseach ye in the bowels of Christ to consider that ye may be wrong"!

In short, I believe that "ethics" are too important to the individual to hand them over to the control of a group.

In other cases, I have used my academic skills to support my other roles but I have not tried to say I was in an academic role at the time, rather I was in one of my other professional roles. For those of us on all sides of this issue who are blogging away, clearly we are using our academic and other training to make points and enter the debate. Are any of us being unethical - including David Price? I think not. And BTW, Price and Gusterson are to be commended for their willingness to join this debate on what to them must seem "hostile ground."

John, I agree totally with that! Despite my disagreements with David, I certainly would agree that he is acting in a manner that is within the moral boundary of established discourse. Do I consider him to be "unethical"? No, not at all. I truly believe that he is answering a "calling", despite the fact that I disagree with his position. I would never demand that he or Hugh Gusterson accept my position - that, to my mind, would be unethical. I can, and will, however, demand that they grant me the same courtesy.

Marc