Why is it that this phrase is the modus operandi for so many people when making serious and important decisions? Why is it that people settle for the lesser of two evils? Is the lesser of two evils an ethical decision?
It seems that we have been conditioned to choose based on who or what would cause less damage, or evil, knowing and accepting the fact that indeed damage or evil would be done. Why is it that looking for ”a good” does not seem to be a consideration ? Is it too much work,is a “good” is not available or is that it really isn’t that important for us personally to be vested in any decision or situation that would cause us to be challenged, particularly if the decision would not affect me directly?
Don’t a significant number of voters vote for “the lesser of two evils?” How many times have each of us made a decision on “the lesser of two evils?”
Searching for a “good” option is the ideal, but it takes time, discernment and commitment for personal follow through. Searching for a “good” option is the ethical quest for the values based person. It reflects an attitude that each decision is indeed, important and needs to be made in the context of personal accountability.
Maybe we should be ethically training our people to choose the greater of two goods!
I wonder what that would look like ?