Good Essay About Ethics

Cooper in, “Applying the Design Approach to Public Administrative Ethics” and in “the Conclusion” examines the application of ethics in public administration. On the other hand, Gawthrop in, The Moral Dimension of Democracy, examines the application of morals and ethical frameworks in the secular societies. The two authors in one sense look at the separation of the moral from the legal. In one way, the message communicated in their arguments is that while morality may not necessarily be legal, it is necessarily for purposes of complimenting the law. This line of argument restates the initial one by Cooper as to the limitation of the law. However, it is necessary to appreciate the distinctions laid forth by the two authors.
Cooper embraces the concept of plurality in the resolution of conflicts in the public agencies. According to Cooper, the players need not cast themselves on stone and limit themselves to one particular approach. He observes that conflict may be resolved from different perspectives and with due consideration of different elements. Further, Cooper stresses on the need to appreciate the problem and have the same fully defined before attempting to solve the same. He equally observes that it is appropriate for the organization to appreciate the presence of uncertainties and acknowledge the likely ambiguities in the organization. This way, it would be able to tackle the problem from an inclusive premise that resolves all the concerns. Further, Cooper observes that it would be necessary to appreciate the time constraints often present during solution of conflicts. In that context, Cooper, prefers the pursuit of solutions from a multiple perspective rather than assuming a singular approach that is devoid of unity.
In, the Conclusion, Cooper raps up his arguments on the management of the organization. He embraces the need for an ethical framework and premise of operation. However, he nonetheless does not forget to acknowledge the existing organizational structures, setting and culture. He opines that ethical context do not occur in isolation. They have to blend and match the larger organizational structure, setting and culture. This, according to Cooper, would make the implementation of ethical practices and cultures easily and accommodative of the larger organization.
Gawthrop appreciates the existing and long enduring separation of the church and the state. He acknowledges this as a necessary evil in that the church and the state should stay separate and distinct. However, what is interesting in his line of argument is the fact that despite the distinction, the state still needs to practice morality and ethical conceptions and principles. He observes that justice in itself has ethical ramifications and it is necessary for the state as the custodian of public rights to remain ethical and moral. However, this must not be confused with religion. Religion, according to Gawthrop, remains a contentious issue and the doctrinal differences should be left for the churches to solve. For the public administrator, it is the ethical premise borrowed from whatever religious affiliation that is necessary. Otherwise, Gawthrop sets the pace for a moral practice in a secular setting. He seeks to distinguish the fact that secular settings should not be synonymous with an unethical application.
In conclusion, I find the authors’ arguments dynamic and necessary especially in the context of the modern public administration. In the modern times, it is necessary to have a moral approach to issues so as to meet the internal objectives of public administration.