There are different ethical systems of communication. The first is the categorical imperative which is based on the work of Immanuel Kant that states ethics on the basis of increasing idea that individuals living in a society pursue moral absolutes (Bowen, 2005). However, the underlying principle of the categorical imperative is that one should act and set an example for others. The second system is utilitarianism that was developed by John Stuart Mill and suggest that anything that is based on ethics brings goodness for a large number of people. However, the utilitarianism largely depends on the cost of moral actions where maximization of happiness and satisfaction are important. The third system is golden mean, contributed by Aristotle which proposes that the moral virtue of an individual stands between, proposing that a person's moral virtue stands between two categories or vices, i.e., with the mean or with the middle that serves as the foundation for a balanced society (Johnston, 2006). The third is ethic of care, which is developed by Carol Gilligan and has concerns with the moral consequences of taking decisions and relationship among people living in a society. The last is significant choice which is based on the concept of Thomas Nilsen that states that emphasize on the belief that ethical communication based on the extent to which one maximizes his or her ability or abilities to implement free choice (West and Turner, 2010). However, the significance of choice also emphasize that the information must be provided to other people in a non-coercive manner so that individuals could be informed and free decisions.
With respect to my personal experiences and observations in my personal life, I have faced many different situations especially of categorical imperative and ethics of care in my routine life. My first experience reflects categorical imperative. Few months back, on one weekend I and my friends decided to go for a picnic. As signal light was red, therefore I stopped the car. However, at that time I can go ahead and break the law as my friends encouraged me to do so as nobody was watching us. However, breaking the law, i.e., crossing when there is red light means everyone can go ahead on red lights at any time which is considered as violation of the universal law. Similarly, another experience is ethics of care. Few days back, I had arranged a party at my home. I invited all my friends including John who has some physical disability. While at the party, my friends interrogated me about the John’s problems and disability in front of him. My ethics appreciated me not to discuss about Johns problems during the party as it will hurt his feelings. Thus, I clearly refused to discuss John and his disability. The two situations, i.e., ethics of care and categorical imperative are different as one makes me to behave in a way to set example for others whereas the other made me to have concern regarding the relation that I have with John. In addition, these ethical considerations have affected my way of communication in both the discussed situations. Although, I had strictly but frankly said no to my friends that had somewhat affected my relationships with them in both the situations, i.e., few friends disliked my refusal where as remaining supported my decision and communication.
On the basis of theoretical explanations and my personal experience, it could be said that one ethical system does not work for all situations. The different situations imply different ethical systems where an individual or society is required to behave ethically and morally.
References
Bowen, J. L. (2005). The Categorical Imperative of a Confucian Evil Demon in America. iUniverse
Johnston, D. (2006). A Brief History of Philosophy: From Socrates to Derrida. A&C Black
West, R., and Turner, L. (2010). Understanding Interpersonal Communication: Making Choices in Changing Times. 2nd Edition. Cengage Learning
