It’s seems to me that at some point in a person’s life, they
will be undoubtedly faced with an opportunity that would benefit them, but
wouldn’t be entirely ethical. Sometimes,
the line between ethical and unethical can be distinct, and in others it may be
blurred. What factors affect this? The person making this decision may not have
a strong moral conscience. Maybe they
were not raised to adhere to the strictest of moral standards, or maybe they
have found that exercising a lax conscience has given them a competitive
advantage against other more morally responsible people.
An example of this that immediately comes to mind is when a
person is in debt to an acquaintance.
Some parents instill in their children a sense that when a debt is owed,
it must be payed back in full as soon as possible. Others may not stress this as much, and the
child may not understand the social/legal benefits of doing so (in the social
sense, that you are a trustworthy and responsible person; in the legal sense
this could be connected to your credit score).
Of course, most know that an immediate payment of a debt it very much
appreciated by the person to whom the debt is owed. But imagine a situation where the indebted
would benefit by waiting longer than they should to eliminate their debt. Maybe the loaner is forgetful, and/or doesn’t
pressure the indebted for the money (they don’t need the money immediately,
it’s a small amount of money, etc.). It
would be opportunistic for the indebted to not pay up. They may think, “good things come to those
who wait”, although that is a twisted interpretation of the saying (in my opinion).
To cite a specific example, I have a friend who lived with one other roommate last year. Each month, this person was
in charge of paying the entire television/internet bill, and the other roommate would pay
their share of the bill to him personally.
He would pay the bill on time (by automatic payments online), and then report
to the other how much was owed. He
wouldn’t pressure his roommate to pay him, but made sure he was aware of the debt. The roommate was,
without fail, very late on his payments.
Even though a debt was owed, he would not go out of his way to repay
it. The indebted in this situation would
receive money from his parents to pay for the bill, but he would spend it on
other things, and therefore would claim to have to ‘wait’ longer before asking
his parents for money again, less they become suspect of his devious actions.
My friend who payed the bill did so with his parents
money, and wasn’t pressured by his
parents for the money from his roommate as he paid each bill (he would collect
it over the semester and pay back a total).
So it begs the question, how unethical was the ‘late payer’ really
being? He was being opportunistic by not
spending the money when he had to, and using it for his own personal gain,
while not doing much harm to his roommate.
The possible disadvantages of this strategy, however, are a reputation
for late payments and a loss of a trust.
