I am astonished by the lack of importance that most posters seem to accord to ethics training. All professions and many organisations have their codes of ethics which members are expected to understand and to which they are expected to adhere. For example, that for Australian engineers is at http://www.ieaust.org.au/about_us/res/downloads/Code_of_Ethics_2000.pdf

When the partly built Westgate Bridge in Melbourne collapsed in 1970 killing 35 people, the cause was not simply that somebody misplaced a decimal point in a calculation. It was a consequence of "mistakes, miscalculations, errors of judgement, failure of communication and sheer inefficiency", a Royal Commission found. Furthermore a bridge of similar type designed by the same engineers had previously collapsed, http://www.westgatebridge.org/commem03.htm

HIH Insurance didn't become a smoking ruin because of an extreme weather event, and neither did Enron. In fact, Enron had its own 64-page Code of Ethics. You can read it at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/packageart/enron/enron.pdf Unfortunately, not everyone followed its admonition to conduct the business in a "moral and honest manner".

Anyone disinclined to glibly dismiss Claus's argument might care to visit Texas A&M University's web site on Introducing Ethics Case Studies Into Required Undergraduate Engineering Courses at http://ethics.tamu.edu/ or visit the Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science at Case Western Reserve University, at http://onlineethics.org/

Professor Schwartz was a member of the advisory group for preparing a guide on ethics in higher education, at http://www.cihe-uk.com/ethicsPR.php so he has some acquaintance with the matter.

Another ethical path I like to see taken by universities is to refuse to pass those individuals who do not perform well enough in a unit. I don't want to see a doctor with PASS grades only (the current pass bar is too low in an intellectual sense).

I certainly don't want anyone to graduate from any university in Australia who lacks the standard of English language necessary for a sound tertiary-level education here. Each student must be seen to hand in fluent, original pieces of assessment at an academic standard worthy of respect and worthy of a degree.

This very much includes the failing of full fee-paying students where necessary (whether they are from overseas or not). This is a fragile area of our tertiary management framework that we need to strengthen a) for the sake of academic teaching and learning standards and b) for the sake of the future reputations of our institutions.

If academe itself is seen by its own students to abide by a very high standard of teacher and faculty behaviour then it can not help but establish the very desirable kind of ethical, stimulating and intellectual atmosphere that it wants and that its students are paying to be part of.

Once again - a philosophy of ethics course will not necessarily teach people how to be ethical but it will teach them "how to think deeply and critically about complex issues" which was surely the point of the article.

MikeM is "astonished by the lack of importance that most posters seem to accord to ethics training", and goes on to talk about codes of ethics - but I rather think he is missing the point.

Ethics are the building blocks upon which decisions are made. Whether to lie, or to tell the truth. Whether to cheat, or to play fair. Whether to take advantage of someone's mistake or ignorance, or to point it out to them and thereby lose an opportunity of personal advancement.

Codes of ethics, the study of ethics, or even (save us!) the philosophy of ethics, have absolutely no impact on whether an individual will pass the test of actually being ethical in real live situations.

Boaz, your parable falls short of being convincing - your characters are made of straw, the storyline is weak and the revelation only twee.

Its irrelevance to the narrative came home to me when only a couple of posts later I saw MikeM's examples of Westgate Bridge and HIH.

“Hmmm”, I thought to myself, "according to Boaz's own statistics, 65% of Australians are Christians. So given that the builders were gathered from the Australian populace, the odds are 13-7 in favour of the conclusion that whoever were to blame, they had the ethics of Christianity to guide them."

I'm sure Boaz will quickly let me know where either my mathematics or my logic here is defective.

To believe that we have to teach ethics - even that we have such a thing as a Code of Ethics - is an admission of failure. It would be much more productive to criminalise unethical behaviour, to use the threat of incarceration in the same cell as a big tattooed guy called Knuckles (sorry mate, nothing personal) as a deterrent.

Over time ethics will once again become as mother's milk... "don't tell fibs, young David, or the bogeyman will get you."

I marvel at how this site somehow found anonymous intellectual giants who can definitive rule on so many things.

Pericles assures us, "Codes of ethics, the study of ethics, or even (save us!) the philosophy of ethics, have absolutely no impact on whether an individual will pass the test of actually being ethical in real live situations."

Well, thank you Pericles, I did not know that. I would never have guessed.

If understanding ethics doesn't have an impact on being ethical, what does, Pericles? Come on. You've got our attention now.

Tell us!

Stan1 I think taking a tough subject in ethics would BOTH help people think deeply about complex issues, and get them to think about being personally ethical. I agree with MikeM that learning what the great thinkers have written about ethics is likely to make a difference in how ethical you are personally, but no I don’t have any empirical evidence.

The logic is that if you have thought hard about it, you will make up your own mind. If you have not thought about it, you will just do what everybody else does. I agree many won’t be changed, but it would still be good to think about the ideas, rather than just do another business administration subject.

If all teachers are University educated, that ethics education would be brought to primary and high schools, even if it wasn’t directly taught. I think my kids teachers have taught ethics at their schools and done a good job at it. A University course would take it to another level, though.

Its not a cure for all the evils of humanity, it’s just a better way to set up a University course.

From my reading I would include Aristotle, Jesus, William Shakespeare, Mortimer Adler and Bruce Springsteen in a course about ethics, but Steven Schwartz and others like him would be much better suited to come up with the appropriate course content. Sign me up.