Topic 3

DISCURSIVE JUSTIFICATION of ETHICS

1. Problems of legitimization of moral norms in communicative ethics.
2. Communicative transformation of social theory.
3. Communicative theory in contexts of the linguistic- hermeneutic- pragmatic
turn.

3.1. Let’s start with analysis of the main five moral principles which are
defined
as: autonomy, justice, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and fidelity are each absolute
truths in and of themselves. By exploring the dilemma in regards to these principles
one may come to a better understanding of the conflicting issues.
In order to avoid possible conflicts 10 Principles of Ethical Communication are
distinguished. Those are some core principles associated with ethical communication,
starting with the core value of honesty that all other values are connected to. However,
it can be said that there is a value underlying honesty (with regard to ethical
communication) and that is emotional intelligence/empathy as the precursor of all soft
skills, which allows all personnel to be understood, and to effectively communicate
with others. Emotional intelligence, within the framework of ethical communication,
allows one to understand the needs of others, and meet those needs in the most
efficient manner possible as if you were in their shoes. Let’s make analyses of main
principals of Ethical Communication:
1. Be Truthful And Honest: Being honest means communicating what is known
to be true (only 100 percent the facts) to a listener, with no intent to deceive or present
only parts of the truth. It also means being as objective as possible, that is, not tailoring
the story based on what the speaker wants the listener to believe. Ethical
communication should be based on accurate information and facts – in a word, do not
lie.
 2. Active Listening: Hearing someone and listening to them are two different
things. In order for ethical communication to be effective, it is necessary for the
recipient to pro-actively listen to the speaker, and to not just hear what they want to
hear, or to hear only parts of the conversation. This also means asking questions when
any point is not completely understood, for the sake of clarification.

3. Speak Non-Judgmentally: Ethically and concisely communicating means

speaking in a non-judgmental manner with every recipient, negating unnecessary
conflict, which typically creates a breakdown in communication and causes
misunderstandings. Unnecessary conflict is never good for any business, and such
conflicts usually result from unethical communications, with judgmental, accusatory,
and overly-critical comments often being the catalyst for such breakdowns in
communication.

4. Speak From Your Own Experience: Bringing your personal experience into a
dialogue with business listeners is important, providing backup for your arguments
with something more tangible. Such a communication method (experiential
communication) paints a complete picture for your audience and helps to prove your
points so that the listeners have a better understanding of what is being said.

5. Consider the Receiver’s Preferred Communication Channel: You risk losing an

audience if you use a communication channel that is not preferred by your intended
receiver. To effectively communicate with your listeners, use the most preferred
communication channel, whether that be face-to-face, email, conference call, phone
call, messenger app, etc. Also, when presenting data to a business audience, be aware
of the preferred method of presentation for that business, whether it be graphs, slides,
PowerPoint presentations, etc. Additionally, since body language is very important, it
is often preferred to meet business clients face-to-face.

6. Strive To Understand: While it is important to be proactive in listening, it is

important for listeners to also strive to fully understand what is being said before
responding. While asking for clarification or confirmation of a point is fine, many
times questions that listeners pose have already been answered. Listeners should think
about what has been said before constructing a reply. Reading “in between the lines” is
also an important skill that allows for understanding what isn’t said, but was implicitly
said or implied.

7. Avoid A Negative Tone: Ethically communicating assumes the speaker will

avoid rudeness, be polite and professional, and have tact. The ethical communicator
knows that it’s not only important what you say, but how you say it. Tone is one of the
most critical facets of communication. A listener may miss the meaning altogether if
the tone is wrong, which can lead to unnecessary confrontations that decrease business
productivity.
Controlling one’s tone goes along with self-control, a soft skill that allows one
to know how they wish to reply to a terse business message (for instance) versus the
most effective manner for replying. Essentially, keeping the tone positive or neutral is
best, as the tone of a written message – or of one’s voice – is always picked up by the
receiver, and can alter how the message is received and/or understood.
Additionally, while it is acceptable to be honest and open, tact – and
professional maturity – means knowing when it is inappropriate to speak up, and when
it is crucial to. Tact also means knowing that being completely honest does not equate
with being rude or negative – it is possible to be completely honest and open with
one’s thoughts and feelings while still remaining polite and respectful.
8. Do Not Interrupt Others: Allowing others to speak is important for the creation of a
civil, effective working environment. Interrupting others results in misunderstandings
and unnecessary conflicts and a breakdown in workplace communications, which only
hinders corporate progress and creates problems. Interrupting others not only shows a
lack of respect, but does not allow the listener to fully grasp what is being said, which
often results in incorrect assumptions being made.
9. Respect Privacy And Confidentiality: Most businesses should include a clause in
their code of ethics defining what is appropriate when it comes to honoring client and
employee confidentiality and privacy. This can have a wide range of implications,
including minimizing workplace gossip, and mitigating toxic conversations about the
private lives of clients and/or personnel.
10. Accept Responsibility: As noted before, a core tenant within any ethical
communication framework is taking responsibility for the actions that result from
one’s words, whether it be good or bad. This includes both short term and long term
consequences of one’s communications. Owning one’s words reinforces the
importance of being conscientious about ethical communication.
In order to analyze the issue deeper I’d recommend to read the article written by
Grzegorz Polok and Anna Adamus-Matuszyńska (University of Economics in
Katowice) “Ethical values and norms in the communication systems of public
institutions” and prepare the brief review of it.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
338450166_Ethical_values_and_norms_in_the_communication_systems_of_public_in
stitutions

As we understand after analyses of main moral norms and principles of

communicative ethics, it is quite difficult to legitimize those. But we can see that more
and more legal documents regulating this issues appear.
3.2. Communicative transformation of social theory.
This issue cannot be discussed without awareness with Luhmann’s
System Theory.
Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998) is a famous German cyberneticist,
sociologist , university teacher and lawyer.
According to Luhmann, each (national) society is divided into various
autopoietic and separated (sub)systems, such as the legal system, the political
system, the educational, the scientific or the economic system. Social
(sub)systems are structures, which “maintain in an overly complex environment
a less complex, meaningful context invariant and are thus able to orientate
actions”.
The system theory of Luhmann is based on several essential elements,
where the first one is communication. So, the core element is communication –
as the unity of “utterance, information and understanding”. Each social system
consists of countless meaningful communications. Moreover, society is only
possible where communication is possible. Luhmann states that communication
is therefore society and society communication. Communication can be
considered as the basic unit of observation for the assessment of the operations
of social systems. According to Luhmann, communication is an ongoing,
without interrupting sustained operation, which reproduces itself. Through the
continuous juxtapositions of communication operations (“communication of
communication”) finally develop social systems. Social systems are thus not
stable, stagnant structures – the systems consist moreover of a multiplicity of
“events”, which change easily. Important to mention is that although social
systems communicate about the environment (e.g. the law system notes and
observes changes of the political, educational or economic system), it cannot
communicate directly with the environment.
Detailed description and analysis of Luhmann’ System Theory is presented in
the article of Clemens Mattheis “The System Theory of Niklas Luhmann and the
Constitutionalization of the World Society”
 https://www.gojil.eu/issues/42/42_article_mattheis.pdf

Tasks:
1. Describe moral norms in communicative ethics.
Kitchener has identified five moral principles that are viewed as the cornerstone of our
ethical guidelines. Ethical guidelines can not address all situations that a counselor is forced
to confront. Reviewing these ethical principles which are at the foundation of the guidelines
often helps to clarify the issues involved in a given situation. The five principles, autonomy,
justice, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and fidelity are each absolute truths in and of
themselves. By exploring the dilemma in regards to these principles one may come to a
better understanding of the conflicting issues.
1. Autonomy is the principle that addresses the concept of independence. The essence of
this principle is allowing an individual the freedom of choice and action. It addresses the
responsibility of the counselor to encourage clients, when appropriate, to make their own
decisions and to act on their own values. There are two important considerations in
encouraging clients to be autonomous. First, helping the client to understand how their
decisions and their values may or may not be received within the context of the society in
which they live, and how they may impinge on the rights of others. The second
consideration is related to the client's ability to make sound and rational decisions. Persons
not capable of making competent choices, such as children, and some individuals with
mental handicaps, should not be allowed to act on decisions that could harm themselves or
others.
2. Nonmaleficence is the concept of not causing harm to others. Often explained as
"above all do no harm", this principle is considered by some to be the most critical of all the
principles, even though theoretically they are all of equal weight (Kitchener, 1984;
Rosenbaum, 1982; Stadler, 1986). This principle reflects both the idea of not inflicting
intentional harm, and not engaging in actions that risk harming others (Forester-Miller &
Rubenstein, 1992).
 3. Beneficence reflects the counselor's responsibility to contribute to the welfare of the
client. Simply stated it means to do good, to be proactive and also to prevent harm when
possible (Forester-Miller & Rubenstein, 1992).
4. Justice does not mean treating all individuals the same. Kitchener (1984) points out
that the formal meaning of justice is "treating equals equally and unequals unequally but in
proportion to their relevant differences". If an individual is to be treated differently, the
counselor needs to be able to offer a rationale that explains the necessity and
appropriateness of treating this individual differently.
5. Fidelity involves the notions of loyalty, faithfulness, and honoring commitments.
Clients must be able to trust the counselor and have faith in the therapeutic relationship if
growth is to occur. Therefore, the counselor must take care not to threaten the therapeutic
relationship nor to leave obligations unfulfilled.
When exploring an ethical dilemma, you need to examine the situation and see how
each of the above principles may relate to that particular case. At times this alone will
clarify the issues enough that the means for resolving the dilemma will become obvious to
you. In more complicated cases it is helpful to be able to work through the steps of an
ethical decision making model, and to assess which of these moral principles may be in
conflict.
2. Define the Principles of Ethical Communication.
1. Be Truthful and Honest. Being honest means communicating what is known to be
true (only 100 percent the facts) to a listener, with no intent to deceive or present only parts
of the truth. It also means being as objective as possible, that is, not tailoring the story based
on what the speaker wants the listener to believe. Letting the listener take the data that is
objectively presented and believe what they choose to believe is a core goal of ethical
communication. Ethical communication should be based on accurate information and facts
– in a word, do not lie.
2. Active Listening. Hearing someone and listening to them are two different things. In
order for ethical communication to be effective, it is necessary for the recipient to pro-
actively listen to the speaker, and to not just hear what they want to hear, or to hear only
parts of the conversation. This also means asking questions when any point is not
completely understood, for the sake of clarification.
3. Speak Non-Judgmentally. Ethically and concisely communicating means speaking
in a non-judgmental manner with every recipient, negating unnecessary conflict, which
typically creates a breakdown in communication and causes misunderstandings.
Unnecessary conflict is never good for any business, and such conflicts usually result from
unethical communications, with judgmental, accusatory, and overly-critical comments often
being the catalyst for such breakdowns in communication.
4. Speak From Your Own Experience. Bringing your personal experience into a
dialogue with business listeners is important, providing backup for your arguments with
something more tangible. Such a communication method (experiential communication)
paints a complete picture for your audience and helps to prove your points so that the
listeners have a better understanding of what is being said.
5. Consider the Receiver’s Preferred Communication Channel. You risk losing an
audience if you use a communication channel that is not preferred by your intended
receiver. To effectively communicate with your listeners, use the most preferred
communication channel, whether that be face-to-face, email, conference call, phone call,
messenger app, etc. Also, when presenting data to a business audience, be aware of the
preferred method of presentation for that business, whether it be graphs, slides, PowerPoint
presentations, etc. Additionally, since body language is very important, it is often preferred
to meet business clients face-to-face.
6. Strive To Understand. While it is important to be proactive in listening, it is
important for listeners to also strive to fully understand what is being said before
responding. While asking for clarification or confirmation of a point is fine, many times
questions that listeners pose have already been answered. Listeners should think about what
has been said before constructing a reply. Reading “in between the lines” is also an
important skill that allows for understanding what isn’t said, but was implicitly said or
implied.
7. Avoid A Negative Tone. Ethically communicating assumes the speaker will avoid
rudeness, be polite and professional, and have tact. The ethical communicator knows that
it’s not only important what you say, but how you say it. Tone is one of the most critical
facets of communication. A listener may miss the meaning altogether if the tone is wrong,
which can lead to unnecessary confrontations that decrease social productivity.
Controlling one’s tone goes along with self-control, a soft skill that allows one to know
how they wish to reply to a terse business message (for instance) versus the most effective
manner for replying. Essentially, keeping the tone positive or neutral is best, as the tone of a
written message – or of one’s voice – is always picked up by the receiver, and can alter how
the message is received and/or understood.
8. Do Not Interrupt Others. Allowing others to speak is important for the creation of a
civil, effective working environment. Interrupting others results in misunderstandings and
unnecessary conflicts and a breakdown in workplace communications, which only hinders
corporate progress and creates problems. Interrupting others not only shows a lack of
respect, but does not allow the listener to fully grasp what is being said, which often results
in incorrect assumptions being made.
9. Respect Privacy And Confidentiality. Most businesses should include a clause in
their code of ethics defining what is appropriate when it comes to honoring client and
employee confidentiality and privacy. This can have a wide range of implications, including
minimizing workplace gossip, and mitigating toxic conversations about the private lives of
clients and/or personnel.
10. Accept Responsibility. As noted before, a core tenant within any ethical
communication framework is taking responsibility for the actions that result from one’s
words, whether it be good or bad. This includes both short term and long term
consequences of one’s communications. Owning one’s words reinforces the importance of
being conscientious about ethical communication.
3. Single out the problems of legitimization of moral norms in communicative
ethics.

4. Read the article written by Grzegorz Polok and Anna Adamus-

Matuszyńska (University of Economics in Katowice) “Ethical values and norms in the
communication systems of public institutions” and prepare the brief review of it.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
338450166_Ethical_values_and_norms_in_the_communication_systems_of_public_in
stitutions
The phenomenon of communication is closely related to mutual interpersonal and
intergroup relationships. It can also take a macro scale, which is particularly evident
when contacting compact groups, i.e. all kinds of organisations along with their
stakeholders. Therefore, the existing methods of communication have a huge impact
on their participants. Those methods not only shape the mutual image but also
strengthen bonds, support integration processes and, last but not least, form desirable
attitudes.
A whole set of axionormative activities plays a significant role in this process. It is

difficult to build lasting communication bonds without establishing, accepting and

implementing common values. Their perception and emphasis significantly facilitate
appropriate communication between the institution and the environment. However,
the values themselves are not enough. Their acceptance should translate into proper
operation. It, in turn, should be shaped through a correct system of norms and
principles. In other words, moral responsibility, shaped among employees of various
types of social institutions, translates into a better and more dignified approach to the
entire environment in a complex communication process.
To sum up the theoretical analysis of the relationship between communicating
and communication with ethical values and norms, one can indicate four levels of
communication activity of public institutions: the micro level, i.e. relationships
between individuals; the meso level, i.e. internal relationships in the institution; the
level of the relationships between institutions and the local or regional community; and
the macro level, i.e. the relationship with society. Those levels each have their specific
nature resulting from the characteristics of entities co-creating the communication
community. In turn the values and norms prevailing at each of these levels result from
the characteristics of these entities.

5. Niklas Lyhmann: short brief of biography and main woks.

Luhmann was born in Lüneburg, Free State of Prussia, where his father's family had
been running a brewery for several generations. He entered the Gymnasium
Johanneum at Luneburg in 1937. In 1943, he was conscripted in World War II and
served for two years until, at the age of 17, he was taken prisoner of war by American
troops in 1945. After the war Luhmann studied law at the University of Freiburg,
where he obtained a law degree, and then began a career in Lüneburg's public
administration. During a sabbatical in 1961, he went to Harvard, where he met and
studied under Talcott Parsons, then the world's most influential social systems theorist.
In later days, Luhmann dismissed Parsons' theory, developing a rival approach of
his own. Leaving the civil service in 1962, he lectured at the national University for
Administrative Sciences in Speyer, Germany. In 1965, he was offered a position at the
Social Research Centre of the University of Münster, led by Helmut Schelsky. From
1965/66 he studied one semester of sociology at the University of Münster.
 Two earlier books were retroactively accepted as a PhD thesis and habilitation at
the University of Münster in 1966, qualifying him for a university professorship. In
1968/1969, he briefly served as a lecturer at Theodor Adorno's former chair at the
University of Frankfurt and then was appointed full professor of sociology at the
newly founded University of Bielefeld, Germany (until 1993). He continued to publish
after his retirement, when he finally found the time to complete his magnum opus,
"The Society of Society".
Works
Luhmann wrote prolifically, with more than 70 books and nearly 400 scholarly
articles published on a variety of subjects, including law, economy, politics, art,
religion, ecology, mass media, and love. While his theories have yet to make a major
mark in American sociology, his theory is currently well known and popular in
German sociology, and has also been rather intensively received in Japan and Eastern
Europe, including in Russia. His relatively low profile elsewhere is partly due to the
fact that translating his work is a difficult task, since his writing presents a challenge
even to readers of German, including many sociologists.
Much of Luhmann's work directly deals with the operations of the legal system and his
autopoietic theory of law is regarded as one of the more influential contributions to the
sociology of law and socio-legal studies.
Luhmann is probably best known to North Americans for his debate with the
critical theorist Jürgen Habermas over the potential of social systems theory. Like his
erstwhile mentor Talcott Parsons, Luhmann is an advocate of "grand theory", although
neither in the sense of philosophical foundationalism nor in the sense of "meta-
narrative" as often invoked in the critical works of post-modernist writers. Rather,
Luhmann's work tracks closer to complexity theory, broadly speaking, in that it aims to
address any aspect of social life within a universal theoretical framework—as the
diversity of subjects he wrote on indicates. Luhmann's theory is sometimes dismissed
as highly abstract and complex, particularly within the Anglophone world, whereas his
work has had a more lasting influence on scholars from German-speaking countries,
Scandinavia and Italy.
6. Luhmann’s System Theory.
Luhmann's systems theory focuses on three topics, which are interconnected in his
entire work.
Systems theory as societal theory;
Communication theory;
Evolution theory;
Niklas Luhmann's systems theory is a sociological concept of the social system,
distinguished from others by the identification of communication and society.
Luhmann defines communication as a specific operation that exclusively characterises
social systems, and society as a system is defined by the operation that reproduces that
system. Luhmann's concept, also called neofunctionalism, has attracted the attention of
many researchers, including Jürgen Habermas.
Luhmann, for the first time, reduces the entire social process to a single operation -
communication. He defines a system through its relation to what it is not (i.e. through
its relation to its surroundings).[3] In Luhmann's understanding a system is anything
that is self-sufficient and is able to reproduce itself, distinguishing itself from its
surroundings. The process of system creation is completely closed. Also, a system has
an infinitely complex environment, which it is knowingly incapable of encompassing.
Therefore, theory constructs its own totality, which it can encompass and process.
Luhmann argues that it is impossible to see the system's environment from the inside,
nor is it possible to study the system from the "outside". Methodologically, this
approach precludes the study of the links between the closed system and its
environment. Luhmann rejects the possibility of system adaptation. He believes that
systems are inherently adaptive to each other. A system has no capacity to adapt to its
external environment. The social system reproduces itself through its key element,
communication.
Luhmann does not see individual consciousnesses as subjects of communication.
In his theory, it is society, not subjects, that communicate. Communication cannot
have contact with the outside world as it is an operationally closed system. It creates
society. For Luhmann, communication is a historically-concretely proceeding, context-
dependent event. It is not a process of information transmission, but an operation in the
course of which "knowledge or ignorance" is "redistributed". Communication is totally
tied to consciousness because only consciousness is capable of perceiving reality
sensually (i.e. perceiving meanings transmitted verbally or in writing), and any
communication involves the transmission of sensual elements.
The structure of communication
The core element is communication – as the unity of “utterance, information and
understanding”. Each social system consists of countless meaningful communications.
Moreover, society is only possible where communication is possible. Luhmann states
that communication is therefore society and society communication. Communication
can be considered as the basic unit of observation for the assessment of the operations
of social systems. According to Luhmann, communication is an ongoing, without
interrupting sustained operation, which reproduces itself. Through the continuous
juxtapositions of communication operations (“communication of communication”)
finally develop social systems. Social systems are thus not stable, stagnant structures –
the systems consist moreover of a multiplicity of “events”, which change easily.
Important to mention is that although social systems communicate about the
environment (e.g. the law system notes and observes changes of the political,
educational or economic system), it cannot communicate directly with the
environment.
Luhmann's theory is controversial in the sociological community. For example,
Jürgen Habermas criticised Luhmann for his technical approach to communication.
Luhmann viewed consciousness as a mere tool for the transmission of meanings,
relegating it to the role of mediator. Habermas, on the other hand, argued that this
approach promotes a unidirectional model of communication. Habermas also
interpreted Luhmann's concept of "technical sociology" as a convenient and beneficial
theoretical construct for political elites, corresponding not to democratic principles but
to technocratic authoritarian rule.
7. Read an article of Clemens Mattheis “The System Theory of Niklas
Luhmann and the Constitutionalization of the World Society”. Be
ready to discuss it.
https://www.gojil.eu/issues/42/42_article_mattheis.pdf