Abraham Lincoln argues that, ethical judgement does not lie in seeking moral purity, but in weighing which option produces more good than harm. Governance thus requires continuous moral evaluation.
Tradeoff between good and evil
Government policy level
Climate policies trade economic growth for environmental protection. Eg- restrictions in eco sensitive zones hamer mining
Welfare schemes involve fiscal costs but social benefits. Eg- NFSA costs around 2% of GDP but ensures “food security”
Security laws trade liberty for safety. Eg- internet shutdowns in J&K hamer Right to internet (Article 21) to ensure security
Societal level
Social reforms disturb traditions but advance justice. Eg- Sabrimala judgment
Urbanisation displaces communities but creates opportunity. Eg- breaking of caste barrier for dalits
Global level
Sanctions punish regimes but harm civilians. Eg- sanctions on Iran crippling economy
Military interventions against rogue states can lead to regional intability. Eg- instability in Middle East
Individual level
Whistleblowing causes personal harm but exposes injustice. Eg- Satyendra Dubey
Commitment to duty may hamper work-life balance
Ethical framework for decision making
Utilitarianism – Judging actions by net consequences (greatest good for greatest number).
Aristotle’s golden mean principle – Balancing extremes
Public interest ethics – Balancing competing claims. Eg- Carbon Tax on coal
Moral realism – Acceptance of complexity and trade-offs.
“Veil of Ignorance” – To ensure fairness and objectivity.
Rights-based test – Does it violate fundamental rights?
Moral humility – Openness to revision.
The task of ethical judgement is to responsibly navigate complexity with wisdom, fairness and humility.
“In a morally complex world, ethics lies not in purity, but in prudence.”