Rational Philosophy

Senator Larry Craig today reversed his promise to resign from the senate if he couldn’t retract his guilty plea on charges of disorderly conduct (after he allegedly propositioned a plain clothes officer in an airport bathroom). As CNN reports: “On the House side, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Michigan, said Friday that elected officials have a responsibility “to exhibit behavior that upholds the dignity of the office.”"

In the wake of David McSwane’s four word column: “Taser this: F**k Bush,” Colorado State University’s Board of Communications decided to admonish the editor-in-chief of its newspaper for unethical and unprofessional behavior rather than fire him. College conservatives, who had sought the editor’s ouster and called for advertisers to pull their ads, were disappointed.

And in the midst of the new furore (see yesterday’s post) about the administration’s legal machinations to allow the CIA to continue with severe interrogation of detainees, President Bush again reiterates his claim that “we do not torture.” Leahy, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, comments: “I suspect that former Deputy Attorney General Comey will again prove to be right in his prediction that the Department of Justice will be ashamed when we learn more about all that they have done.”

Elected officials, those in positions of influence and responsibility, and those with ethical obligations have been doing bad things for as long as such positions have existed. Craig’s alleged behavior wouldn’t have even made it as a footnote in the history of the senators of ancient Rome. It may sometimes seem as though there’s far more wrongdoing now than ever before, but I expect it’s just that we get to know about more of it.

But while at first it seems to be resonant and solid, the phrase “to exhibit behavior that upholds the dignity of the office” becomes fuzzier and fuzzier the more I think about it.

Surely nobody can always exhibit dignified behavior, whenever any of us visits the bathroom, even if not propositioning for sex, we are not at our most dignified. And it the phrase refers more to upholding appearances, then is it really an important benchmark for an elected official? It seems more important that our elected officials and those in positions of responsibility think and act responsibly as they carry out their responsibilities. The CSU editor, for instance, perhaps should have weighed his words a little longer before going to print. And the current president, perhaps, should have weighed his motives a little longer before running for office.

Dignity is an odd concept. I found this quote from John Stuart Blackie - On Self-culture 1874 - quite helpful: “The real dignity of a man lies not in what he has, but in what he is.” The OED defines dignity as the quality of being worthy or honorable. Which of course presents us with a question about the concept of worthiness and honor.

Taking these two ideas together, dignity lies in doing that which one feels is right. Dignity is not in the office because the office may stink. If Craig feels it is right for him to continue to work in the senate, because he can continue to be effective, more effective than a replacement, as he says, then his actions have dignity.

Likewise, a fellow editor at CSU’s paper praised his boss’s handling of the situation and his general leadership. Some dignity then rests with him. But what about the college republicans who called for the newspaper’s sponsors to pull their ads?

And what of our fearless leader, Mr. Bush? Does dignity rest with him? All indications are that Bush is doing one thing and saying another. He hides his actions behind his words. He would claim that he does this because what he is doing is right. But perhaps he does it because he knows that others would feel he is wrong.

 

ÂÂ