More than following the rules

My take on ideas set forth by John Steinbeck in the book East of Eden (chapter 24 page 307).

The concept I would like to explore is the difference between the inferences of meaning of “Thou Shalt”, “Thou Shalt Not”, and “Thou Mayest” in terms of both morality and professionalism.

There are many rules developed to guide our actions by society, our religions, and our professional supervisors/administrators.  We could do well by following these rules and the concepts of “Thou Shalt” or do as we have strictly been told.  These same groups will usually clearly define what we are not to do and thus the concept of “Thou Shalt Not” can be followed.  Using the guidelines of “Thou Shalt” and “Thou Shalt Not” can allow us to perform seemingly impeachablely but we can usually find examples of individuals who have done exactly as the rules have both told them to and not to do specific actions and yet their conduct is not exemplary.  I can think of examples of politicians who have not broken any laws and have done all their expected duties yet their performance is not what we had expected.  

Even if we tried to define every duty and action exactly to have it performed correctly and tried to define absolutely clearly every action we do not want performed we could never word it or write it out clearly enough so that everyone would understand exactly our intentions.  I believe the essence of this is at the heart of our legal and justice systems where we have been trying to define our laws for all and yet it is still often unclear when individuals actions actually break these laws.

My point is that for a individual to act morally or professionally they must transcend the limits of “Thou Shalt” and “Thou Shalt Not” and explore the realm of “Thou Mayest”.  Thou Mayest in my opinion sets out the expectation that we use our judgment and understanding of the rules established by our authorities to make good judgments in the performance of our duties.

For example as a Respiratory Therapist there are often set times you are expected to see your patients in ICU.  Often you are expected to monitor every two hours.  This may be a rule and no one could fault you for following it exactly but if you have a patient who requires suctioning more frequently or needs repeated adjustments on the ventilator we may need to show good judgment by being at that patients’ bedside more frequently.

My point is that we as moral and professionals people must exercise our good judgment and move beyond the strictly stated and interpreted rules of conduct to be considered truly moral, and professional.  Simply following the letter of the rules and laws is not enough.

Can you truly be a moral man if you only strictly follow the set rules of your religion?  Can any interpretation of the rules or laws be clearly and strictly applied to all situations?

Do we believe that a soldier who “Strictly” followed orders and kills innocent people is morally or even legally blameless because he followed orders?

There are several elements that are important: knowledge, judgement, responsibility, and humility that apply to decision and actions that require a greater priority than simply following the rules.