Do the Right Thing

Responses to "Kyle and His Future Brothers-in-Law"

"In the car ride up to her family’s cabin, Carol told Kyle, her future husband, that she was sure that her brothers would like him. In reality, she was concerned that her brothers’ outrageous behavior and off-color humor might frighten off her reserved and bookish fiancé. Even more, she was worried that her brothers might be put off by Kyle’s quiet demeanor. When they arrived, Carol’s two brother’s, Terry and Joe, welcomed Kyle with a firm handshake and a slap on the back. When Carol ducked away with her sisters and her mom, Kyle was left with Terry and Joe. Reluctantly accepting a glass of whiskey, Kyle found himself in the midst of sexist jokes and racial slurs. Though he desperately wanted to be accepted by Terry and Joe, especially for Carol’s sake, he was morally offended by their remarks. What should Kyle do?"

For whatever reason, this case elicited quite a few responses, all of them insightful. Let's take a quick look at some of them:

You can't change who you are, but never piss off the family you're marrying into. Go along with the guys until you get to know them. - Nick Booker

One may argue that we have to respect a person's autonomy so that even if they are doing something wrong we ought not to interfere especially if they are competent and not harming third parties. (However), in this the case the direct harm is not that great. My solution is that it would be wise for Kyle to say something because if Carol's brothers may soon be Kyle's brothers-in-law. - Ryan Adams

Kyle should certainly tell the brothers how he truly feels about the topics being brought about. Acceptance is a goal for Kyle, but suppose the brothers find out that Kyle is being fake to them…Will the brother respect him more because he is honest or because he lied to try to earn their respect? - Chris Nowak

I think that Kyle should first act, because actions speak louder than words. He should do so by refraining from laughing or commenting on anything the brothers say. His silence will not go unnoticed for long. - Adrienne Baran

If Kyle did not agree with their behavior, he should tell them because it will only make their relationship strain over the years, and resentment will begin to grow. - Anonymous

I believe that pleasing one's spouse is more important in this case. Kyle cannot change these people. It can't be as if they don't know already that what they are doing is wrong. Open confrontation will do nothing. - Allen Brooks

I think Kyle should let his future brothers-in-law that he's offended by their comments. - Mark Manglona

Kyle should do the right thing! That is, he should be honest with himself and others in order to establish healthy relationships….(H)e should have said the following: "This is who I am, and what I am, and what I desire, despite the fact that I might have flaws." - Prof. Devissi Muhammad, Department of History

I don't think that Kyle's feelings about his fiancée's brothers should affect his relationship with his future wife. I think he should grin and bear it for the time being . When he gets to know them a bit better, he may have to tell them to try to tone it down a little bit. - Paul Briscoe

This case may be about many things, but it is certainly about integrity. Integrity is a term that we often use to refer to a kind of moral goodness, especially in relation to persons. The term frequently appears in corporate codes of conduct and business advertisements. However, like many commonly used terms, most of us rarely reflect on its specific meaning. Words such as "integral," "integer" or integrate are etymologically related to integrity. All of these words refer to a unity or wholeness. So, to say of someone that she has integrity is to say that her attitudes, beliefs and actions are integrated. They form a unity of sorts, a wholeness. Conversely, when a person lacks integrity, she is fragmented or disconnected. She lacks wholeness or integration, e.g., she believes or says one thing, but does another.

The popularity of this term is likely connected to a renewed interest in virtue theory. In philosophical circles, virtue theory is most often associated with the moral writings of ancient Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. This tradition continued into the middle ages, especially through the work of St. Thomas Aquinas. While much of modern and contemporary ethics focuses of the rightness of actions, virtue theory focuses on the character of persons. That is, the virtuous person is the person who possesses a certain kind of character. We would say of such a person that she is a "good" person. There are many other elements to virtue theory, but one that is especially relevant here is that the virtuous person's attitudes and beliefs are reflected in his words and actions. The person who espouses certain values, but acts in ways that are inconsistent with those values, lacks virtue and, given all we've said, certainly lacks integrity.

Hence, Kyle faces a challenge to his integrity. He wants Terry and Joe to like him, especially for Carol's sake. Going along with Terry and Joe will give them the impression that he's one of the guys. Indeed, this may, at least for the time being, strengthen his relationship with Terry and Joe, and with Carol. However, he'd be doing so at the expense of his own moral standards. I think everyone would agree that that Kyle should try to remain true to who he is. But what would this entail? Should he express disapproval to Terry and Joe? Or should he politely smile at the offensive jokes, but avoid participating?

Terry and Kyle have a right to make offensive remarks. It may be morally wrong to do so, but still permissible. As Ryan Adams points out, the only time we are justified in restricting someone's liberty is when that his actions put outside parties at risk of harm. (This is often called the "Harm Principle.") Given the value we tend to place on liberty, the risk of harm would have to be significant if it is to justify a restriction on a person's liberty. In light of this, Kyle is not allowed to prevent Terry and Joe from saying what they want. However, he is certainly free to express exactly what he believes. Still, he knows that he and Carol will have to live with the consequences of what he says.

This leads us to a related point. Some of you appear worried about Kyle's relationship with Carol and with his future brothers-in-law. We believe that human relationships are a good to be promoted and preserved. And certainly, the decisions we make affect our relationships. Whatever Kyle does, he should be mindful of how it will affect his relationship with Terry, Joe and Carol. However, as Prof. Muhammad has pointed out, we want to foster healthy relationships. Being true to oneself not only preserves one's integrity, but it promotes honesty in relationships. Misrepresenting our beliefs and feelings to the parties with whom we have relationships can be a destructive force. To the extent that one overtly misrepresents oneself, one is, in effect, lying.

On the other hand, having a self that is separate from the public world is important to people. We value that kind of hiddenness. It is one of the reasons we value privacy. In a certain sense, we all must objectify the things we think about, including the people we think about. We subsume them under general categories so that we can make some sense of them. So, those parts of our private selves that we put out into the world unavoidably become objectified, they become a part of the world of objects. Naturally, we all want to keep part of ourselves private.

Some parts of ourselves we only reveal to our closest friends and family. And, of course, some things we don't reveal at all. The amount of ourselves we reveal should depend on the nature of the relationship. In Kyle's case, since he may likely have to interact with Terry and Joe in the future, it might be a good idea if Terry and Joe get some sense of who Kyle is as a person. This might be effectively communicated in some subtle ways. As Adrienne Baran suggested, if Kyle simply smiles politely, confesses that he is not much of a whiskey-drinker, and does not join in the jokes, Terry and Joe will likely get the message. This is where social skill becomes very important. Some people can get their point across in light-handed humorous ways that let people know where they stand, but at the same time don't turn people off. If this is not successful, perhaps Chris Nowak's point that Terry's and Joe's favor is no great prize, and no great loss if they withhold it.

Finally, we began our reflection on this case with a reference to the virtue tradition. It may not be obvious, but this is a case about one very important virtue, courage. We tend to underestimate the courage needed in the everyday lives of regular people. As a virtue, courage is a quality of one's character related to the experience of fear. The courageous person feels an appropriate amount of fear and acts appropriately in the face of fear. What are Kyle's fears? He's is afraid of not being liked, and afraid of screwing up his relationship with Carol. The situation tests his courage because his fear of rejection may lead him to act in ways that are inconsistent with his values. He must overcome that fear in order to maintain his integrity. It looks like Aristotle is still relevant after all these years.

See the next Do the Right Thing case,
A Strained Relationship with an Ailing Father

If you like exploring ethical questions such as this, you should consider competing in UDM Ethics Bowl.