Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2015 – 01836
By Dorothy Emmet
Dorothy Emmet begins by stating that everyone is within the bounds of law and
government. Within these bounds are a constellation of roles, which are not necessarily
coherent, for in fact their obligations can and do conflict. Dorothy Emmet acknowledges that
these role obligations are not harmonious, which makes it difficult to talk about ‘the social
A person will find himself in more than one constellation of roles, or in multiple roles. In
deciding what he ought to do, the person will likely take into account, even if only to reject,
notions of what is expected of him. When making such distinctions intuitively, social morality as
conform. An existentialist may say that to accept a role is to evade the responsibility of seeing
that one is free not so to act, and of freely deciding what one wants to. Indeed, to take a role
can be to evade freedom by sheltering behind one’s social function. However, Dorothy Emmet
finds that the fact that different roles can press upon the same person makes it impossible to
think of him as the incumbent of a role. Rather, the person can be seen as an element in a
social structure produced by a reference group producing their own codes defining what is in
and what is out of their circles. Thus, the person takes on multiple roles to follow or reject these
codes, or notions.
Emmet cites G. H. Mead as she quotes that ‘the expectations of others have thus become the
self-expectations of a self-steering person.’ This does not mean that an individual is nothing but
a collection of roles. Rather, an individual has his own style and character which exists and
develops through his relationships with others. Reflexive role-taking allows a person to see
himself through the attitudes of others and to enter imaginatively into their roles. And so, the
individual will always ask: ‘What will they say?’ As the individual answers the question, they may
not always have a precedent to follow but rather create their own precedent. As they create their
precedent, they assume what one ought to do, for in legislating oneself, one legislates for the
whole world.
Role morality represents this impersonal element in morality, where the individual
considers instead what one ought to do. In a role, an individual becomes a person of a certain
kind in a certain kind of relationship, detaching themselves from their personal idiosyncrasy.
Role morality serves as a directive for behavior in certain kinds of relationships, and it structured
by rules both explicit and implicit. The most explicit case of role morality, where all the rules
have been deliberately thought out, is the professional code. To define the profession, Dorothy
Emmet quotes Talcott Parsons, stating that ‘a profession is a cluster of occupational roles in
which the incumbents perform certain functions valued in society in general, and by these
activities, typically earn a living at a full-time job.’ In keeping with role morality, professionals
and professional integrity. To uphold this standard, older professions, like medicine and the law,
have formulated principles of professional conduct to guide their practitioners. This gives
example of the role morality of professionals. Communications between lawyers and their
clients are privileged, for according to Knight-Bruce L. J., the pursuit of truth is not worth the
cost of prying and instilling fear and suspicion into a man’s communication with his legal
advisor. However, the relation between client and legal advisor is only one role relationship. The
lawyer’s role-set also comprises of his relationship to his colleagues and the lay public. The
lawyer has a duty to the court and to the cause of justice, so even though he is tasked with
giving the best interpretations on the interest of his client, he must not deceive the court by
maintaining mutual trust and collaboration within the profession, which in turn lets professionals
discussing pay, it is agreed that a professional can only receive payment for rendered services.
In most cases, a professional isn’t even allowed to sue for unpaid fees. According to Dorothy
Emmet, professional conduct is designed to make the desire for success, service to others, and
personal integrity to somehow ‘point in the same direction.’ She goes on to say that it isn’t the
deepest form of sacrifice, though it isn’t something that competitive societies would despise
either. Dorothy Emmet also discusses the threat of nepotism in the professional field. She
mentions that professional conduct, though sometimes restricting, can also serve as a
safeguard from pressures. Conflict of roles will often occur but in any case, moral judgement
Commentary
As a student of Psychology, I found that the concept of social morality was very similar
interacts with and creates judgements based on the social group he is in, it was inevitable that I
would eventually draw parallels upon reading Dorothy Emmet’s work. Dorothy Emmet discussed
the profession as the most explicit case of role morality. More implicit cases would have also
been appreciated, like the role of parent or panganay, which according to Social Psychology
can be very restricting, and even more so for mothers and eldest sisters.