Integrity Required Though Hard to Define

Bernardo A. Sanfeliz
Sergeant Major, USA, Retired

Ethics focuses on integrity, yet integrity isn't easy to define. Integrity may be assessed in terms of adherence to an ethical code, in which case none of us measures up, since we inevitably fail to obey every law.

Kant defined the moral man as one who does his duty simply because it is is duty. Integrity in this scheme depends on determining the universal moral laws and following them regardless of the consequences.

Some define integrity as living by the Gold Rule, but who hasn't failed at some time to break even that simple rule?

There are others who say that integrity is thoughtful consideration of the consequences to others of one's actions, but we live in a world were we can't control or even foresee all possible consequences.

Aristotle believed that the good life is a virtuous life and that the virtuous person derives happiness from being virtuous. But as we learn from history people exist who find personal happiness and fulfillment in making a name for themselves as inhumane monsters. We think of people such as Hitler and Stalin.

In determining integrity we must always consider what motivates and the actor's intentions. Motivations and intentions spring from character, so character and integrity can't be separated.

In his book, The Problem of Pain, CS Lewis speculates that this world is like a school or a regiment which has low standards of morality. Everyone in the school or regiment thinks that the group's morality is just fine, but when they transfer to another school or regiment with a higher moral standard, they realize that they were hanging around with bad apples. In other words, unless we are a prophet, we rise or sink to the moral level of our community.

Character is developed in community and also defined by community. To illustrate how this is the case, consider the following true story.

The Army officer training academy at Westpoint is known for its code of honor. In response to any question, cadets may give only four answers: "Yes sir, No sir, I don't know sir, or No excuse sir." If a person under a cadet's leadership makes a mistake, the cadet leader assumes the blame. This teaches responsibility, honor and integrity. Consider the following illustration:

A Westpoint graduate was sent to Vietnam as a Lieutenant. His first assignment was to supervise the construction of a runway in the jungle which was already underway. A sergeant was in charge. Unfortunately, he knew nothing about runways. He asked the sergeant, "Are you sure the direction of this runway is correct?" The sergeant assured him it was. So the Lieutenant said, "Well, continue on therefore and I'll trust your judgment."

An hour and a half later, a Colonel came by who was an expert in runways and blared, "Who is the idiot who ordered this runway to be built in this direction?"

The Lieutenant almost replied, "This sergeant here, he said he knew...etc." But instead he said, "I did, Sir."

The Colonel got into the Lieutenant's face and asked, "Why did you order that?" The Lieutenant replied, "No excuse, sir."

At this moment the sergeant approached, with his hand upraised as though to explain what had happened. The Colonel deduced what had happened and asked the Lieutenant, "You just came out of West Point, didn't you?"

The Lieutenant said, "Yes Sir."

The Colonel looked at the sergeant, then at the Lieutenant and said, "Well in that case, it was an honest mistake."

Later, the Colonel invited that Lieutenant to join his staff. This represented a substantial promotion.

This story illustrates the central virtue in leadership: Integrity. Integrity can be instilled through training, but the deepest integrity emerges out of one's character. It is no coincidence that Westpoint screens applicants on the basis of academic success, physical strength, community involvement, and character. While it is possible to instill integrity through training, integrity is only surface deep if the individual being trained is an excuse-maker.

This true story is taken from a cassette tape on Westpoint leadership training. On that cassette the lecturer says that any cadet who can be taught to be a person of integrity, can become a leader regardless of temperament, personality or natural qualifications. Westpoint fails cadets with natural leadership ability if they show themselves to fail in integrity. Integrity is regarded as an essential quality for leadership.


Related reading: Deontological Ethics; What Makes a Good Society?; Moral Obligation