THE ETHICIST
By Steve Martin
Dear Ethicist:
Last week, while putting a man to death (I'm an executioner at a state prison), I noticed that several spectators were doing "the wave." I felt that this was wrong, so afterward l executed them, too. Then I asked their spouses to join me for dinner. Here's my question: When giving a dinner at home, is it the host's responsibility to serve healthful, low-calorie food?
When you are serving dinner to guests, remember that they are essentially a captive food audience. So, yes, it is wrong to offer only rich, fatty food. Generally, a host should ask his guests about their dietary preferences in advance -- something you did not have time to do -- or he should offer healthy alternatives.
My wife and I were at a restaurant on our anniversary and when I paid the bill I noticed that two numbers had been inverted, causing the total to be nine dollars more than what I owed. I went ahead and paid it. Was I wrong?
Sometimes this column gets letters so heinous that I question whether they should be published at all. The letter above was unsigned, naturally -- a sure mark of a coward. I offer it here as a reminder that this must never happen again, anywhere, ever. Now let me answer the question: I have no idea.
I have recently written two biographies of the same famous politician. One is intentionally filled with disgusting lies; the other is based solely on truth. The problem is, they are identical. Which one should I publish?
The key word in your question is that the lies are "intentional." Your admitted intention makes the first biography wholly honest, whereas there might be errors in the one based on fact. Publish the one with the disgusting lies.
My wife is having an affair with a bartender, and I have been secretly filming her and her lover having intercourse. I then sell the tapes on the floor of the stock exchange. I would like her to be more wrong than l am. Who is more wrong?
She is more wrong. Her immoral actions have enabled your own immoral actions. Without her, you would not have committed your immoral act. Once I pushed a conflicted suicide off a bridge, and I felt fine afterward, because his action had engendered mine. I knew I was "less wrong" than he was, and I walked with a spring in my step for the rest of the day.
l am going to a country where it is legal and socially acceptable to eat people. I would like to eat my brother-in-law, who will be on the trip with me and is Canadian. l am from Iowa. Would this be ethical?
I am sure cannibalism is illegal in Iowa, but I'm not sure about Canada. I would suggest you stop in Canada first, take your brother-in-law to a police station and eat his foot, and see if anyone objects. If not, you can feel assured that the complete ingestion of your brother-in-law in a permissive country is perfectly ethical.
After I was banned from my nine-year-old son's Little League playing field, I began teaching him to scream at his coach. I would like to encourage him to include profanity in these adorable tirades, but, as it is banned from our household, would this make me a hypocrite?
You have created a philosophical conundrum. What happens when two contradictory moral laws seem to be in effect at the same time? Bertrand Russell said that it is possible for one law to indicate the truth or falsehood of another, even though the two contradict each other. However, it should be noted that in 1948 Russell entered into a lifelong feud over the issue with a Magic 8 Ball, which said, "Reply hazy, try again."
I am suing my neighbor's eleven-year-old daughter because she overheard my son Chester say, "I am going to blow up the school and everybody in it," and she then reported him to the principal. My son has become a pariah at school and has been kicked out of home-ec class. You should know that I have always been very strict with my son about not allowing him to take his homemade bombs outside his bedroom. Besides the lawsuit, I would like to retaliate in some other way, but my brother-in-law has told me that legal action is enough. What do you think?
You have strayed into the difficult philosophical area that Schopenhauer called "getting even." It is important that you utilize the court system to get even legally; and then, according to Schopenhauer's dictum, "give 'em a little kicker." Why not invite your neighbor over for dinner and serve him fatty, high-calorie food?
I am a sixth-grade teacher and would like to hang the Ten Commandments on the wall of my classroom. However. I am told that this is illegal. I'm not sure whether I should honor the Great God Jehovah, Lord of the Universe, or the Constitution of the United States. What should l do?
Easy. Change all the "Thou shalt nots" to "Don'ts." Cut the one about coveting your neighbor's wife (now regarded as "too little too late"). Change the word "Commandments" to "Suggestions." You now have "The Nine Suggestions." This should make everyone happy.
===========
This is from The New Yorker, March 5, 2001, vol. 77, no. 2, p. 50, the "Shouts & Murmurs" section.