Stu explains that all three terms can be a trap because they are often used interchangeably and don’t provide any clarity. We should be more careful about how we use those words, and think of them as follows: Ethics is a body of regulations, e.g. academic and business, which involves consequences if violated. Morality is a commonly accepted sense of values in society that have to do with right and wrong, but may not always be just. Integrity, on the other hand, involves deeper questioning of those conventionally accepted ideas of right and wrong – it is one’s realm of conduct when “nobody is looking.”
Why do you think integrity can be taught?
Stu emphasizes that integrity can and must be taught; we must dispel the notion that we’re either born with it or not because the idea that it is innate is dangerous. Everyone thinks they have it, and that keeps us from thinking about how we can be educated to better decision making, which is what integrity is ultimately about. Integrity can be taught the same way management techniques can be taught.
How can someone get better at practicing integrity?
Most people who think about integrity would say it’s something that you have, but if you change it to the idea that it’s something you practice decision by decision, the whole thing changes. We start to see it as something you can keep practicing (even if you blow it sometimes) and keep getting better. Integrity consists largely of discerning what you owe somebody else and fulfilling those duties. Keep in mind that loyalty frequently competes with truthfulness as a duty, and we must find a way to fulfill both.
