Jimmy Savile and Kant

Deontological ethics seeks to establish clear obligations or duties based on the idea that principles or rules are absolute, either because they come from God, or because they are based on an unchanging principle of human reason such as Kant’s categorical imperative.

The Jimmy Savile case raises disturbing questions for ethics. This is because a practical utilitarian ethic cannot guarantee the rights of a few vulnerable children when faced with a predatory adult. Those observing Jimmy Savile molest defenceless children in Stoke Mandeville Hospital might well argue, for instance, that the good Savile did raising £40 million vastly outweighed the damage caused to the children – in this case, it is counterproductive in net welfare terms to expose him. Or so a utilitarian calculation might go.

Ethical theories have problem dealing with abuse of power. Those who have no practical accountability hide behind a smokescreen of a good reputation, or bully those weaker than themselves into silence. Only a strong emphasis on individual rights backed up by the virtue of moral courage in those who try to expose such abuses can counteract this utilitarian pragmatism which is arguably the source of so much evil in the world. Click read more below.

In case you think this has little application for you, consider your own situation. Many of us have met, or will one day experience, leaders who abuse their power by silencing criticism, or intimidating people in meetings, or, as in this case, using sexual exploitation for their own ends. Will we have the moral principles to speak out for the right and the good when we are faced with situations of abuse of power?

We need to realise how much a strong deontological ethic will cost us, and also how much society will benefit from a shift away from utilitarian pragmatism towards a harder ethic of duty. Consider again the Savile case.

He befriended as mighty a person as Mrs Thatcher, who invited him to share New Year at Chequers with them on no less than eleven occasions. This, too, is I think often a tactic of the powerful, to surround themselves with even more powerful protectors should they run into trouble. He was challenged on a number of occasions but had such confidence in his own untouchability that he laughed the accusations off.

With hindsight it would have taken one parent, one nurse, one doctor, one politician, one journalist to have the moral courage to expose Savile’s real motives and actions to the world. No doubt this one person would have risked their own reputation and the ability of powerful people to employ PR gurus or the libel laws to attempt to silence the accusations. Many must have known, but likely feared what it might cost to pursue an allegation through the inevitable court cases which would have followed.

My own view is that a strong Kantian deontological ethic might have helped prevent this abuse, and that Kant, often dismissed by A level students as unrealistic, or impractical or too cold-hearted for popular taste, is in urgent need of rehabilitation.

T.S. Eliot wrote these prophetic words in the Four Quartets:

Go, said the bird, for the leaves were full of children,
Hidden excitedly, containing laughter.
Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
Cannot bear very much reality