An Ethical Dilemma

Well, I'm confronted with a bit of a problem, and I figured that Fruhead opinions were as good as any, so give me some feedback here:

Yesterday (Easter), my wife bought me a new video game, because she's the coolest (and it was on sale for $20).� We played it for about an hour, and then she accidentally knocked my PS2 over, scratching the disk, and rendering the game unplayable.� I knew that I would have problems exchanging the game for a new one, even though it was brand new.� However, I went back to the store, and when they asked how the game got damaged,�. . . I lied through my teeth.� I said it came that way, and even when they asked if the console fell over, I still lied.� So I got a new one, and went back home.� Except now we're both feeling pretty crummy about it.� What would you do in this situation?

We have debates like that in our house. I don't think it's right. Paul tends to err on the side of white lies. Also, if we get something and it breaks and we don't have the receipt anymore he tends to buy a second one, change out the pertinent parts, and then return the broken part with the new receipt. Sigh. :) I pick my battles.

The gist is I personally don't think it's right. It's making someone else (even if it's a company) swallow the loss for your actions.

It was wrong but I wouldn't lose that much sleep over it. The marginal cost to the company is minimal, just the cost of the disk, less than a dollar. The thing is that if you told them what really happened they might have replaced it anyway.

I'm curious about which store it was.� Most of the box stores could care less how it got damaged, as long as you're trying to exchange it for the same title.� While the person behind the desk appreciated honesty, they know better.� I'd bet that after you left, they were talking about the guy who knocked over his PS2 and didn't want to tell them.

Of course, my ethics when it comes to returns are questionable.� It comes from working at the service desk.� If you spend time processing bogus returns, you know what to say to get your bogus return processed.

As far as the store is concerned (and again, speaking from box store experience), as long as the game proves to be defective, Sony credits the store for the loss.� If Sony tests the game and it's not defective, the store loses the credit.� Of course, my information comes from the initial release of the PS2... after that, I was promoted away from the desk.

The secret to escaping these ethical problems is to do your returns and exchanges at Wal-Mart.� They're unethical... so you leave feeling that you've stuck it to the Man, instead of leaving with a bitter taste in your mouth.

Ethics are personal.� While I admit that it's probably wrong, I wouldn't feel bad about it and it wouldn't stop me from doing it again.� From the way you've described it, I doubt you'll be making any of these returns in the future.

You feel like you did something wrong, hence the guilt. Could you fix it by going to the store (even though you are proabably poorish like many) and give them $20 for the purchase of a new game? That way, they aren't out anything, and you have paid for your actions. Just an idea.

Hmm.� It was GameCrazy, which is a spinoff of Hollywood Video, a rental chain.� Yeah, I realize it probably costs them less than a dollar for a new disk, but it's more about the lying than anything else.� Honestly, I'm not sure if they would have exchanged it if I told the truth (they weren't the nicest guys) but that doesn't make it any easier.� We'll probably end up giving them another twenty bucks, although the problem is, we can't really afford it.� It was a stretch for her to buy me the game in the first place.� But it's really getting to me.� Not losing sleep, but I'm not sure I'll be able to enjoy the game until I get it off my chest.

I know Game Crazy... I was considering working there (until the listing dried up.)� Don't they function mostly as a reseller anyway?� Sure, they sell some new games, but their profit comes off of the used titles.

But there I go trying to justify it again.� It comes down to the fact that even if everyone comes in and says it wasn't a 'bad' thing to do, you're still going to believe that it's 'wrong.'� Even if all of us say, "We've done it before and we'll do it again."� That would do more to question your choice of friends than it would to compromise your ethics.

If it helps, the people in the store have probably forgotten it already.

I'd take it back, the store isn't going to lose any money off of it and you'll have your game.

Yeah, this is probably what I'll end up doing.� The question now is, am I doing this just to make myself feel better, or am I concerned about saving the store (or manufacturer) a dollar?� Or both?� Or what?

Doing what you think is right should be somewhat separated to what's going on with the other party. Does that make sense. Following a code of ethics and being the person you want to be does not necessarily depend on if it's actually hurting another party. If you do something as reparations for what you felt you did to violate your own code of ethics, then yeah it's mostly about making yourself feel better. But that's not as selfish as it sounds because you felt bad due to your conscience being out of sync with the situation as it went down. In some part guilt exists to help us realize when we should reassess how we've handled things.

And wow that's a lot of words to probably not have said anything useful.

No, no.�� I totally get what you're saying.

But here's another question:� If guilt exists to put our actions into a certain perspective, then, 1.� Is there a way to truly�rid yourself of�guilt when you've done something wrong without making reparations? and, 2.��If our perspective has changed to something more in line with�what we think it should be because of resulting guilt, should we still take steps to rectify the situation?

1. No, reparations in some form are required. You have the ability to do something, so you should do it. And maybe that involves sacrifice on your part, like not going to the movies to save up money to pay for the game you broke. It is good to say you are sorry, but you have to really be sorry. It's a heart thing. When you really are sorry, you will want to make up for it. It's not about "having to" it's about "wanting to."

2. Not sure of the questions, but I think it is saying: If we suddenly think lying is bad, should we still atone for lying in the past when we thought it was ok? Absolutely. You should always try to fix whatever you can. Even though it just occured to you that it was bad, it's badness didn't depend on your�realization. Now that you see more clearly the truth, you can go fix the other times too.

You were wrong and you're going to burn in hell for it!

Or not.

I wouldn't have done so if it were me, and my personal opinion is it was wrong to do, but the effect is minimal.� Doesn't change the fact it was wrong, but the store is not going to be out any money, and the maker of the game won't even blink since they budget in for defects in manufacturing and returns and the like.

Well, we sucked it up and called the store. And, surprise surprise, they didn't care. It's not that they didn't care, exactly, actually they were kind of surprised that we called. I guess I would be, too. They said it wasn't a big deal and they "valued our business." HA! I guess it sorta came down to money, which I understand, but we feel better for bringing it up. The End.

Cool. :) As someone who works in entertainment retail, I'd love it if someone actually made that kind of offer. People make bogus returns all the time - honesty is always refreshing.

honesty breeds honesty. :) The only way to fight�a cynical world is to stop being so cynical.

Heee. If only I could practice all I preach. :)

2. Not sure of the questions, but I think it is saying: If we suddenly think lying is bad, should we still atone for lying in the past when we thought it was ok? Absolutely. You should always try to fix whatever you can. Even though it just occured to you that it was bad, it's badness didn't depend on your�realization. Now that you see more clearly the truth, you can go fix the other times too.

I almost take exception to this, but I think it's in part because of the way it was rephrased.� There are times when events of the past can't be fixed.� There are times when attempts to repair the past only scratch open old wounds.� You, personally, have to balance your epiphany against the elusive 'greater good;' good as defined by your own personal ethics.

But part of that may be my own ethical code talking... a code that is sometimes corrupt.� I also tend to focus on results and effects.� I also think that lying is determined by intent, not truthfulness.� If I lied to my Mom last year, then attempted to rectify the issue, all I've really done is tell my Mom that I lied to her.� She may have known and forgotten... she may never have known... but now she does, and that's something that we both have to deal with now.� How is it 'right' to turn my guilt into her suspicion?� How does that serve anybody's purpose?� If I've truly found the 'right' path, it doesn't matter, because she's not going to trust me anyway.