THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHICS AND POWER

The Relationship Between Ethics And Power

The Relationship Between Ethics And Power

The idea for this collection came about fortuitously, as is so often the case. First, I read an editorial by Stan Brunn in the Annals of the Association of American Geographers that laid out some ground rules about ethical conduct (1989). His tone was one of sorrow that certain practices (such as "self-plagiarism") could exist, and that rules should need to be introduced. I might not have thought too much more about this, had I not also received that week a letter from Ghazi Falah, a Palestinian at that time unknown to me. As he documents below, he was circulating a confidential letter from within the Israeli geographical community, in which certain allegations were made about Falah's scholarly objectivity. And then at the end of that week, I came across a destructive review of a book by a colleague that reeked of invective (Hart, 1989).

These communications all appeared to be connected, insofar as they speak to a balance between individual and collective responsibilities that extends from research through to teaching. Hart's review appeared to this reader as an exercise in malice that left the author in an abused state without reasonable recourse. So too, in Falah's case, there were collective intimations about quality and bias that were hard for an individual to rebut. However, Brunn's editorial shifted the issue of ethical conduct back upon the shoulders of the individual. He mentioned only isolated lapses and errors, and said nothing about the greater powers exercised by groups, such as university departments or entire professions.

Perhaps the simplest way to denigrate the individual is to 'blame the victim'-to attribute homelessness to an unwillingness to work, or to blame self-plagiarism on laziness and careerism. Doubtless, there are individuals who display these character traits, but this overlooks the crucial point about who is in the powerful position to apply such labels in the first place. This theme is consistent in the work of Michel Foucault, which is directed to the redefinition of the individual as a "subject' (Foucault, 1982). This happens in varied ways, but of importance here is the way that individuals are divided "inside... or divided from others" (1982, p. 778). By labeling people, we create objective categories (the sick, the guilty), which are then amenable to control. These divisions-Foucault identifies them as objectifications are inextricably linked to the question of power relations, and the ability of the individual to resist the objectification that takes place throughout society and, in particular, its varied institutions, education included.

It is easy enough to begin to understand the ways in which power relations are exerted-and resisted-within institutions such as schools, colleges, and professions.

Indeed, to follow Foucault once more, we should never allow ourselves to stray far from the double meaning of the word 'discipline' within the academy. The list of ways in which discipline is exerted is long. Students are assessed in the classroom and their products are ...