Ethical Pragmatism: What I Learned From Our New TV Programme

Mal Fletcher

Posted on: Wednesday 5 January 2011

Tonight, a new TV programme I’m involved with goes to air in the UK – and globally via the internet and mobile phone-casting.

‘Catalyst’ is a series of interviews in which I get to chat with some respected social and cultural campaigners who are changing society for the better through their activism.

Each of my guests in the six-part series is a leader who has, over a long period of time, proven to be a cultural architect. Each has in some way engaged with a particular social problem and brought change.

These recorded talks were collected over a period of more than three years, but as I’ve reflected on them, I’ve realised that they’re all characterised by one thing. I can’t quite find the right term for it, so I’ll have to settle for ‘spiritual pragmatism’ – or perhaps ‘ethical pragmatism’ is closer to the mark.

It sounds a little ephemeral doesn’t it, even somewhat metaphysical? And yes, there is a spiritual dimension to their work, at least in terms of the worldview that drives them. Each happens to possess a religious faith, yet not one that is worn defensively, as armour against the post-modern world, or which is an excuse for superficial thinking.

Each of these friends has his feet solidly planted on terra firma. None could be rightly called an ‘air-head’ or boffin, with a brain full of transcendent notions that are of no practical benefit.

What I mean by ‘ethical pragmatism’ is a combination of a searching mind, focused on solving human and social problems, with a conviction that solutions must be circumscribed by the highest ethical standards – and a commitment to taking the harder, more tortuous road when ethics demand it.

One of these men (yes, in the first series they’re all men, but that will be rectified in the next) is a renowned futurist, but he also leads a global agency working to alleviate the suffering of people who’re afflicted with HIV/AIDS.

Another heads an international network working to stop human trafficking, plus a charity offering housing to the homeless. In his spare time, he is also the driving force behind an agency that builds schools in deprived areas.

These leaders, like the others featured in the series, possess a refreshingly can-do approach to solving seemingly intractable problems. Their confidence is infectious; their willingness to sacrifice is contagious.

Yet speaking with them I found a refusal to subscribe to the ultra-pragmatism that seems to drive much of technological and political progressivism today.

They are driven by a passion to bring change, yet the solutions they employ are constantly submitted to a process of careful thought. Whilst not being in the least Luddite in their worldview, they’re unwilling to employ any given method just because ‘it can be done’. In our age of data-explosion and rapid technological advance, we need more people like them.

As Bryan Appleyard once wrote, just because a thing can be done doesn’t mean it should be done.

Pragmatism has its place, we are right to seek results. Yet those results must not be sought with an ends-justifies-means mindset, or a neo-liberal anarchism that advocates doing whatever brings short-term satisfaction with little thought for its morality or future implications.

There will always be a seemingly strong argument for moving forward with some new technology immediately. Yet we cannot possibly foresee the implications of some of the decisions we make today, especially those involving powerful technologies, for those generations who will follow ours.

My interviewees have shown me that it is possible to be in the vanguard of engagement with social ills and human pain, whilst keeping an eye on the demands of morality and ethics, which are based to some degree, at least for them, in human spirituality.