Against the common-sense view of ethical careers

Abstract

The traditional view of ethical careers focuses on jobs within the charity sector as the most ethical. The author argues that this view is incorrect on consequentialist grounds: a professional philanthropist working in a lucrative career can often make a far greater difference to the world than someone working in a low-paying charity job, even if the former’s career involves ethical issues. Four arguments are provided in support of the Weak Claim that it is ethically preferable to pursue professional philanthropy through a morally innocuous career than to pursue a career in the charity sector. These arguments are based on the financial discrepancy between careers, the fungibility of money, the uncertainty of the best causes, and the replaceability of workers. Further, the author argues for the Strong Claim that professional philanthropy can be ethically preferable to pursuing a morally innocuous career even through a morally controversial career. It is argued that some harm-based or integrity-based reasons against morally controversial careers do not obtain against pursuing professional philanthropy, and that in some emergency scenarios, a large enough financial discrepancy can outweigh those reasons. Finally, the author argues that the potential to influence others can sometimes be a more effective route for moral action than professional philanthropy. – AI-generated abstract