Compromise: What makes it bad?

Journal article

This article considers what makes a compromise bad. First, it defines a compromise as a decision involving a loss of good (i.e., an evil), which should therefore be accompanied by ‘agent-regret’. Regret, however, is not moral guilt. Pace proponents of ‘dirty hands’, a morally right compromise cannot retain elements of moral wrongness (as distinct from non-moral evil). Second, the article proceeds to elaborate the features of bad compromise further in terms of common moral sense: the preference of less rather than more of a single good; the preference of an inferior to a superior good; and the violation of an absolute moral rule. Third, it extends its elaboration in terms of three historical cases: the abandonment of strategic promotion of a good; tactical suspension for insufficient reasons; complicity in indubitable and certain injustice to avoid tolerable costs; and the violation of a basic principle of justice as distinct from normal judicial process. Finally, it adds a methodological epilogue, in which it reflects on whether its treatment of the topic has been sufficiently theological.

Authors: Biggar, N

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: SAGE Publications
• Journal: Studies in Christian Ethics
• Volume: 31
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 34-48
• Publication date: 2017-10-24
• Acceptance date: 2017-07-11
• DOI: 10.1177/0953946817737926
• EISSN: 1745-5235
• ISSN: 0953-9468
• Keywords: absolute rules; compromise; theological ethical method; regret; Vereeniging; Good Friday Agreement; Yalta