Corruption: 'Culture' in the Dock

2Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Corruption in public life1 needs to be examined in greater detail as not only an individual lapse but also a feature of the collective that either does or does not put pressure on the individual to lapse. This paper takes a methodological holistic perspective exceeding the methodological individualistic perspective in understanding corruption. The claim is that the locus of responsibility cannot be restricted to the individual alone and the collective (if there be such an entity) be left scot-free. This claim is premised on the conception that an individual's act which is in deviation of expected and established norms cannot be faulted only at the level of the individual, and careful consideration needs to be made to assess the role of the collective in precipitating the lapse(s) in the actions of the individual. This paper argues for sharing the liability of corruption in public life between the legally responsible individual as agent and the cultural milieu in which the agent operates. At a foundational level this paper calls for a reconceptualization of individual agency and decision making from being isolated and discrete, to being construed by the collective that the individual agent is a part of.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sahu, V. (2017). Corruption: “Culture” in the Dock. Journal of Human Values, 23(1), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971685816673481

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free