|
I don't see the point of this entry:
1. It's not really an appropriate subject for an encyclopedia article
2. It's seriously incomplete / inaccurate. For example: "Such codes exist in most professions to guide interactions between specialists with advanced knowledge ... and the general public."...
a. I don't see the relevance of advanced knowlege
b. Many ethical codes have nothing to do with interactions with the general public. For example, consider ethical codes for biologists about cloning.
3. It's kind of obnoxious. For example, "As the public is in general incapable of distinguishing good from bad decisions"... um... do we need to be this condescending?
4. There is a totally gratuitous slam against accounting
5. "Public guidance typically is confined to ensuring that there is such an internally consistent code" - does "public guidance" really attempt to ensure that there is an internally consistent code?
6. I see no reason to believe that "ethical codes" are more consistent than "moral codes".
Frankly, if it was just up to me I would delete this entry totally - I feel it does not add value - but since I am new to Wikipedia I don't feel comfortable doing that. So I'm flagging it for more attention by others.
Mike Friedman 19:31, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
you suck
| 
