Ethical Dilemmas: Aquinas and Augustine on Workplace Morality
This paper examines two everyday ethical dilemmas through the lenses of Thomas Aquinas and Augustine of Hippo. The first scenario involves an office worker whose chronic absenteeism harms his colleagues despite his technical entitlement to the time off; the second involves a woman who suppresses her moral instincts and participates in workplace gossip. Drawing on Aquinas's Summa Theologica and Augustine's City of God and Confessions, the paper categorizes each behavior as either a sin of omission or commission, and considers how both theologians would assess the moral failure involved. Together, the cases illustrate how classical Christian ethical frameworks apply to ordinary, modern workplace situations.
- Introduction to the Ethical Dilemmas: Overview of two workplace moral scenarios
- The Absentee Worker: Entitlement Versus Obligation: Aquinas and Augustine on chronic absenteeism
- Gossip and the Betrayal of Moral Instinct: Free will, gossip, and sins of commission
- Conclusion: Classical Ethics in Everyday Life: Classical ethics applied to modern workplace choices
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It applies classical theological frameworks — Aquinas's distinction between sins of omission and commission, and Augustine's concept of the will turning away from good — to relatable, contemporary workplace situations, making abstract moral philosophy concrete and accessible.
- The paper carefully distinguishes between technical entitlement and moral obligation, showing that legality and ethics are not the same, which is a nuanced analytical move.
- Direct quotation from primary sources (Summa Theologica, City of God, Confessions) is used precisely and purposefully, with each citation tied directly to the scenario being analyzed.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative application of multiple theoretical frameworks to the same type of problem. Rather than simply summarizing what Aquinas or Augustine believed, it shows how each thinker would assess the same moral situation differently, highlighting their distinct emphases — Aquinas on moral precept and duty, Augustine on the corrupting role of the will and deprivation of good. This comparative method is a hallmark of rigorous philosophy and ethics writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as a group response to two distinct scenario prompts. Each scenario receives its own paragraph of analysis that introduces the moral tension, applies Aquinas's framework, then applies Augustine's framework, and synthesizes both. The conclusion of each section broadens outward to a general moral observation, grounding the specific case in universal ethical principles. Citations are minimal but correctly formatted and traceable to primary texts.
Introduction to the Ethical Dilemmas
The following scenarios present two common workplace ethical dilemmas, each analyzed through the moral frameworks of Thomas Aquinas and Augustine of Hippo. Both cases involve individuals who must choose between personal convenience and their moral obligations to others.
The Absentee Worker: Entitlement Versus Obligation
An office worker had a record of frequent absence. He used all his vacation and sick leave days and frequently requested additional leave without pay. His supervisor and co-workers expressed great frustration because his absenteeism caused bottlenecks in paperwork, created low morale in the office, and required others to do his work in addition to their own. On the other hand, he felt he was entitled to take his earned time and additional time off without pay. Was he right?
While the office worker has a legitimate reason to make use of his allotted vacation time — as this stipulation was likely agreed upon in his employment contract — choosing to request additional time off without pay presents a more complicated moral dilemma. The worker is technically entitled to take unpaid time off, but doing so necessarily affects his coworkers and colleagues in an array of negative ways.
For Aquinas, this would be considered the classic offense and not true sin, as the worker is consciously failing to do what he ought to do and "gives not of his own to whom he should give, which is a sin of omission" and not commission. In terms of the ultimate application of good and evil, this situation illustrates Augustine's contention that "all which is corrupted is deprived of good," because while this worker is obviously acting without malice, his inconsiderate lack of commitment to his profession has become a serious detriment to the welfare of his colleagues.
Both Aquinas and Augustine would disapprove of this worker's behavior. Aquinas would view him as a sinner guilty of failing to act according to moral precepts, while Augustine would lament mankind's willful deprivation of God's good grace.
Conclusion: Classical Ethics in Everyday Life
Both scenarios reveal how classical Christian moral frameworks remain surprisingly applicable to the mundane ethical choices of modern professional life. Whether framed as a sin of omission, as Aquinas might categorize the absentee worker's behavior, or as a sin of commission driven by a corrupted will, as Augustine would describe the gossip, these cases demonstrate that ordinary workplace decisions carry genuine moral weight. The insights of Aquinas and Augustine remind us that ethical responsibility extends beyond what is merely permitted or contractually allowed, and into the realm of what we owe one another as members of a shared community.
References
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica, I-II q. 72.
Augustine. City of God, XII, Chapter 6.
Augustine. Confessions, VII: [XII] 18.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.