When 'ethics' works?

[Sumit]

There is a debate on how or whether ethics/philosophy can be applied
to
emergency situations.
One chapter on Virtue of selfishness discusses it, and AR says that
people don't live in such emergency situations and hence philosophy
does not apply to it. In other words she accepts that her philosophy
can not be applied to such conditions.

Some examples of such conditions can be taken to discuss this aspect.
If you are hanging by the balcony of some other person's flat and he
he
asks you to let go of his private property what would do?
If you are on a boat with another person, and due to circumstances
only
1 person can survive to the shore, what would you do? Would your
answer
change if the person is physically superior or inferior to you or if
the boat belongs to you or the other person?

[Ashok]

What about being truthful? Are there conditions where one should lie?

[Shweta]

What about paying taxes if you don't believe in government controlled
economy?

[Sumit]

Any principle is correct for a particular context and that applies to
ethical principles also. Why should you tell a truth if a gun is
pointed at your head? And if you don't believe in government
controlled economy, why should you pay you taxes honestly? 'Ethics' is
a matter of believes and I don't agree with a hard-coded chain of
commandments.
The inclusion of force changes the equations in the scheme of things
and you have to decide accordingly.

[Shweta]

I agree with you Sumit. Even I face similar situations at workplace
where you need to selectively apply principles depending on the
situation. It is not the same as applying principles as per your
convenience, rather to understand the context in which the principle
is proper.

[Sumit]

But at the same time evaluating objectively what one should do is a
challenge.