In recognizing the deontic line of reasoning in that it is immoral to force others to do something aginst there will, there should be a universal criterion that is implemented in order to protect people from this type of coercion. Aldo Cimino, an anthropologist at the University of California Santa Barbara, presents examples of hazing tactics that will intentionally inflict failure on another. Cimino explains,

[p]ledges are required to memorize items from the pledge book, including other chapter names and founding dates, past presidents, pledge classes, and oaths or mottos. … the most telling demonstration of this difficulty is that actives often refer to the pledge book to check the answers that pledges provide them. Thus, even members who have necessarily completed the pledging process … still require some assistance in recalling pledge book items.[1]

Ultimately, while this scenario is not particularly harmful to those participating, it is morally wrong to force others to partake in activities with the intent of causing that person to fail. Thus, if it is clear that someone is in trouble or is being harmed, it is immoral to abstain from alerting someone who could help them.

Furthermore, this criterion presents guidelines explicitly drawn out for what type of action is permitted. With this, I recognize that most college campuses already have some type of guideline in place. However, since hazing still continues to occur there needs to be a more effective way to promote less humiliating tactics. If there is clarity among each institution, people cannot say they were unclear of the rules as an excuse for wrongdoings. Previously mentioned regarding this topic, it has been recognized that forcing others to participate in activities that are initiated with the intent of ultimate failure is morally wrong. With this statement, I am not arguing that any act where one will fail is immoral. If an instruction is given with the intent of success in the future, but the participant will go through trials of failure to reach the success, that is a different story. Therefore, activities that are seemingly impossible should not be the basis for whether or not one is accepted into an organization. A possible solution for this could be to focus on aspects such as a certain GPA requirement. This way, the organizations are promoting aspects outside of one’s ability to consume incredible amounts of alcohol, or to perform absurd stunts. Another solution could be to require a certain amount of service hours or some other type of philanthropic mission in order to promote a well-rounded experience. Focusing on factors that are more tangible will allow for organizations to thrive and continue recruiting members without the fear of hazing being an implicit task.

 

[1] Cimino, A. (2018). Fraternity Hazing and the Process of Planned Failure. Journal of American Studies, 52(1), 214-236. doi:10.1017/S0021875816001924