272 PROGRESSING HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
The consequence of historico-social contingency is that the modern person
must choose atelosif he or she does not wish to lead a purely contingent life.
The modern person thus must make an existential choice. This choice is not
about instrumental rationality, it is a means and an end in itself. And one of
the fundamental choices a person can make is the existential choice of decency.
According to Heller, a person can make an existential choice under two broad
categories: the category of difference and/or the category of universality. More
particularly, a choice under the category ofdifferenceis the choice of a particu-
lar calling or cause that defines that person’s life and destiny. Choosing under
the category of theuniversalis to choose oneself as a decent person. A choice
under the category of difference is a choice that separates individuals from
each other. Everyone, she argues can choose to become or destine themselves
to be a decent person.
This involves a person committing to being decent and in so doing choosing
to accept themselves as they are. That is, in choosing decency we also choose
to accept all our ‘determinations, circumstances, talents, assets, infirmities: we
choose our ill fate and good fate—in short everything that we are’ (Heller
1990: 14). It also involves a person striving to have no compulsions built into
their character and thus to take responsibility for all of their actions. This
does not mean the existential choice should be understood in absolute terms:
you either chose yourself entirely or you have not chosen at all (see Heller
1996). For Heller, decent people may choose themselves, but not completely:
they may be blind to some of their frailties and on occasions they may lapse
into inauthenticity. Moreover, the choice need not be a momentous episode
but can involve a gradual dawning of awareness. It is not necessary for a
person to recall significant validating episodes or well-thought steps to prove
to themselves or others that they have chosen. The choice is proven in a
person’s behaviour as he or she struggles to be himself or herself.
Thus, morality exists because decent people exist and decent people exist
because they have made an existential choice to suffer wrong if faced with the
alternative of committing wrong.
Turning to the debate on universality, Heller recognizes that norms and
values vary significantly across communities but, nevertheless, states that there
are moral universals that all decent people in modern societies use to question
or reject other normative criteria. The universal norms and values are largely
orientative and abstract and thus are interpreted and followed in somewhat
different ways. This means decent people do not submissively abide by norms
and values. They discuss and deliberate on them in order to decide which to
follow in particular situations and thus how to act.
The inclusion of discussion in decision-making here is important because it
suggests that the decent person need not rely on his or her own resources when
working out what to do. This is important because for Heller the existence of a
plurality of communities, a diversity of norms, and the ultimate contingency