Hippocrates\' teaching on the ethical and moral values of medicine have captivated physicians, scholars, and historians for over twenty-five centuries, enduring despite the challenges of applying moral guidance across diverse cultures. At the core of Hippocratic ethics is the human relationship between the physician and the patient, with an emphasis on the physician\'s responsibility to assess potential harm involved in any attempt to heal. The Hippocratic principle \"to help, or at least to do no harm\" remains as relevant today as it was 2,500 years ago. In the modern context, it serves as a deontological imperative, reminding physicians to evaluate the risks of harm associated with any healing attempt. This concept aligns with the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, which are at the heart of Hippocratic medical ethics with timeless significance.

The purpose of this article is to discuss the hypocrisy of American ethics. This hypocrisy allows certain members of our society to breach their ethical duties and responsibilities without concern for the collective or regard for the oaths they pledge. This hypocrisy wields great power that continues to support the systemic discrimination that will be the downfall of this Country. By analyzing the January 6, 2021, raid on the Capital, we will examine how government officials and American citizens disregarded their oaths and committed unethical acts to overthrow the government. They used the American flag, that they pledge their lives in the name of Democracy, as a tool to incite violence and insurrection. Analysis of this incident clearly reflects that this selective application of ethical responsibility allows some government officials and members of society to commit violent acts against the government officials, institutions, and its citizenry, without the same criminal reprisal other Americans endure.

In a competitive business environment, dishonesty can pay. Self-interested executives and managers can have incentive to shade the truth for personal gain. In response, the business community has considered how to commit these executives and managers to a higher ethical standard. The MBA Oath and the Dutch Bankers Oath are examples of such a commitment device. The question we test herein is whether the oath can be used as an effective form of ethics management for future executives/managers-who for our experiment we recruited from a leading French business school-by actually improving their honesty. Using a classic Sender-Receiver strategic game experiment, we reinforce professional identity by pre-selecting the group to which Receivers belong. This allows us to determine whether taking the oath deters lying among future managers. Our results suggest \"yes and no.\" We observe that these future executives/managers who took a solemn honesty oath as a Sender were (a) significantly more likely to tell the truth when the lie was detrimental to the Receiver, but (b) were not more likely to tell the truth when the lie was mutually beneficial to both the Sender and Receiver. A joint product of our design is our ability to measure in-group bias in lying behavior in our population of subjects (comparing behavior of subjects in the same and different business schools). The experiment provides clear evidence of a lack of such bias.

This is the second part of a paper on the relevance and significance of the Hippocratic Oath to modern medical ethical and moral values with the aim at answering questions on controversial issues related to the Oath. Part I argued that the general attributes and ethical values of the Oath are relevant to the modern world. Part II attempts to elucidate the interpretation of the specific injunctions of the Oath from today\'s perspective in relation to ethical values concerning the duties of physicians to patients and society. The objective is to prove that the Oath has established the general context of medical ethics of the physician-patient relationship, which reflects long-lasting moral values that still define the medical profession. The Oath has exemplified the fundamental modern ethical principles of beneficence, non-maleficence and confidentiality. Its foremost message focuses on patients\' best interests and not on the prohibition of surgery, euthanasia or abortion, as is generally believed. Furthermore, the Oath as a code of professional identity has had a powerful impact on modem judicial opinions regarding medical ethics. In a lot of ways, it is as relevant of the values of contemporary medicine as it was for ancient medicine. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.