Both he and the facts are a matter of record. As a medical pathologist in Michigan, he willfully assisted at least 130 patients, dozens of whom—though not all—were terminally ill, end their lives. He was eventually convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 10 to 25 years. Beginning in 1999, he served eight years of the sentence before being paroled. He died June 3, 1911, age 83.

Whether you, the reader, believe in an ill or suffering person’s right to end his or her life is beside the point. What is relevant were Kevorkian’s beliefs on the highly controversial subject?

By the 1980s, he formulated and published them in a series of articles that appeared in the German journal Medicine and Law. He held it was his professional duty to end human suffering. It was his duty to assist those in hopeless agony, mental and physical; whose individual lives had lost all meaning. He denounced the idea that the humane way was to let people starve and thirst to death, claiming that was the position of the American Medical Association.

Declaring that it was his aim to find a solution to incurable agony, he flatly refused to deny or disclaim his written beliefs. Defying prosecutors, the courts, and public condemnation, he proceeded to assist those who sought his services. He said, “It is no crime to die.” His stand cost him eight years in prison.

Critics and supporters agree that Kevorkian’s stubborn advocacy for his position stimulated hospice care in the United States. It also brought out in the open public debate on a subject long considered taboo. In 1997 the State of Oregon enacted a law authorizing physicians to prescribe lethal medications for the terminally ill seeking to end their lives. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the statute constitutional.

Before answering the question posed, consider this: the cardinal virtue of integrity is the capacity to hold firmly to a set of principles, those that withstand scrutiny, that are beneficial to those directly concerned, even when it is difficult, inconvenient, or unprofitable to do so. Stated differently, integrity is the ability to stand by an idea.

So, how do you answer the question?

Few know about him or his contribution to science and technology in the 20th century. Furthermore, his breakthrough discovery of a method for the fixation of nitrogen is one of the most underappreciated in history. At the very end of a fabulous career in chemical science, one marked by productivity and destruction, accolades and condemnation, he demonstrated the cardinal virtue of integrity in its purest form.

Here are the basics.

Franz Haber was a preeminent German Chemist of Jewish descent.
In 1909 he discovered a method for the fixation of nitrogen from the atmosphere.
A means for capturing nitrogen from the air had bedeviled scientists for a century.
The Haber-Process, as it is known, allowed industry to produce huge quantities of nitrogen products for both agriculture and industry.
Nitrogen is the most important nutrient for food crops.
Nitrogen products are essential raw materials in the manufacture of explosives and munitions.
Across the 20th century farmers produced ever greater harvests thanks in large part to the availability of nitrogen-based plant food.
More food means more people. Two fifths of the world population would not be here, but for the Haber- Process.
Haber conceived and directed Germany’s launch of gas warfare during World War I, a feat for which he was widely condemned.
He received the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1919.

After the war, Haber became director of the prestigious Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin. On April 7, 1933, the Nazis overlooked Haber’s Jewish descent but demanded dismissal of his staff of Jewish scientists. In a display of iron-clad integrity, he flatly refused and resigned. His letter of resignation reads in part “…in a scientific post in choosing fellow workers, I take into account only professional qualifications and the character of the applicant…” Haber went into exile and died the following year in Boset Switzerland, age 66.

Philosopher Nathaniel Brandon wrote that “…self respect is one asset no one can afford to lose.” And the writer, Kingsley Amis added, “Surrendered even for the best of reasons, it’s gone for certain and forever.”

An exemplary portrayal of self-respect abandoned is found in Herman Wouk’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel, The Caine Mutiny. (Later, a superb movie starring Fred MacMurray as Keefer and Humphrey Bogart as Captain Queeg).

Lt. Keefer, third- in- command on the Caine, portrays a type that is alive and well. We find them in every sphere and sector of modern life—the individual who refuses to stand up and be counted when it counts.

In this World War II sea story, Captain Queeg takes command of an old destroyer-minesweeper operating in the Pacific Theater. After a series of bungled incidents aboard ship, Keefer concludes Queeg is either crazy or incompetent. He becomes outspoken among other officers and persuasive in sparking the revolt. Finally, in the crisis of a wild typhoon off the Philippines in December 1944, with the ship in mortal danger, and Queeg unable to function, executive officer Maryk relieves Queeg of command.

With Maryk at the helm, the Caine stabilizes and survives a typhoon. However, he is charged with mutiny and court martialed.

During court martial proceedings, Keefer is called as a witness for the prosecution. There he refuses to testify consistently with his numerous declarations of Queeg’s incompetency. In addition, he declines to support Maryk’s action that saved the ship. In essence, Keefer failed to affirm the very ideas he espoused so vigorously in private.

Maryk is acquitted. At the victory celebration, defense counsel charges Keefer with wanting to get Queeg all along “…while keeping your own skirts white and starchy.” Keefer can muster no response.

A colleague who sometimes disagreed with him said of Earl Warren, Governor of California and Chief Justice of the U.S Supreme Court, that “Warren stood up and was counted on every great issue of his age.”

The greatest single motivation for performance with integrity in the intent to maintain one’s self-respect. And, self-respect demands that we know what we stand for, that we are willing to stand for it, so others will know, too.

 We know it when we see it, but integrity—in the abstract—can be uncertain, vague, and even elusive. Yet, many who have thought deeply on the subject maintain it ranks first among the cardinal virtues. Undoubtedly, for without it other assets and advantages decline in value, or become of no value at all.

The men and women of the French Resistance in World War II exemplified the very essence of integrity. From them we see this indidpensable virtue is about making the deliberate choice. A choice to stand by the right principles, at the right time, for the right reasons—even when it is unprofitable or inconvenient to do so.

In May of 1940, Germany invaded and occupied France. The invaders soon clamped down with an iron heel. Young Frenchmen were deported to work in German war industries. French Jews were deported to concentration camps. Great treasures of French art and culture—the pride of the nation—were soon being looted and shipped to Germany. What should they do? What could they do, if anything? asked the citizens of France.

An overwhelming majority said “nothing,” and adhered to their usual routine. Another contingent collaborated with their occupiers. A tiny element, looking on from the safety of their homes and jobs, became outraged and decided something must be done. They made a deliberate choice; they joined forces with the resistance fighters. No one made them do it. They acted freely and voluntarily. Their motivations arose from patriotism and love of country.

Once the choice was made, France’s practitioners of integrity drew upon a separate and distinct virtue—courage—to enforce it.

In his highly popular book, Your Greatest Power, Psychologist J. Martin Kohe contends that the power to choose is the greatest single power of the human psyche.

The deliberate choice, not necessarily the superior choice, but by all means avoidance of the bad choice, that is the fundamental underpinning of integrity.