Framework for Ethics

Moral judgments and moral concerns are unavoidable. In fact, non-action, or trying to remain neutral is also a moral judgment. Our concern with morality centers around questions of how ought we to live -- what kind of actions in our life are right or wrong to take?

Think of that question as the framework for the study of ethics and morals. But there are other related issues that fall also within the purview of our discussion: what makes a good person? what virtues or traits define a person of good moral characacter? how should we act in particular situations? what are the grounds for moral or ethical standards? If you think back to your Classical Rhetoric class you'll remember that such concerns about character, virtues, and the good life were central to Greeks and Romans. Remember Aristotle and Quintillian?

Before going further we should make a simple distinction between ethics and morals. Most often these terms are used interchangeably in popular culture. However, it might help us to think about them thusly: 1) Morality refers to a set of umbrella or overarching beliefs that tells us how to live a good life. Philosophers also refer to morals as conduct in place (situation), 2) ethics refers to a secondary reflection on the efficacy, appropriateness, and adequacy of our moral beliefs. Again, philosophers regard ethics also as the study of moral conduct (morality as a system of norms). The reason we spend so much time on issues of ethics is to develop better discernment about morality, to improve our moral understanding, and thus our life (this kind of inquiry also leads us to reflect on what will harm our moral life).

As it is to be expected, there is no one single perspective that provides the answers to the questions we pose about morality and ethics. Some scholars see morality and ethics from the point of view of virtue or character. Others see morality as a universal law that we must follow (often contrasted with ethics as situational). Buddhist ethics, for instance, start with acceptance of a common situation of suffering for all beings that requires compassion as the central value. Another perspective is encapsulated in the phrase: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Moreover, there are many perspectives on how to judge or evaluate moral and ethical decisions. For example some people render moral and ethical decisions based on the consequences of actions. Others see right conduct and duty regardless of situation as taking precedence over outcomes or goals. You're probably familiar with the perspective that holds that there is a rational, universal and correct moral standard for all, always, everywhere. Still others consider decisions that increase pleasure as the norm, while some folks think actions that maximize the greater good for all are best.

Interesting no? Quite so. But what about religion? Most people don't make a distinction between religion and ethics (or morality). But, as you may have read in the Ethics Glossary on this site, "Theists have no special insight into ethics over atheists. Correct ethical answers are those with the best reasons." In other words, religion does not necessarily provide you with an advantage in terms of discerning or deciding what is ethically or morally correct. It might very well do the opposite (witness 9/11 or the burning of "witches"). What religion does is provide you with a specific standpoint and set of guidelines from which you can or should decide. But you don't necessarily need religion for that.

So, with so much uncertainty, how can we arrive at good moral judgments? First, remember that uncertainty does not mean you cannot act ethically. Moreover, we should not allow our philosophical pondering to paralyze us about making sound moral judgments based on our values and good critical thinking. Consider ethics as an affirmation of personal responsibility for your life and the consequences of your actions (for all living beings, for the environment, etc.). Seek to understand on what basis moral actions are undertaken. Here are a few common understandings:

1. Religious/Divinely Inspired: God/Allah/My Deity says... or, do as the scriptures command (the Bible, the Koran, etc. says).
   
2. Character/Virtue: A good person has certain specific characteristics and acts in particular ways.
   
3. Duty/Conduct: You must do the right thing always.
   
4. Utilitarian: What will make the world a better place? What maximizes benefits for all?
   
5. Justice: What is fair? The just are only just until they commit an injustice...
   
6. Conscience: What does your conscience tell you?
   
7. Egoism: Look out for #1.
   
8. Rights/Respect: Treat others as you would want to be treated. People have certain rights.
   

Moreover, when confronted with particular situations you might want to at least consider some basic framework for discerning what the issues are, what facts are salient, what alternative courses of actions exist and what are their potential consequences. At the very least we should consider the following sets of questions (the source for this set of questions is the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/framework.html):

Recognize a Moral Issue

Is there something wrong personally, interpersonally, or socially? Is there conflict that could be damaging to people? to animals or the environment? to institutions? to society?

Does the issue go deeper than legal or institutional concerns? What does it do to people as persons who have dignity, rights, and hopes for a better life together?

Get The Facts

What are the relevant facts of the case?

What individuals and groups have an important stake in the outcome?

What is at stake for each? Do some have a greater stake because they have a special need (e.g., those who are poor or excluded) or because we have special obligations to them? Are there other important stakeholders in addition to those directly involved?

What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons and groups been consulted? If you showed your list of options to someone you respect, what would that person say?

Evaluate The Alternative Actions From Various Moral Perspectives

Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm ?

Which option respects the rights and dignity of all stakeholders? Even if not everyone gets all they want, will everyone still be treated fairly ?

Which option would promote the common good and help all participate more fully in the goods we share as a society, as a community, as a company, as a family?

Which option would enable the deepening or development of those virtues or character traits that we value as individuals? as a profession? as a society?

Make A Decision
[After taking into account the two questions below]

Considering these perspectives, which of the options is the right thing to do?

If you told someone you respect why you chose this option, what would that person say?

Act, Then Reflect On The Decision Later

How did it turn out for all concerned?

If you had to do it over again, what, if anything, would you do differently?

This last point on reflection is critical. As our conversation regarding the dropping of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki shows us, ethical reflection requires courage. We must face the consequences of our actions honestly.

Finally, beware of these ethical traps:

False Necessity Trap: Fooling ourselves into thinking that we are doing what we must do, that we have no other choice.

Relative Filth: Our actions look good when compared against the behavior of others. So, I only took three cookies, other people took the whole jar. The boss takes most afternoons off to play golf so what's a little fudging of the numbers in my expense account?

Rationalization: Trying to explain away unethical actions by finding excuses for them.

Self-Deception: Lying to ourselves. What's worse, believing those lies. For instance, I know I did much better in that speech than the teacher thinks. I might never have taken a class in public speaking but I know I'm great at it. It's in my personality.

The Ends Justify the Means: Self-explanatory. Beware of unethical means to achieve desired goals. Chances are you will engage in self-deception, rationalization, and the other traps listed here in order to explain away unethical actions.

These ethical traps were adapted from: Mary Ellen Guffey, Business Communication: Process and Product, 3rd ed. (South-Western College Publishing, 2000)

Comments

[LeOgAhEr]

I Love you girls

Buy

[juliavanderbat]

Hello

Phentermine is a sympathomimetic amine with pharmacologic activity similar to the
prototype drugs of this class used in obesity, the amphetamines.
Actions include central nervous system stimulation and elevation of blood pressure.
Search Phentermine weight loss pills - Phentermine weight loss (http://phentermine-weight-loss.blogspot.com/ )

Bye

[jjjonesman]

Hey, can anyone recommend a site that supports 3410 Nokia ring tone? Nokia forums weren't much help unfortunately.
I'm an IT guy but apparently I suck at cell phone tech. Heheh :)

[ma248zda]

c797t