Ethical Principles, Quick Tests, And Decision-Making Guidelines

1

• Ethical Principles, Quick Tests, And
  Decision-Making Guidelines

2
Outline

• Decision criteria for ethical reasoning
• Ethical relativism A self-interest approach
• Utilitarianism A consequentialist
  (results-based) approach
• Universalism A deontological (duty-based)
  approach
• Rights An entitlement-based approach
• Justice Procedures, compensation, retribution

3
Decision Criteria for Ethical Reasoning

• A first step in addressing ethical dilemmas is to
  identify the problem and related issues.
• Laura Nash developed twelve questions to ask
  yourself during the decision-making period to
  help clarify ethical problems.

4
Why?

• These twelve questions can help individuals
• Openly discuss the responsibilities necessary to
  solve ethical problems
• Facilitate group discussions
• Build cohesiveness and consensus
• Serve as an information source
• Uncover ethical inconsistencies
• Help a CEO see how managers think
• Increase the nature and range of choices

5
Decision Criteria for Ethical Reasoning

• The following three criteria can be used in
  ethical reasoning
• Moral reasoning must be logical
• Factual evidence cited to support a persons
  judgment should be accurate, relevant, and
  complete
• Ethical standards used should be consistent
• A simple but powerful question can be used
  throughout your decision-making process in
  solving ethical dilemmas
• What is my motivation for choosing a course of
  action?

6
Decision Criteria for Ethical Reasoning

• A major aim of ethical reasoning is to gain a
  clearer and sharper logical focus on problems to
  facilitate acting in morally responsible ways.
• Two conditions that eliminate a persons moral
  responsibility for causing harm are
• Ignorance
• Inability
• Mitigating circumstances that excuse or lessen a
  persons moral responsibility include
• A low level of or lack of seriousness to cause
  harm
• Uncertainty about knowledge of wrongdoing
• The degree to which a harmful injury was caused
  or averted

7
Ethical Relativism A Self-Interest Approach

• Ethical relativism holds that no universal
  standards or rules can be used to guide or
  evaluate the morality of an act.
• This view argues that people set their own moral
  standards for judging their actions.
• This is also referred to as naïve relativism.
• The logic of ethical relativism extends to
  culture.

8
Ethical Relativism A Self-Interest Approach

• Benefits include
• Ability to recognize the distinction between
  individual and social values, customs, and moral
  standards
• Problems include
• Imply an underlying laziness
• Contradicts everyday experience
• Relativists can become absolutists
• Relativism and stakeholder analysis.

9
Utilitarianism A Consequentialist
(Results-Based) Approach

• The basic view holds that an action is judged as
  right, good, or wrong on the basis of its
  consequences.
• The moral authority that drives utilitarianism is
  the calculated consequences or results of an
  action, regardless of other principles that
  determine the means or motivations for taking the
  action.
• Utilitarianism includes other tenets.

10
Utilitarianism A Consequentialist
(Results-Based) Approach

• Problems with utilitarianism include
• No agreement exists about the definition of the
  good to be maximized
• No agreement exists about who decides
• How are the costs and benefits of nonmonetary
  stakes measured?
• Does not consider the individual
• Principles of rights and justice are ignored
• Utilitarianism and stakeholder analysis.

11
Universalism A Deontological (Duty-Based)
Approach

• This view is also referred to as deontological
  ethics or nonconsequentialist ethics and holds
  that the means justify the ends of an action, not
  the consequences.
• Kants principle of the categorical imperative
  places the moral authority for taking action on
  an individuals duty toward other individuals and
  humanity.
• The categorical imperative consists of two parts.

12
Universalism A Deontological (Duty-Based)
Approach

• The major weaknesses of universalism and Kants
  categorical imperative include
• Principles are imprecise and lack practical
  utility
• Hard to resolve conflicts of interest
• Does not allow for prioritizing ones duties
• Universalism and stakeholder analysis.

13
Rights An Entitlement-Based Approach

• Moral rights are based on legal rights and the
  principle of duty.
• Rights can override utilitarian principles.
• The limitations of rights include
• Can be used to disguise and manipulate selfish,
  unjust political interests and claims
• Protection of rights can be at the expense of
  others
• Limits of rights come into question
• Rights and stakeholder analysis.

14
Justice Procedures, Compensation, Retribution

• The principle of justice deals with fairness and
  equality.
• Two recognized principles of fairness that
  represent the principle of justice include
• Equal rights compatible with similar liberties
  for others
• Social and economic inequality arrangement
• Four types of justice include
• Compensatory
• Retributive
• Distributive
• Procedural

15
Justice Procedures, Compensation, Retribution

• Problems using the principle of justice include
• Who decides who is right and who is wrong?
• Who has moral authority to punish?
• Can opportunities and burdens be fairly
  distributed?
• Justice, rights, and power are really
  intertwined.
• Two steps in transforming justice
• Be aware of your rights and power
• Establish legitimate power for obtaining rights
• Justice and stakeholder analysis.