Course Description

Course Timeline

40 minutes	Part 1: What Statements? Part 2: What Presuppositions?
30 minutes	Part 3: What Imperatives?
90 minutes	Part 4: How to Reason Ethically?
20 minutes	Exam

Course Outline

To deal with ethical choices, you need to find the answers to these questions:

1. What statements do you make?
   • 1.1 Logic
   • 1.2 Facts
   • 1.3 Values
2. What are your presuppositions?
   • 2.1 Meaning
   • 2.2 Restraint
   • 2.3 Humanity
3. What are your imperatives?
   • 3.1 Welfare
   • 3.2 Fairness
   • 3.3 Freedom
4. How do you reason ethically?
   • 4.1 Consequential
   • 4.2 Deontological

1: What Statements?

There are three types of statements, definitions, factual, and value-based ones. A definition is a statement that is a definition in itself or that is derived from a definition and could be “2+2=4.″ A factual statement is derived from an observation and could be that “the clouds are gray.” A value-based one is a normative statement that asserts what is right or good, such as, “you are too old to drive.” This course deals mainly with value-based or normative statements.

Edward DeBono, the author of Lateral Thinking, recommends 8 types of statements, namely factual, emotional, critical, creative, managing, coaching, authoritative and humorous.

Look at ethics from the following perspective: Laws and rules were made to limit very bad behavior. Bad behavior is further limited by your personal ethics, which tells you what is bad and what is good. Thus some actions may be lawful, but still unethical. Unlawful actions are in the black area, good ones in the white area and all in-between is in the gray area. Ethics deals mainly with this gray area between the clearly bad and the definitely good.

Bad behavior	Personal ethics	Good behavior
Clearly unlawful	Lawful but unethical?	Clearly lawful
Clearly wrong	Ethical but unlawful?	Clearly right
Black area	Gray area	White area

One short way to define ethics is to call it the study of right and wrong. Ethics seeks answers to questions like

• “What is the right things to do in a given situation?”
• “What is good behavior?”
• “What do I value?”
• “What is usually the right thing to do?”

In answering these questions, people rely on different values. Some values can be summarized:

• “Whatever WORKS is right!”
• “Whatever is FAIR is right!”
• “Whatever is helpful to OTHERS is right!”
• “Whatever makes ME happy is right!”

Ethics does not tell a person what values to hold. It can provide a way to determine the best action based on a set of value.

Approaches to ethics

Some of ethics concerns itself with describing behavioral standards to see if they are absolute or relative, objective or subjective.

Much of ethics here deals with normative applied ethics that tries to discover what standards are to be followed so that specific behavior may be morally right. Thus this course deals with ethics in health, in business, and similar areas.

In an ethical dilemma, there is a choice between two nearly evenly balanced alternatives. In a dilemma, there is usually a choice between right vs. right. In an ordinary ethical problem, the choice is between right or wrong, or between acceptance or rejection. Some people carefully consider what action they should accept in themselves and in others, others accept any behavior.

2: What Presuppositions?

presuppose [pree-suh-pohz] verb 1. to suppose or assume beforehand; take for granted in advance.

What are some of the presuppositions, or assumptions, in ethics?

• Everyone needs to be treated with respect.
• Each person has a right to come to his/her own ethical conclusions.
• It is bad manners to tell others that they are ethically wrong.
• Ethics that works only for the advantage of the individual with total disregard of others is not acceptable.
• People have physical and social needs that must be satisfied.
• People are or can be rational.
• Different people have different values, thus there will be disagreements in ethics.

3: What Imperatives?

imperative [im-per-uh-tiv] adjective 1. absolutely necessary or required; unavoidable

3.1 What are the imperatives in ethics?

The HF2 Values Model

The main imperatives, according to many authorities, are helping, fairness, and freedom. Honesty is an outgrowth of fairness and is needed to implement the other three imperatives.

Help – Fairness – Freedom – Honesty

These four imperatives can be expanded to include:

beneficence, protection from harm, healing, welfare, relieve suffering truth, integrity, trust, obedience to laws justice, equality, accountability liberty, respect, individual dignity, autonomy, honor, privacy, confidentiality.

The HF2 Value Model is explained, in part, by a look at the opposites. The opposites of help, fairness, freedom and honesty are listed below.

help – harm
fairness – partiality
freedom – oppression
honesty – lie, cheat, steal

4: What Reasoning?

4.1 Sufficient Facts

Are there sufficient facts to declare a statement true, false, or uncertain and to reason ethically?

4.2 Consequential Reasoning

What is consequential reasoning? Here outcomes or ends are identified as the good and the means are selected to meet that good. The end justifies the means. This is associated with Utilitarianism and John Stuart Mill (1806-73). It is listed below as EndRight. More on this in the next module. Some call it the ethics of consequences.

4.3 What is deontological or non-consequential reasoning?

deontological ethics, in philosophy: ethical theories that place special emphasis on the relationship between duty and the morality of human actions. The term deontology is derived from the Greek deon, “duty,” and logos, “science.”

Source: Deontological Ethics. Encyclopædia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/topic/deontological-ethics

We list two types of deontological reasoning.

One is centered on duty and rules, often called Moral Law, and is proposed by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). It is listed below as RuleRight. The rules prescribe behavior. Some call it the ethics of principle.

The other is centered on help, care, and love, and is often referred to as based on the Bible, with Moses and Jesus as the main exponents. We list it below as CareRight. The care-process guides action. It is also called teleological, or the ethics of the ultimate purpose. The ultimate purpose, in this case, appears to be the process of help, care and love.

To fully appreciate the EndRight, RuleRight and CareRight concepts, students are encouraged to preview these concepts in the next module.

4.4 The Ethical Reasoning Model

The Ethical Reasoning Model is based, in part, on the nine checkpoints for ethical decision-making by R. M. Kidder.

Ethics decision-making is first based on the distinction between statements that are factual and those that are value-based.

Factual statements may be divided into true ones and untrue ones. It is wise to base decisions on truth, rather than build them on lies.

Value statements may be divided into those involving right and wrong, and those that involve two rights, both of which can claim some influence on the decision.

When you come to a situation of right v. right, you must decide on what basis that claim of the two rights is based, and which has precedence. Some perspectives may involve the end outcome (EndRight), others rules (RuleRight), still others care and love (CareRight). Some are a mixture of all three (MidRight). The questions before the decision-maker involve the facts of the case, the persons involved in the case, and the value perspective that the decision-maker brings to the case.

Ethical thinking and decision-making deals with the defense and evaluation of that value perspective that eventually decides the case. In this model, a “yes” stands for a go-ahead, a “no” for a stop.

For a value to be right, the valued action has to

1. Result in ultimate good,
2. Avoid needless harm, and
3. Be open to examination.

As you study ethical cases, you are encouraged to ask:

1. Is this really an issue of ethics and are the facts true?
   If it is a factual ethical issue, go on to Step 2.
2. Is this an issue of right against wrong?
   Decide if it is EndRight, RuleRight CareRight or MidRight.
3. If it is right against right, go on to Step 3.A
   1. On what basis can you decide between the rights?
      Is it by the ends, rules, care, or in-between/other?
4. As you review and evaluate all the facts, the people influenced and your decision, do all fit together?

By this model, an action may be

1. prescribed or obligatory or a yes
2. proscribed or forbidden or a no
3. permitted, which is neither obligatory nor forbidden

4.5 Case study

Here is an example of using the Ethical Reasoning Model to approach a question.

“The purpose of radar detectors in cars may be to avoid the law and drive at dangerous speeds. Should they be banned?”

1. This is an ethical issue.
2. This is an issue of right vs. right.
3. This is an issue of Care-orientation.
4. Radar detectors should definitely be banned.

4.6 Ethical Reasoning in Daily Life

Put your mind into an ethical mode. Start each day with a short review of your life-mission and weekly plan. Work daily on your ethical stamina. Then determine to enjoy the things that fit into your life that day. Deal with the things that do not fit into your life in a problem-solving way (that is, look at your alternatives and choose the best). Thus you can face each day in an ethical mode, well prepared for the problems that will come.

4.7 Worksheet for Ethical Decision Making

4.8 Worksheet Example

Here is an example of how one can use the worksheet. In this example, EndRight, RuleRight and CareRight were inserted in brackets where it appeared to the writer reasonable dominant values. In cases where one was not inserted, it was not considered as a reasonable dominant value. Other writers (including you) may may have different values and come to different conclusions. The values may also depend on the assumptions of the writer, which in the above case were not considered as separate items but were incorporated into the values. In more advanced modules, assumptions may be considered seperately as filters just before the values.

Case: XZ Corporation has experienced 62 accidents in the past year. In 21 incidents, a person had been using mind-altering drugs. It is considering whether to initiate company-wide drug-testing of all employees.

Source: Based in part on Marvin T. Brown, The Ethical Process, pp 53-60.

EXAM for the 3 CE hours course: