Ethical Choices: How to Reason Ethically
| Course Number |
LW03-4263-05009 |
| Objectives |
At the end of this course, you will
1. Understand and apply different statements, ethical presuppositions and imperatives.
2. Describe and use the four-step Ethical Reasoning Model. |
| Credit Hours and Fee |
3.0 CE Credit Hours with a fee of $24.00 |
| Instructor |
Rudolf Klimes, PhD (Indiana University), MPH
(Johns Hopkins University); Adjunct Professor, Folsom Lake College,
Folsom, CA |
Welcome
to this
3-contact-hour Continuing Education course with instant online processing
and certification 24/7. Study the course below, take the 12-question
multiple-choice
TEST, register and pay online. If
you score 75% or above, you may print your CE certificate on your printer as
soon as you finish.
If you have difficulty printing your certificate,
click here..
You may retake the test once.
TEST
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 |
THOUGHT QUESTIONS for self-study:
E1.1 Why is important to have some imperatives in ethics?
E1.2 How do facts and values interact in ethical reasoning?
E1.3 How would you present the Sample Case 4.7 below from a different value
perspective?
Read Glossary | Classic Texts in Ethics
| Ethics Center

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, and could be "that you
are too old to drive". This course deals mainly with value-based or normative
statements.
"It is going to rain tonight" is a definition statement.
"I should open the door for you" is a
value-based statement.
"Ethics is the study of right and
wrong" is a factual statement.
On the other hand, Edward DeBono, 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 |
Violation of laws/rules |
Personal ethics |
Good behavior |
|
Unethical.................................................................Ethical |
| Unlawful |
Lawful |
|
Black area |
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?" and "What is good behavior?" and "What do I
value?"
"What is usually the right thing to do?" In our study of ethical
issues, we will often present the opinions of four characters, namely Small Pinker and
Small Browner, and Big Pinker and Big Browner. Later you will learn who these
characters really are. Here are their four answers. Do some sound better than
others?
"Whatever makes ME happy is right!"............ "Whatever WORKS is
right!"
"Whatever is helpful to OTHERS is right!"
.......................... "Whatever is FAIR is
right!"
Explain some of the various 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.
Just for fun, take the
Environmental Ethics Quiz

What are some of the presuppositions 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.
Aristotle

3.1 What
are the imperatives in ethics?
Explore the HF2 Values Model. The three main imperatives, according to many
authorities, are help, fairness, and freedom. Honesty is an outgrowth of fairness
and is needed to implement the other three imperatives.
 Help |
Honesty |
Fairness |
Freedom |
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.
| Harm |
Lie, cheat, steal |
| Partiality |
Oppression |
3.2 How do the four imperatives affect daily life? Links to HELP: Caring for the
Caregiver-How Others Can Help, Links to JUSTICE: Justice Information Center (NCJRS)

4.1
Are there sufficient facts to declare a statement true, false, or uncertain and
to reason ethically?
4.2 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?
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 prescribes 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. More on this all in the next module.
4.4 What
is the Ethical Reasoning Model?
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 the later, 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, others
rules, still others care and love. Some are a mixture of all three. 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. The Ethical Reasoning Model is based, in part, on the nine
checkpoints for ethical decision-making by R. M. Kidder. The Institute for Global Ethics -
Right vs. Right. Also check logical fallacies at http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/dunnweb/logicfall.html.
To fully appreciate the EndRight, RuleRight and CareRight concepts, students
are encouraged to preview these concepts in the next module.
| Facts |
Values |
| Step 1. True vs. False |
Step 2. Right vs. Wrong |
Step 3. Right vs. Right |
1. True = yes,
go to Step 2
2. False = no, stop |
3. Right vs. Wrong, on
basis of
EndRight, RuleRight,
CareRight or MidRight.
Select one via worksheet.
4. Right vs. Right, go to Step 3
5. Neither Right vs. Wrong
or Right vs. Right=stop |
6. Right vs. Right on basis of
EndRight, RuleRight
CareRight or MidRight.
Select one via worksheet. |
Analyze the facts,
actors and values and decide. Then circle one of the above options and the
basis. |
Ethical Reasoning Model by Rudolf
E. Klimes, PhD, 2002
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 issues 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.
3. 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, or 3) permitted, which is neither
prescribed nor proscribed.
4.5 How
would you deal with a case like this?
"The purpose of radar detectors in cars may be to avoid the law. 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 How do you reason ethically 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
1. Question__________________________________________________________________________?
2. Choices:
C1________________C2______________C3_______________C4____________________
(On a separate sheet, present the observed factual evidence for
each choice, considering if possible who, what, when, where, why, how.)
3. EndRight Filter............................../............................../..................................../.......................................
3. RuleRight
Filter.........................../................................/.................................../........................................
3. CareRight
Filter........................./................................./..................................../........................................
(Check the best value-based filter for each choice)
4. Best Choice (circle 1 on basis of
the strength of the evidence, and filter-match) C1, C2, C3, C4
4.8
Simple OUTLINE SAMPLE:
Case: XZ Corporation has experienced 62 accidents in the past year, 21 of
them drug-related. It is considering whether to initiate company-wide drug-testing of all
employees.
1. Question: Is drug-testing at XZ Corporation appropriate?
2. Choice C1. no, C2. yes, C3. yes, if with
consent, C4. yes, if well defined.
C1 facts are: It is an invasion of privacy. It provides data that is
normally not publicly available.
C2 facts are: It reduces drug-related accidents. There were 21 drug-related accidents last
year.
C3 facts are: It can be made a condition of employment. Employees can sign this right
away.
C4 facts are: There can be detailed policies to safeguard its use and prevent misuse of
data.
3A. EndRight filter for C1: Workers do not give up privacy to gain safety.
3B. RuleRight filter for C1: Managers have no right to the drug-testing data. Privacy is
the rule.
3C. CareRight filter for C1: Managers do what is best for the company, not for the
workers.
3A. EndRight filter for C2: Workers must give up privacy to gain safety.
The morale may go down.
3B. RuleRight filter for C2: Managers have a responsibility (RuleRight) to keep their
workers safe.
3C. CareRight filter for C2: Managers do what is best for workers.
3A. EndRight filter for C3: Workers can give up privacy to gain safety
(EndRight).
3B. RuleRight filter for C3: Managers have some responsibility to keep their workers safe.
3C. CareRight filter for C3: Managers can do (CareRight) what is best for workers.
3A. EndRight filter for C4: If there are safeguards, workers can give up
privacy to gain safety (EndRight). In the long run, they will appreciate a safer
work-place.
3B. RuleRight filter for C4: Managers must follow policy to keep their workers safe
(RuleRight).
3C. CareRight filter for C4: If guided by policy, managers do (CareRight) what is best for
workers.
4. BEST CHOICE: C4 because (it best meets the requirements of good Ends,
Rules, and Care):
C1-C3: There are no data to support the primacy of privacy, likely misuse
of test-data, and a non-caring management.
C4: Safety (the end) is more important than privacy, safety is a company responsibility
(and rule), and the company cares (the care) for its workers by providing safety in a
responsible way.
Individuals with different values may choose C1, C2, or C3.
Note: In the above filter section, EndRight, RuleRight and CareRight was
inserted in brackets where it appeared to the writer reasonable dominant values. In cases
where it was not inserted, it was not considered as a reasonable dominant value. Others
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 separatly as filters just before the values.
Source: Based in part on Brown, Marvin T., The Ethical Process,
1996, Prentice-Hall, pp 53-60.
4.9
Do an Ethics Update with current news, information and
research: EthicsWorld
ERIC_NO:
ED385872.
The Social Construction of Ethics. By
Lulofs, Roxane S.
1994
ABSTRACT:
While some social constructionists are unprepared to confront the
role of ethics in the process of communication, the
fact must be faced that as a person constructs reality, he or she
makes judgments about that reality. Here are four situational
perceptions that affect how decisions are socially constructed as ethical
or not ethical within decision-making communities,
specifically, within faculty governance at Azusa Pacific
University (California). These perceptions involve: (1) the degree
to which reasonable choices have been laid out; (2)
whether or not information has been presented fairly; (3) whether
or not calls for a decision are based on "good reasons";
and (4) whether or not the message violates or enhances humanity.
First, one way to help distinguish between persuasion and coercion
is in the concept of "significant choice."
For Thomas R. Nielsen, not only must the perception of choice
be present, but that choice must appear to be
reasonable to the hearer. Second, the ethical
dilemma associated with the fair presentation of information
focuses on whether there has been a search for all relevant
information. Third, in attempting to make a decision, the subject
must avoid circular reasoning; Walter R. Fisher presents five
steps for evaluating different options in a decision. Fourth, some
writers characterize ethical communication as that
which enhances and promotes uniquely human characteristics and
characterize unethical communication as that which dehumanizes its
audience. The perspective of social constructionism runs the risk
of being morally vapid, but it is not impossible to find
transcendent values for particular forms of communication that can
help toward the understanding of communication processes within
them.
ERIC_NO:
ED150651,
Maximizing Choice: An Ethic for the
Religious Persuader. By
Griffin, Emory A.,
1977
ABSTRACT:
This paper maintains that persuasive efforts in religious
discourse must include a respect for the right of individuals to
make free choices. Some of the unethical practices discussed are:
deception and flattery, where the persuader, in a spirit of
conquest, entices the listener into wrong decision-making;
physical or psychological force, where the participants are
forced, through guilt, to do something they would otherwise
reject; one-way communication, where the listener is not permitted
to respond; and legalism, where the motivation for persuasion is a
sense of duty. The paper asserts that the ethical religious
persuader does not reduce the choice options of the audience.
Rather, it is essential that love for the cause be tempered, at
all times, by an attitude of justice toward the listener. (Source
for both: www.askeric.org )
Library:
www.goodcharacter.com
Knobe
Concepts
Time Schedule of Course
1st period: 40 minutes………..Part 1: What
Statement? Part 2: What Presupposition?
2nd period: 30 minutes………..Part 3: What
Imperatives?
3rd period: 90 minutes………...Part 4: How to
Reason Ethically?
4th period: 20 minutes……… .Test
Ethics
Resources
Ethics
Glossary
Classic Texts in
Ethics
Ethics
Connection - What is Ethics?
TEST
Study this web-site for
3 hours for an
approved (RN-CEP 11430, MFT- PCE 39) 3-hours Continuing Education Certificate (0.3
CEUs).
Click
her for the self-correcting test.