Ethics Reflection Paper

DM254083
This paper reflects on my experiences in leadership simulations and group discussions,
analyzing my decision-making process through the lens of various ethical theories
explored in class.

Simulations: Leading a Pandemic Response

The leadership simulation placed me in a pivotal role – leading a nation ravaged by a

deadly pandemic. The decisions revolved around public health, military involvement,
communication strategies, and resource allocation.

Thought Processes and Ethical Principles:

My primary focus was on utilitarianism, maximizing overall well-being. This meant

prioritizing public health measures like lockdowns and mask mandates, even if they hurt
the economy (terminal vs instrumental values). I heavily invested in research and
development (R&D) for vaccines and treatments, acknowledging the importance of both
individualistic (protecting individual health) and collectivistic (ensuring herd immunity)
elements.

Role Identity and Moral Integrity:

As a leader, I strived for moral integrity, consistently upholding ethical principles

during media interactions and controversies. To gain public trust, I adopted a transparent
communication style, addressing concerns honestly and emphasizing the collective fight
against the pandemic.

Unconsidered Aspects and Ethical Theories:

During the simulation, the long-term psychological impact of the pandemic on

individuals and communities wasn't a major focus initially. Reflection reveals the
importance of considering self-concept and personal identity when implementing
stringent measures. Lockdowns, for example, while vital for public health, could
negatively impact mental well-being. This highlights the need for a balanced approach
incorporating mental health resources alongside physical health initiatives.
Group Discussions and Moral Myopia

The group discussions provided valuable insights into ethical complexities.

● The Poisoned Drink Case: Initially, I favored a localized recall, focusing on

utilitarianism to minimize product waste. However, the discussion triggered a
consideration of moral hypocrisy. Recalling only in specific regions could be
perceived as prioritizing profit over public safety. A nationwide recall, though costly,
would uphold consistency and public trust.
● Death Penalty: The discussion revealed a spectrum of viewpoints. Some classmates,
focusing on the categorical imperative, believed taking a life is always wrong.
Others, leaning towards utilitarianism, advocated capital punishment for deterrence in
extreme cases. The discussion exposed potential moral myopia in my own initial
stance.
● The Train Dilemma: The classic train dilemma highlighted the conflict between
utilitarianism (saving more lives) and the categorical imperative (not actively causing
harm). The discussion explored alternative solutions like alerting the authorities, and
showcasing the importance of creative problem-solving in ethical decision-making.
● Car and Scooter: This scenario brought in the concept of social identity. Risk
aversion might lead one to swerve to avoid the scooter rider, regardless of helmet use,
due to the ingrained perception of motorcyclists being vulnerable. However, the
discussion emphasized equal value to human life, prompting a focus on responsible
driving to avoid accidents altogether.

Ethical Theories and Decision-Making:

The theories formed a framework for ethical decision-making in both the simulations
and group discussions.

● Utilitarianism: This theory heavily influenced my initial decisions, focusing on

maximizing overall benefits during the pandemic and the poisoned drink case.
However, discussions emphasized the need to consider individual and societal
well-being alongside collective good.
● Categorical Imperative: The discussions on the death penalty and train dilemma
highlighted the importance of this theory. It prevented hasty decisions that caused
harm, prompting a search for solutions that didn't violate the sanctity of life.
● Moral Integrity and Hypocrisy: These concepts were crucial in maintaining
consistency and transparency throughout the pandemic simulation and the poisoned
drink discussion.

● Self-Concept vs. Personal Identity: Imagine a doctor (self-concept) who prioritizes

patient care (personal identity). Even during a crisis, their self-concept of being a
 healer guides their actions, reinforcing their core identity.

● Role Identity vs. Social Identity: A leader (role identity) must prioritize public safety.
However, their social identity as a parent might influence decisions related to school
closures, highlighting potential conflicts.

● Moral Hypocrisy vs. Moral Integrity: A leader advocating transparency (moral

integrity) wouldn't fudge health statistics during a pandemic (moral hypocrisy).

Conclusion

This reflection has been a valuable exercise in refining my ethical decision-making

framework. Through simulations and group discussions, I gained a deeper understanding
of ethical complexities and the importance of considering various perspectives. Balancing
diverse ethical principles like utilitarianism, the categorical imperative, and individual
well-being will be key to navigating future challenges with integrity and responsibility.
The journey to becoming an ethical leader requires continuous reflection and a
willingness to learn from diverse viewpoints.