ETHICS

By; Dr. Chetankumar J Lad

Take out a piece of scrap paper!

• Would you cheat on an important exam? “Yes or

No”
• A survey of American students showed that 65%
would cheat!
• Were you truthful?
• Is it ethical to answer truthfully?
• Who gets hurt when people are unethical?
• What if GM cheated you when they built your car?
 Examples of Ethical Decisions

An American journalist, the first, to visit the Soviet Union after the
Chernobyl accident found a very provocative story. He was taken on
a tour of the plant with some American engineers after the 1986
explosion. What he found out about what happened the night the
reactor exploded was frightening. It seems that night two of the
engineers were playing around with one of the reactors, in what
later the Soviets described as an "Unauthorized experiment." The
engineers were trying to see how long a turbine would free-wheel if
they took the power off it. To do this they had to take reactor four
off-line. They by- passed six different security systems with warning
lights saying "extremely dangerous do not continue." They shut off
the alarms rather than the experiment. The engineers even
padlocked open the valves on the reactor so they wouldn't
automatically close. These engineers were two of the people
considered excellent in their field. If they had been in America they
would have been seen as Yale, Harvard, or MIT, graduates. They
would have had 4.0 GPA's and highly revered.
What ethical decisions were involved in this
story?

What kind of ethical decisions did the

engineers make?
 Think back to the Engineers
• How ethical were the Engineers?
• How moral were the Engineers?
• What is the difference?
 Ethics
• The English word ethics is derived from the Ancient
Greek word ēthikós (ἠθικός), meaning "relating to one's
character", which itself comes from the root
word êthos (ἦθος) meaning "character, moral nature“. This
word was transferred into Latin as ethica and then into
French as éthique, from which it was transferred into
English. Ethics – A branch of philosophy concerned with
ways of thinking philosophically about morality, and moral
judgment.
• Ethics: principles for guiding decision making and
reconciling conflicting values
– People may disagree on ‘ethics’ because it is based on people's
personal value systems

– What one person considers to be good or right may be considered

bad or wrong by another person
 What Ethics does??
• Ethics can provide a moral map
• Ethics can pinpoint a disagreement
• Ethics doesn't necessarily give right answers
• Ethics can give several answers
• Ethics as source of group strength
• Searching for the source of right and wrong
Source of Ethics

family

Culture Individual
Experience

Politics & policy

15
 Value
Values represents basic convictions
(certainty) that “a specific mode of
conduct or end-state of existence is
personally or socially preferable to an
opposite or converse mode of conduct or
end-state of existence”.
Types of Values –- Rokeach Value
Survey
Values in the
Rokeach
Survey
Values in the
Rokeach
Survey
(cont’d)
 Mean Value Rankings of
Executives, Union Members,
and Activists
 Type of Ethical Inquiry
• Normative Ethics
• Meta Ethics
• Discriptive Ethics
 Normative Ethics

• is the study of ethical acts. It therefore

focuses explicitly on questions of ‘what is the
right thing to do?’ in general. Normative
ethics is concerned with questions of what
people ought to do, and on how people can
decide what the ‘correct’ moral actions to
take are.
 Normative ethical questions
• Is it ever moral to lie?
• Are there absolute moral obligations?
• Are promises moral duties?
Meta-ethics
• Meta-ethics is the branch of philosophical ethics
that asks how we understand, know about, and
what we mean when we talk about what is right
and what is wrong.
•  A meta-ethical question is abstract and relates to
a wide range of more specific practical questions.
• What does 'good' mean?
• What is a 'moral obligation'?
• Is the statement 'Never lie' justifiable?
• Meta Ethical Questions focuses on the meaning of
ethical terms themselves (for instance, ‘what is
goodness?’), and on questions of how ethical
knowledge is obtained (for instance, ‘how can I
distinguish what is good from what is bad?’), rather
than on the more applied question of ‘what should I
do in a particular situation?’. Meta-ethics is therefore
concerned with the nature of ethical properties,
statements, attitudes and judgments. Meta-ethics
examines such themes as what moral questions
mean, and on what basis people can know what is
‘true’ or ‘false’.
 Descriptive Ethics
• Also known as comparative ethics, is the study of people's
beliefs about Morality. It contrasts with prescriptive
or normative ethics, which is the study of ethical theories that
prescribe how people ought to act, and with meta-ethics, which
is the study of what ethical terms and theories actually refer to;
• What do people think is right?
• Descriptive ethics is a form of empirical research into the
attitudes of individuals or groups of people. involves the
observation of the moral decision-making process with the goal
of describing the phenomenon.
• Those working on descriptive ethics aim to uncover people's
beliefs about such things as values, which actions are right and
wrong, and which characteristics of moral agents are virtuous
Major (Six) Approaches to ethics
• Deontological Approach
– This approach states that we should
identify and use a Universal code when
making ethical decisions. An action is
either ethical or not ethical, without
exception. It also deals with duties to be
delivered by Human being in the society
• What are my ethical principles telling me I
should do?
• What duties do I owe?
• How do I decide between conflicting duties?
(Nurse Example; risk at workplace to home &
work life balance, Dilemma of essential
service workers))
 Ethical skepticism

– This is the relativist viewpoint, stating that

ethical standards are not universal but are
relative to one's particular culture and
time.
– Asian, western, European
– Gujarati, South Indian, Punjabi, Marathi,
Rajasthani.Bengali etc,
– Young, Adult, Matured, Old
– Past, Present, Future
 Utilitarianism

– This is a very practical viewpoint, stating that decisions about

the ethics of a study should depend on the balance of the
consequences and benefits for the research participants and
the larger society.
– ethical actions are those that provide the greatest balance of
good over evil"
In order to take the utilitarian approach, the problem must be
analyzed from several different perspectives, and the
solutions to each must be contemplated to arrive at the one
that favors the greater good.
– It is one of the most preferred Consequentiality Theory of
ethics
• The utilitarian approach is used by most
people in academia (such as Institutional
Review Boards).
• Actions aim at bringing about the greatest
good for the greatest number of people

• "Do the potential benefits outweigh the risks

associated with this research?"
• Hospital 4 Serious and one minor sick patient
dilemma
• Duckait and rescue dielemma 1/6
• Is It Good?
• What impact is my behavior having on the
world?
• Am I doing more good or harm by my
behavior?
• Is my behavior making the world a better
place?
 The Rights Approach
• The rights approach is predicated on the
notion that humans have the right to choose
paths which affect their destiny because they
are human. Furthermore, humans are justified
in their expectation that their rights should be
respected. These rights include ;
• The right to the truth,
• The right of privacy,
• The right to not be injured, and
• The right to fulfillment of promises.
 Fairness or Justice Approach
• The fairness approach assumes that people
should be treated equally regardless of their
station in life, that is, they should not be
subject to discrimination.
 Justice
• Distributive justice
– The fairness and justice of a decision’s result.
• Procedural justice
– The fairness of the process by which the decision
was reached.
• Interactional (interpersonal) justice
– The manner in which managers conduct their
interpersonal dealings with employees.
 Common Good Approach
• The common good approach suggests that ethical
actions are those that benefit all members of the
community.
•  The commongood (also commonwealth,  general
welfare, or public benefit) refers to either what is
shared and beneficial for all or most members of a
given community, or alternatively, what is achieved
by citizenship, collective action, and active
participation in the realm of politics and public
service
 The Virtue Approach; Drive for
Excellence
The virtue approach describes an assumption that there are higher orders of goodness
to which man should aspire, and that only moral actions will help us achieve that
higher level.
• Ethical problem solving involves accumulating all the facts surrounding an issue and
considering;
• what the possible solutions to the problem are, and what benefits and harms result
from each and whom they affect;

• what rights each of the parties to the problems has;

• what solutions to the problem treat all parties equally;

• what course of action promotes the common good;

• and, what actions develop moral virtues like honesty, happiness,integrity, loyalty etc
• What kind of person do I want to be?
• What virtues bring me closer to this goal;
which vices prevent me from achieving it?
• Is my behavior consistent with being a moral
person?
 Morality (Ought to be____)
• Morality, on the other hand, is more often used in connection
with the ways in which individuals conduct their personal,
private lives, often in relation to personal financial probity,
lawful conduct and acceptable standards of interpersonal
behavior (including truthfulness, honesty, and sexual propriety).
• Morality – Human conduct and character referring to “those
acts which it makes sense to describe as right or wrong, good or
bad.”
• Moral Judgment – Judgments based on considerations of how
other people are to be treated, and how others interests are to
weigh against their own. It will lead to decision making
 Where does morality come from?
• Parents
• Religion
• Peers
• Technology
 Parents
• Parents instill ethics and morals in children.
Example: A child yells at their friend – calling
them a name.
• How does the parent respond?
• Other ways?
 Religion
• Most religions set guidelines on how to make
moral judgements.
• Example: In the Christian religion the ten
commandments serve as guidelines for
making ethical and moral judgments.
• What do Muslims, Hebrews, and other
religions use?
 Peers
• Friends effect your moral judgments.
Example: A friend or acquaintance might coax
you to use drugs.
• Peer pressure can sometimes cause people to
make moral and ethical decisions.
• Others?
 Technology
• Technology provides many opportunities to
make moral and ethical decisions. Example:
Copying computer games and violating copyright
laws.
1. Does having a radar detector give you the right
to break the law and speed?
2. Is it ethical to slash and burn the rain forests to
feed more people?
3. Should you drive your car to work or school
when it is in within walking distance?
 Factors affecting ethical decisions
• Normative judgments
– Judging something as good or bad, right or wrong,
better or worse.
• Moral standards (Morality)
– Society’s accepted standards for behaviors that
have serious consequences to its well-being.
• Behaviors that cannot be established or changed by
decisions of authoritative bodies.
• Behaviors that override self-interest.
 Moral Reasoning
• The thinking processes involved in
judgments about questions of right and
wrong.

• Kohlberg’s work (’63, ’75, ’81):

– Divided moral development into three levels
 Kohlberg’s Moral Dilemmas

• Hypothetical situations in which no choice is

clearly and indisputably right.
 Heinz and the Drug
A woman was near death from cancer. There was one drug doctors thought
might save her. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist charged ten
times what it cost. He paid $200 for the raw materials and charged $2,000.
The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the
money but could only come up with $1,000: half the cost. He approached the
druggist and told him that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it to him for
less or let him pay half now / half later.
But the druggist said, “No, I discovered the drug and I intend to make a profit
from it.” So Heinz got desperate and began to think about breaking into the
man’s store to steel the drug for his wife.

Should Heinz steal the drug? (check one) Why??

___ He should steal it ___ I can’t decide ___ He should not steal it.
 Heinz and the Drug
1. Whether a community’s laws are going to be upheld.
2. Isn’t it natural for a loving spouse to care so much for his wife that he’d steal?
3. Is Heinz willing to risk getting shot as a burglar or going to jail for the chance that
stealing the drug might help?
4. Whether Heinz is a pro. wrestler, or has lots of influence with pro. wrestlers.
5. Whether Heinz is stealing the drug for himself or doing this for someone else.
6. Whether the researcher’s rights to his invention have to be respected.
7. Whether the essence of living is more encompassing than the termination of dying,
socially and individually.
8. What values will be the basis for governing how people act towards each other.
9. Whether the researcher is going to be allowed to hide behind a worthless law which
only protects the rich anyhow. 
10. Whether the law here gets in the way of the most basic claim of a member of society.
11. Whether the researcher deserves to be robbed for being so greedy and cruel. 
12. Would stealing in such a case bring about more total good for all of society or not?
 Moral Reasoning
• Pre-conventional
– Judgment based solely on a person’s own needs and
perceptions
• Conventional
– Expectations of society and law are taken into account
• Post-Conventional
– Judgment based on abstract, personal principles not
necessarily defined by society’s laws.
 Kohlberg’s Work
• Stage 1 (Pre conventional)
– Punishment-obedience orientation
• Fear of authority and avoidance of punishment are
reasons for behaving morally.
• Stage 2 (Pre conventional)
– Personal reward orientation
• Satisfying personal needs determines moral choice.
 Kohlberg’s Work
• Stage 3 (Conventional)
– Good boy-nice girl orientation
• Maintaining the affection and approval of friends and
relatives motivates good behavior
• Stage 4 (Conventional)
– Law and order/authority orientation
• A duty to uphold rules and laws for their own sake
justifies moral conformity
 Kohlberg’s Work
• Stage 5 (Post conventional)
– Social contract orientation
• We obey rules because they are necessary for social
order, but rules can be changed if there were better
alternatives
• Stage 6 (Post conventional)
– Morality of individual principles and conscience
• Behavior which conforms to internal principles (justice
and equality) and may sometimes violate society’s
rules.
 Stages of cognitive moral development1/3

Level Stage Explanation Illustration

Illustration
Individuals define right and
and Whilst this
this type of
of moral
moral reasoning
reasoning
1 Obedience wrong according to is usually
usually associated
associated with
with small
small
and expected rewards
rewards and
and kids, we cancan also
also see that
that business
business
punishment punishments from people frequently
frequently make unethical
unethical
authority figures decisions
decisions because they they think
think their
their
Preconventional
Preconventional

company
company wouldwould either
either reward
reward itit or
or
let it go unpunished (Gellerman '86).
unpunished (Gellerman
I
Individuals are concerned
concerned An
An employee might
might cover
cover for
for the
the
2 Instrumental
Instrumental with their own immediate absence of
of a co-worker
co-worker so so that
that their
their
purpose and interests and define right own absences
absences might
might subsequently
subsequently
exchange according to whether there be covered
covered for
for in
in return
return – a ““you
you
is fairness in exchanges
exchanges or
or scratch
scratch my
my back,
back, I’ll
I’ll scratch
scratch yours”
yours”
deals
deals they
they make
make to
to achieve
achieve reciprocity
reciprocity (Treviño
(Treviño && Nelson
Nelson 1999).
1999).
those
those interests.
interests.
 Stages of cognitive moral development2/3

Level Stage Explanation Illustration

3 Interpersonal Individuals live up to An employee might decide that
that using
using
accord, what is expected of them company resources
resources such
such as
as the
conformity by their immediate peers
peers phone, the internet and email
email forfor
and mutual and those close to them personal use whilst at workwork isis
expectations acceptable because everyone else else in
in
Conventional

Conventional

their office does it.

Conventional

Conventional

II
Individuals’ consideration A factory manager
manager may
may decide to
to
4 Social
Social of
of the
the expectations
expectations of
of provide
provide employee
employee benefits
benefits and
and
accord and others
others broadens
broadens to
to social
social salaries
salaries above
above the
the industry
industry minimum
minimum
system accord more generally, in order to ensure that
that employees
employees
maintenance rather than just the receive wages
wages and
and conditions deemed
deemed
specific
specific people
people around
around acceptable
acceptable by
by consumers,
consumers, pressure
pressure
them.
them. groups
groups and
and other
other social
social groups.
groups.
Stages of cognitive moral development3/3
• Rest: Components of Moral Action
Manager’s Dilema of pollutant

Make the Moral Esttaablish the Execu

n iz e the Judgment Moral Intent imple te &
g mora ment the
Reco Is sue Kohlberg (1969)
l actio
a l
Mor Taking a moral n plan
act depends on more than just your
stage of Moral development

Lawrence Kohlberg, Jim Rest, 1982 at the

Moral Ed. Conference in Fribourg, Switzerland
Situational influences on ethical
decision-making
 Ethics and the law
– An behavior may be legal but unethical.
– An behavior may be illegal but ethical.
– An behavior may be both legal and ethical.
– An behavior may be both illegal and unethical.
 How ethical decisions are justified:
Rationalization tactics/Reaction 1/2
Strategy Description
Denial of Actors engaged in corrupt acts
responsibility perceive they have no other choice
than to participate in such activities.
Denial of Actors are convinced that no one is
injury harmed by their actions; hence the
actions are not really corrupt.
Denial of Actors counter any blame for their
victim actions by arguing that the violated
party deserved whatever happened.
Examples
“What can I do? My arm’s being
twisted.” / “It is none of my business if
the corp. uses bribery overseas.”
“No one was really harmed”
“It could have been worse.”
“They deserved it.”
“They chose to participate.”
 How ethical decisions are justified:
Rationalization tactics/Reactions 2/2
Strategy Description
Social Actors moderate the salience of act:
weighting 1. Condemn the condemner,
2. Selective social comparison.
Appeal to The actors argue that their violation
higher of norms is due to their attempt to
loyalties realize a higher-order value.
Metaphor of Actors argue that they’re entitled to
the ledger indulge in deviant behaviours due to
time and effort in their jobs.
Examples
“You have no right to criticise us.”
“Others are worse than we are.”
“We answered to a more important
cause.” / “I would not report it
because of my loyalty to my boss.”
“It’s all right for me to use the internet
for personal reasons at work. After all,
I do work overtime.”
Moral Judgement/Decision making
 Moral Decision-Making

• How is moral decision-making

different?

– Process for dealing with moral

uncertainties
– introduces a degree of rationality and
rigor into our moral deliberations
 Moral Decision-Making

Moral decision-making
1. Most dilemmas are not right vs. wrong but
right vs. right dilemmas.
- It is right to protect forests,
it is right to provide jobs for loggers
- It is right to uphold confidentiality,
it is right to protect the welfare of
others
 Moral Decision-Making

Moral decision-making
2. Dilemmas often represent competing moral
paradigms
- Truth vs. Loyalty
- Individual vs. Community
- Short-term vs. Long-term goals
- Justice vs. Mercy
 Moral Decision-Making

I. Standards-based model
Based on the assumption that rules, laws, &
policies provide the best basis for determining
action.
♦ Determine primary dilemma
♦ Spell out ethical standards for response
♦ Determine if there is a reason to deviate
♦ Decide on course of action
 Moral Decision-Making
II. Principles-based model
Clarify
♦ Determine dilemma
♦ Formulate alternatives
♦ What key ethical principles and values involved
Evaluate
♦ Is any ethical principle violated?
♦ Distinguish facts from beliefs, theories, opinions
♦ Consider credibility of sources
♦ Weigh the benefits, burdens and risks
 Moral Decision-Making
II. Principles-based model (cont’d)
Decide
♦ Evaluate alternatives & determine consequences
♦ Prioritize ethical principles/values
♦ Consider the worst case scenario
♦ Apply principles
Implement
♦ to maximize benefits & minimize costs & risks
Monitor and modify
♦ as new information emerges
 Moral Decision-Making

III. Virtues-based model

Considers that dispositions and habits enable us to
act according to the highest potential of our
character and on behalf of our values.
♦ Virtue ethics asks of any action:
--What kind of person will I become if I do this?
--Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?
♦ Use virtues in considering options
♦ Make decision accordingly
 Moral Decision-Making

IV. Moral reasoning-based model

♦ Recognize the moral issue
♦ Make a judgment
♦ Establish intent
* individual and situational variables
* factors of opportunity and significant others
 Moral Decision-Making

IV. Moral reasoning-based model (cont’d)

♦ Moral intensity (effect of decision on others):

* concentration of effect (individual or group)
* probability of effect (likelihood of harm)
* proximity (closeness to the issue)
* social consensus (agreement with society)
* temporal immediacy (closeness in time)
* magnitude of consequence (impact)

♦ Act
 Moral Decision-Making

V. Practice-based model
♦ Recognize problem, get facts
♦ Assess values, benefits, burdens
♦ Determine legal, social influences
♦ Generate solutions, outcomes
♦ Consult
♦ Act, review, reflect
 Moral Decision-Making

Application of a practice-based model

Steps
1. Recognize there is a moral issue
2. Determine the actor(s)
3. Gather the relevant facts
4. Test for right-versus-wrong issues
5. Test for right-versus-right paradigms
 Moral Decision-Making

Steps
6. Determine resolution principles involved
• Ends-based
• Rule-based or Kantian principle
• Justice or fairness-based
• Care-based principle
• Virtue-based
7. Investigate possibilities for action: “trilemma”
 Moral Decision-Making

Steps
8. Consult
9. Weigh benefits & burdens
10. Consider other dilemmas that arise
11. Make the decision
 Moral Decision-Making

Steps
12. Formulate a justification for the decision
♦ List reasons & arguments
♦ Recognize shortcomings
♦ Anticipate objections
♦ Recognize limitations in perspective
13. Document
14. Review and reflect on decision
THANKS