A MORAL DECISION-MAKING MODEL



A MORAL DECISION-MAKING MODEL

Danney Ursery

New College

St. Edward’s University

Sources:

Ruggiero, Vincent Ryan. Thinking Critically About

Ethical Issues. 3rd ed. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1992.

Ursery, Danney. “Ethical Analysis and Moral Reasoning.” Class

handout.

CAUTION: It is important to make clear that the Ruggiero model is just one way of viewing moral dilemmas and coming to decisions about them. Danney Usery, Coordinator of the Ethical Analysis course, references this model in his introduction to ethical theories and their application in ethical, that is, normative, decision-making (7). Danney Ursery recommends that we focus students’ attention on Ruggiero’s approach as a moral decision making model to distinguish it from normative theory. The model assumes importance in our curriculum because it may be adopted across the university as a common platform for subsequent development of ethical reasoning and application of normative principles.

In the Critical Inquiry course, the Ruggiero model provides a basis for further analysis of personal values in making moral decisions, a process started with the Belief Paper. While we only touch the surface of this model and moral decision-making in general, we will be addressing the objective of preparing students better for their future coursework in ethical analysis. All that is expected is that we have students work with the criteria Ruggiero develops with the understanding that we will not question the basic principle of Respect for Persons. His framework is simple and straightforward. It is outlined below, and copies of the relevant pages of his book follow. Note in those pages that Ruggiero provides a number of short cases that can be used in class. He also provides a sample case analysis in the section on Analyzing Issues.

In a related content matter, Chaffee does provide ethical perspectives in “The Thinker’s Guide to Moral Decision-Making”; he focuses on developing a “moral code” and not on normative theory (378-85). While we should also use this material as another approach, we should point out that students will be studying ethics in more depth in their next mission course.

The Ruggiero Model:

Underlying Principle: Respect for Persons. Ruggiero argues that “At least one important principle underlies almost all ethical systems.” This principle has three requirements:

1. “’[E]very person should be regarded worthy of

sympathetic consideration, and should be so

treated. . . .’”

2. “’[N]o person should be regarded by another as a mere possession, or used as a mere instrument, or treated as a mere obstacle, to another’s satisfaction. . . .’”

3. “’[P]ersons are not and ought never to be treated in any undertaking as mere expendables.’”

(Harris qtd in Ruggiero 54)

Three Basic Criteria: Ruggiero develops three criteria that he maintains “are found to inform the reasoning of most ethicists about particular moral issues” although “[e]mphasis on them differs from system to system, and the theoretical formulations of ethicists may focus on to the virtual exclusion of the others” (54-55).

1. Obligations. Ruggiero claims that “every significant human action occurs, directly or indirectly, in a context of relationships with others.” He goes to say that relationships involve obligations, what should be or not be done (55). Ursery has indicated that he finds students often fail to consider their obligations. He asks them, “What are some of the obligations to the stakeholders involved in your dilemma or conflict? These could be . . . family, economics, personal satisfaction, etc.”

2. Ideals. Ruggiero refers to ideals as “notions of excellence” and as “specific concepts that assist us in applying the principle of respect for persons in our moral judgments” (55-56). Ursery substitutes the word values for ideals. He asks, “What is the impact of our actions on our important values?” Ruggiero also refers to what we commonly refer to as values. He says “Some common ideals that figure prominently in ethical [remember that we need to use the word moral in place of ethical here] reasoning are fairness, tolerance, compassion, loyalty, forgiveness, amity, and peace” (56).

3. Consequences. What “are the beneficial or harmful effects that result from the action and affect the prople involved, including, of course, the person performing the action?” Emotional? Physical? Immediate? Later? Obvious? Subtle? Hidden? Intentional? (Ruggiero 56) Ursery askes, “[W]hat are the effects of our actions on our obligations or values?”

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download