A Framework for Thinking Ethically
This document is designed as an introduction to thinking ethically.
We all have an image of our better selves-of how we are when
we act ethically or are "at our best." We probably
also have an image of what an ethical community, an ethical
business, an ethical government, or an ethical society should
be. Ethics really has to do with all these levels-acting ethically
as individuals, creating ethical organizations and governments,
and making our society as a whole ethical in the way it treats
What is Ethics?
Simply stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that
tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations
in which they find themselves-as friends, parents, children,
citizens, businesspeople, teachers, professionals, and so on.
It is helpful to identify what ethics is NOT:
- • Ethics is not the same as feelings. Feelings provide important
information for our ethical choices. Some people have highly
developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something
wrong, but many people feel good even though they are doing
something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us it is
uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.
- • Ethics is not religion. Many people are not religious, but
ethics applies to everyone. Most religions do advocate high
ethical standards but sometimes do not address all the types
of problems we face.
- • Ethics is not following the law. A good system of law does
incorporate many ethical standards, but law can deviate from
what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt, as some
totalitarian regimes have made it. Law can be a function of
power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow
groups. Law may have a difficult time designing or enforcing
standards in some important areas, and may be slow to address
- • Ethics is not following culturally accepted norms. Some
cultures are quite ethical, but others become corrupt -or
blind to certain ethical concerns (as the United States was
to slavery before the Civil War). "When in Rome, do as
the Romans do" is not a satisfactory ethical standard.
- • Ethics is not science. Social and natural science can provide
important data to help us make better ethical choices. But
science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Science
may provide an explanation for what humans are like. But ethics
provides reasons for how humans ought to act. And just because
something is scientifically or technologically possible, it
may not be ethical to do it.
Why Identifying Ethical Standards is Hard
There are two fundamental problems in identifying the ethical
standards we are to follow:
1. On what do we base our ethical standards?
2. How do those standards get applied to specific situations
If our ethics are not based on feelings, religion, law, accepted
social practice, or science, what are they based on? Many philosophers
and ethicists have helped us answer this critical question.
They have suggested at least five different sources of ethical
standards we should use.
Five Sources of Ethical Standards
The Utilitarian Approach
Some ethicists emphasize that the ethical action is the one
that provides the most good or does the least harm, or, to put
it another way, produces the greatest balance of good over harm.
The ethical corporate action, then, is the one that produces
the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are affected-customers,
employees, shareholders, the community, and the environment.
Ethical warfare balances the good achieved in ending terrorism
with the harm done to all parties through death, injuries, and
destruction. The utilitarian approach deals with consequences;
it tries both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm
The Rights Approach
Other philosophers and ethicists suggest that the ethical action
is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights
of those affected. This approach starts from the belief that
humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or
on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives.
On the basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated
as ends and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral
rights -including the rights to make one's own choices about
what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to be injured,
to a degree of privacy, and so on-is widely debated; some now
argue that non-humans have rights, too. Also, it is often said
that rights imply duties-in particular, the duty to respect
The Fairness or Justice Approach
Aristotle and other Greek philosophers have contributed the
idea that all equals should be treated equally. Today we use
this idea to say that ethical actions treat all human beings
equally-or if unequally, then fairly based on some standard
that is defensible. We pay people more based on their harder
work or the greater amount that they contribute to an organization,
and say that is fair. But there is a debate over CEO salaries
that are hundreds of times larger than the pay of others; many
ask whether the huge disparity is based on a defensible standard
or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence
The Common Good Approach
The Greek philosophers have also contributed the notion that
life in community is a good in itself and our actions should
contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking
relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning
and that respect and compassion for all others-especially the
vulnerable-are requirements of such reasoning. This approach
also calls attention to the common conditions that are important
to the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective
police and fire departments, health care, a public educational
system, or even public recreational areas.
The Virtue Approach
A very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought
to be consistent with certain ideal virtues that provide for
the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions
and habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential
of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty.
Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity,
integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples
of virtues. Virtue ethics asks of any action, "What kind
of person will I become if I do this?" or "Is this
action consistent with my acting at my best?"
Putting the Approaches Together
Each of the approaches helps us determine what standards of
behavior can be considered ethical. There are still problems
to be solved, however.
The first problem is that we may not agree on the content of
some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the
same set of human and civil rights.
We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may
not even agree on what is a good and what is a harm.
The second problem is that the different approaches may not
all answer the question "What is ethical?" in the
same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information
with which to determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance.
And much more often than not, the different approaches do lead
to similar answers.
Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity
to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical
aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should
impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for
ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced
regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through
it automatically without consulting the specific steps.
The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the
more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others
about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem,
aided by the insights and different perspectives of others,
can we make good ethical choices in such situations.
We have found the following framework for ethical decision
making a useful method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying
ethical courses of action.
A Framework for Ethical Decision Making
Recognize an Ethical Issue
- Could this decision or situation be damaging to someone or to
some group? Does this decision involve a choice between a good
and bad alternative, or perhaps between two "goods"
or between two "bads"?
- Is this issue about more than what is legal or what is most
efficient? If so, how?
Get the Facts
- What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are not
known? Can I learn more about the situation? Do I know enough
to make a decision?
- What individuals and groups have an important stake in the
outcome? Are some concerns more important? Why?
- What are the options for acting? Have all the relevant persons
and groups been consulted? Have I identified creative options?
Evaluate Alternative Actions
- Evaluate the options by asking the following questions:
- Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm?
(The Utilitarian Approach)
- Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake?
(The Rights Approach)
- Which option treats people equally or proportionately? (The
- Which option best serves the community
as a whole, not just some members?
(The Common Good Approach)
- Which option leads me to act as the sort of person I want
to be? (The Virtue Approach)
Make a Decision and Test It
- Considering all these approaches, which option best addresses
- If I told someone I respect-or told a television
audience-which option I have chosen, what would they say?
Act and Reflect on the Outcome
- How can my decision be implemented with the greatest care
and attention to the concerns of all stakeholders?
- How did my decision turn out and what have I learned from
this specific situation?
This framework for thinking ethically is the product of
dialogue and debate at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
at Santa Clara University. Primary contributors include Manuel
Velasquez, Dennis Moberg, Michael J. Meyer, Thomas Shanks, Margaret
R. McLean, David DeCosse, Claire André, and Kirk O. Hanson. It was last revised in May 2009.
Go back to Decision Making.