A Framework for Moral Decision Making
Developed by Manuel Velasquez, Claire Andre, Thomas
Shanks, S.J., and Michael J. Meyer
Moral issues greet us each morning in the newspaper, confront us in the
memos on our desks, nag us from our children's soccer fields, and bid
us good night on the evening news. We are bombarded daily with questions
about the justice of our foreign policy, the morality of medical technologies
that can prolong our lives, the rights of the homeless, the fairness of
our children's teachers to the diverse students in their classrooms.
Dealing with these moral issues is often perplexing. How, exactly, should
we think through an ethical issue? What questions should we ask? What
factors should we consider?
The first step in analyzing moral issues is obvious but not always easy:
Get the facts. Some moral issues create controversies simply because we
do not bother to check the facts. This first step, although obvious, is
also among the most important and the most frequently overlooked.
But having the facts is not enough. Facts by themselves only tell us
what is; they do not tell us what ought to be. In addition to getting
the facts, resolving an ethical issue also requires an appeal to values.
Philosophers have developed five different approaches to values to deal
with moral issues.
The Utilitarian Approach
Utilitarianism was conceived in the 19th century by Jeremy Bentham and
John Stuart Mill to help legislators determine which laws were morally
best. Both Bentham and Mill suggested that ethical actions are those that
provide the greatest balance of good over evil.
To analyze an issue using the utilitarian approach, we first identify
the various courses of action available to us. Second, we ask who will
be affected by each action and what benefits or harms will be derived
from each. And third, we choose the action that will produce the greatest
benefits and the least harm. The ethical action is the one that provides
the greatest good for the greatest number.
The Rights Approach
The second important approach to ethics has its roots in the philosophy
of the 18th-century thinker Immanuel Kant and others like him, who focused
on the individual's right to choose for herself or himself. According
to these philosophers, what makes human beings different from mere things
is that people have dignity based on their ability to choose freely what
they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right
to have these choices respected. People are not objects to be manipulated;
it is a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely
Of course, many different, but related, rights exist besides this basic
one. These other rights (an incomplete list below) can be thought of as
different aspects of the basic right to be treated as we choose.
The right to the truth: We have a right to be told the truth and
to be informed about matters that significantly affect our choices.
The right of privacy: We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever
we choose in our personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights
The right not to be injured: We have the right not to be harmed or
injured unless we freely and knowingly do something to deserve punishment
or we freely and knowingly choose to risk such injuries.
The right to what is agreed: We have a right to what has been promised
by those with whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.
In deciding whether an action is moral or immoral using this second approach,
then, we must ask, Does the action respect the moral rights of everyone?
Actions are wrong to the extent that they violate the rights of individuals;
the more serious the violation, the more wrongful the action.
The Fairness or Justice Approach
The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings
of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who said that "equals should
be treated equally and unequals unequally." The basic moral question in
this approach is: How fair is an action? Does it treat everyone in the
same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?
Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason
for singling them out; discrimination imposes burdens on people who are
no different from those on whom burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism
and discrimination are unjust and wrong.
The Common-Good Approach
This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose
own good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community
members are bound by the pursuit of common values and goals.
The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000 years ago
in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero. More recently, contemporary
ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as "certain general conditions
that are...equally to everyone's advantage."
In this approach, we focus on ensuring that the social policies, social
systems, institutions, and environments on which we depend are beneficial
to all. Examples of goods common to all include affordable health care,
effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and
an unpolluted environment.
Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the
same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society
we want to become and how we are to achieve that society. While respecting
and valuing the freedom of individuals to pursue their own goals, the
common-good approach challenges us also to recognize and further those
goals we share in common.
The Virtue Approach
The virtue approach to ethics assumes that there are certain ideals toward
which we should strive, which provide for the full development of our
humanity. These ideals are discovered through thoughtful reflection on
what kind of people we have the potential to become.
Virtues are attitudes or character traits that enable us to be and to
act in ways that develop our highest potential. They enable us to pursue
the ideals we have adopted. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity,
fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples
Virtues are like habits; that is, once acquired, they become characteristic
of a person. Moreover, a person who has developed virtues will be naturally
disposed to act in ways consistent with moral principles. The virtuous
person is the ethical person.
In dealing with an ethical problem using the virtue approach, we might
ask, What kind of person should I be? What will promote the development
of character within myself and my community?
Ethical Problem Solving
These five approaches suggest that once we have ascertained the facts,
we should ask ourselves five questions when trying to resolve a moral
What benefits and what harms will each course of action produce,
and which alternative will lead to the best overall consequences?
What moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course
of action best respects those rights?
Which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there
is a morally justifiable reason not to, and does not show favoritism
Which course of action advances the common good?
Which course of action develops moral virtues?
This method, of course, does not provide an automatic solution to moral
problems. It is not meant to. The method is merely meant to help identify
most of the important ethical considerations. In the end, we must deliberate
on moral issues for ourselves, keeping a careful eye on both the facts
and on the ethical considerations involved.
This article updates several previous pieces from Issues
in Ethics by Manuel Velasquez - Dirksen Professor of Business
Ethics at Santa Clara University and former Center director - and Claire
Andre, associate Center director. "Thinking Ethically" is based on a framework
developed by the authors in collaboration with Center Director Thomas
Shanks, S.J., Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good Michael
J. Meyer, and others. The framework is used as the basis for many programs
and presentations at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.
This article appeared originally in Issues in Ethics V7 N1 (Winter
Go back to Decision Making.