1. Based on the article given, List the relevant facts. State facts in complete sentences. (List more than five facts.) At the end of your list, cite reference from your source(s).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Reference (In most cases, this is the article you are analyzing. However, if you are using some other resources to get extra facts/information, make sure to present those sources as well. Suggested format: APA):
2. What ethics/values are in question from the above facts? (List more than three facts.)
1.
2.
3.
4.
3. List the stakeholders involved. List the individuals/groups who are/may be affected by this issue and how. Be specific.
| WHO | HOW |
| …… | …… |
Step II. Isolating the major ethical dilemma
1. Write several statements or questions that are ethical dilemmas from this situation (at least two should be presented).
1.
2.
3.
2. What is the ethical dilemma to be resolved NOW? State it using the form: Should someone do or not do something? Keep this statement simple. For example: Should people buy pirated software? NOT Should people buy pirated software even though they cannot afford the price of proprietary software?
Step III. Analyzing the ethicality of both alternatives (yes or no) to your dilemma
Theory I:
Consequentialism (teleology) – Does the action minimize actual and potential harm?
Utilitarianism: Good for the group, least harm for the group
1. If the answer to the ethical dilemma were YES ,discuss the following:
· who will be harmed and how each stateholder is harmed (identify ALL potential stakeholders being harmed)?
· who will NOT be harmed and how each stateholder is NOT harmed?
· who will be benefited and how each stateholder is benefited (identify ALL potential stakeholders being benefited)?
· who will NOT be benefited and how each stateholder is NOT benefited?
2. If the answer to the ethical dilemma were NO,discuss the following:
· who will be harmed and how each stateholder is harmed (identify ALL potential stakeholders being harmed)?
· who will NOT be harmed and how each stateholder is NOT harmed?
· who will be benefited and how each stateholder is benefited (identify ALL potential stakeholders being benefited)?
· who will NOT be benefited and how each stateholder is NOT benefited?
3. Which alternative results in the least harm in answering the dilemma yes or no? Why? (There is no right or wrong choice. Interpret the outcome of the analysis.) For example: The answer to the question that would result in the least harm would be…. Because answering ……
4. Which alternative results in the maximum benefit in answering the dilemma yes or no? (There is no right or wrong choice. Interpret the outcome of the analysis.) For example: The answer to the question that would result in the maximum benefit would be…. Because answering ……
5. Therefore, based on the above analysis (Questions 1 to 3), the utilitarian’s position on this dilemma would be….. (Yes, or No to the question)
Step III. Analyzing the ethicality of both alternatives (yes or no) to your dilemma.
Theory II.1: In deontology analysis, answer the following questions (Remember: When listing a right, show its corresponding duty and vice versa).
1. If the answer to the ethical dilemma were YES, identify which stakeholders’ rights have been or may be violated/abridged; and what duties have been or may be neglected.
2. If the answer to the ethical dilemma were NO, identify which stakeholders’ rights have been or may be violated/abridged; and what duties have been or may be neglected.
3. What would be the outcome of the deontologist’s position on your dilemma? (YES/NO, Because ……)
Theory II.2: Kant’s Categorical Imperative
· The principle of consistency: What if everyone acted this way?
· The principle of respect: Are people treated as ends rather than means?
4. Which alternative is preferable? (Yes or No) Why? What would be Kant’s position to your dilemma?
Step IV. Making a decision and planning the implementation
1. Based on the analysis in Step III, choose which theory best applies to this situation. Add any arguments justifying your choice of these ethical principles to support your decision.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
Consequentialism (Teleological)
Deontological
Other: (Name the theory here)___________________________
Explain your choice above (THIS AREA SHOULD BE 4 OR MORE SENTENCES):
2. Your decision: What would you do? Why? List the specific steps needed to implement your defensible ethical decision(THIS AREA SHOULD BE 2 OR MORE PARAGRAPHS):.
3. What longer-term changes (i.e., political, legal, technical, societal, organizational) would help prevent your defined dilemma in the future? (THIS AREA SHOULD BE 2 OR MORE PARAGRAPHS)