This model is most at home where, from an administrative standpoint, one seeks ethical guidelines suitable for public policy. Putting one’s option in standard form has the following advantages:

a. it gives one distance on the problem;

b) it allows one to construct qualified positions which go beyond "always" and "never" positions

c) it allows one to run certain tests concerning fairness and consequences

1. LIST POSSIBLE OPTIONS

2. FILTER OUT those options which are (a) not really practical (do-able) and/or
                                          (b) are so extreme that they raise additional ethical problems.
                                                (e.g. killing the teacher to avoid cheating on a test).

3. CHOOSE ONE OPTION and  put it in STANDARD FORM:
        In ANY CIRCUMSTANCES X (or having features x₁. x₂, ... x_n),
               ANY ETHICAL AGENT Y (agents with features y₁. y₂, ... y_n)
                            OUGHT/OUGHT NOT DO ACTION Z
                                                        (or an action having features z₁. z₂, ... z_n)
4. TESTS FOR FAIRNESS

For these Fairness Tests we are indebted to Immanuel Kant who thought deeply about the nature of persons.

 "Persons are not things." Or alternately, "persons have rights."  Persons are centers of worth having intellects and the ability to choose. (See NMP.)
 

A. Reversibility Test

If Z is right to do, then Z is right whether I’m on the doer or receiver side.

B. Equal Cases Test

If it is right for me to do Z, then it is right for anyone relevantly similar to me.

You must treat equal cases equally or show that in spite of looking similar, the two cases are relevantly different and can be treated differently.

C. Universalizability Test -- generalizes from "equal cases" test.

Suppose it is right for A to do Z. If B is relevantly similar to A (abbreviated B "rst" A), then it is right for B to do Z.

If C is "rst" B, then it is right for C to do Z.
If D is "rst" C, then OK for D and on and on until we
must consider what would occur if everyone (or almost everyone) did Z.

"What if everyone did Z?" is the universalized question.

(Steps 5 and 6 look to Bentham & Mill and the "Actions have consequences.") aspect.

LIST THE CONSEQUENCES (to you, to others, to what joins you together) if everyone were to follow your rule, i.e., if this rule were to become a PRACTICE.

6.   ASK YOURSELF: Could I truly accept a world in which acting on this rule were a way of life?     Notice that Step 6 brings together considerations of both the rights of persons and consequences to the common life.
 

                                                Return to the Ethics Enrichment page

                                                Return to the Ethics Menu page

                                                Return to John G. Sullivan Homepage