This course and the work material is based off the book the (honest) truth about dishonesty by Dan Ariely
One of the insights of Ariely’s research about honesty is that no one is 100% honest all the time without the support of others. There are whole chapters in the book about what happens when people around us are dishonest, or when we prioritize a benefit for others that we realize can (only?) be achieved by dishonest means.
Fortunately, just like Ariely, social, moral, and political philosophers understand the practice of honesty as far from simple—being honest goes beyond just personal willpower. These thinkers have created ethical frameworks against which we can apply some everyday moral dilemmas.
Let’s try out Reddit: Go to r/moraldilemmas or, for further narrowing of what you’ll find, go to r/moraldilemmas, find the search box at the top of that page and add in “business” (Yes, let’s stick to “business”-related for now.) Find a moral dilemma that is descriptive (200 words or more) that is based on someone’s situation in their work or business. It may also be a situation that involves the person who is writing in some kind of business transaction or exchange. (To be clear, for now, we are staying away from super-social or purely personal issues, so NOT like “I’m in love with my best friend, should I tell them?” [smile] Right, NOT this—let’s stick to “business”-related for now.). (OK, you get it.) Also please check the discussion board and make sure no one else in the class has written on the Reddit post you have chosen.
Directions: Create a 450-word, approximately, discussion board post, that follows these five steps (including word counts):
In your first sentence, first explain in one sentence the topic of the dilemma you selected: (Something like, “For today’s post, I selected a dilemma about, . . . or that involves. . . .) Also say what the keywords to the post are, or what keywords you used, to find that post, and place a hyper-link to the reddit page within your first sentence so we can all look up that post. (60 words, approximately) . If you need help inserting the hyperlink, you can view the first 1 minute/ 40 seconds of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Grv2auP77M )
Briefly, go on to summarize the dilemma in your own words. This is where you can practice the skill of paraphrasing—your own words! Give the basics about the dilemma. (80 words, approximately)
Now tell what you find interesting about this dilemma, and what questions or red flags were being raised in your mind AS you were reading it. Tell what you like about HOW the person spoke about the dilemma—how you could see actual evidence of their worry, sincerity, humor, empathy, even their interesting writing style. You should put a few phrases (do not quote full sentences, but just short expressions, blended into your own sentence) from the post blended into your own commentary in this part of the post. (60 words, approximately)
And now for the ethics: This is the heart of your post: Choose one of the three ethical frameworks for decision-making (found in the handout “Three Ethical Frameworks,” see below) that you want to apply to this situation. Notice its distinct principles. You need to select and commit to dealing with at least two out of the three principles. Start a new paragraph—this will be your ethical reasoning paragraph. Use these guidelines to construct this important paragraph:
Start with a sentence something like, “Now, to speak to this person’s concern directly, I would reason it out this way, using the ____ framework for ethical reasoning.”
Write clearly to apply its principles to the situation—really doing a fine-tuned job of employing these principles in your reasoning. Get psychological and philosophical.
You might find it helpful to use expressions like, “What I would tell this person is this:. . . “ and directly speak to the person, using quote marks. If, at any point in the paragraph, you speak directly to the person, be sure to recommend the name of the specific ethical framework you are using and tell the person what else from the framework this person might also want to consider. (220 words, approximately).
Lastly, reflect on doing this exercise. How did using this test seem useful? Where do you think the test itself may fall short? Are there other issues in your life, or in our lives as a larger community, where you could see using this particular test again? Explain. (60 words, approximately) Don’t forget as well to include a reference to the Reddit thread you used by referring to this Course Menu reference: https://bbhosted.cuny.edu/webapps/blackboard/content/listContentEditable.jsp?content_id=_84494973_1&course_id=_2358175_1&mode=reset
Here is your necessary “Three Ethical Frameworks” handout:
Three Ethical Frameworks to Use with Help Me to be Honest Discussion Board Post.docx Three Ethical Frameworks to Use with Help Me to be Honest Discussion Board Post.docx – Alternative Formats
Comments from Customer
This is the message from the hyperlink:
Citing a Reddit post? Is that even legitimate research? Yes, it is, or can be, depending on how you use it, for the purposes of this course.
One of the takeaways of this course–which is a reading, writing, and research course–is that we encounter research “sources” all the time. The people whom we encounter can be research sources if we interview them. A graphic we find through a data organization can be analyzed and its insights integrated into a paragraph. A social media post can reveal a perspective that backs up perfectly a general observation we have made about our culture that we need and “everyday” type of support for.
So there will be tasks and assignments where either I encourage a look into Reddit or permit it when you see it as a creative step into research.
But if you use Reddit, like any source, you will have to “cite” it properly in the body of your paper and in your Works Cited list that goes with your paper. The same applies to when you use Reddit in a discussion board post.
Three Ethical Frameworks to Use with Help Me to be Honest Discussion Board Post #3
The Blanchard-Peale Framework
This test has as its start-point that we exist within structures and frameworks—organizational, legal, and psychological—that have internal logics (intentions) of their own, and that these offer signals to us as to how we should behave. It is an essentially a standpoint asking how we measure up to structures, expectations, and norms that are established for mainly beneficent purposes.
This framework was developed by Ken Blanchard and Norman Vincent Peale and appeared in The Power of Ethical Management.
The principle of legal and/or explicitly permitted: What are the government and/or institutional policies around this issue? If so, what is the intention of these policies—rightness, fairness, order, expense?—and which of these intentions does the action value, or not value? To what extent has the government or organization already anticipated that such possibly wrong action might occur, or such a predicament might arise, and what clear or implicit statements or measures have been put in place to address these kinds of matters?
