My Ethical Framework: Bernard Lonergan And Robert Kegan

Vanessa Codorniz
November 27, 2015
Ethics
My Ethical Framework

In everyday experience one is likely to encounter ethical dilemmas. This paper presents one framework for working through any given dilemma. I have chosen to integrate three theories from Ruggerio Vicent, Bernard Lonergan and Robert Kegan. When making a deceison you must collabrate different views to come to a one conclusion. Ruggerio factors in different aspects that will take effect. Depending on which order of conciousness you are in by Kegan we can closely compare this with Ruggerio's theories also. As I continue I will closely describe the three theories with Kegan and how this will compare with Lonerga's theory combining the three. While Family,

culture, feelings of conciousness are factors that may influence our ethical decisions. The three basic critieria (Ruggerio) that brings all of the theories together are Obligantions, Moral Ideas and Consequences. Ruggerio describes the fundamental good as '' respect for persons '' When one is in the process of decision making ethically one shall demonstrate respect for persons by honoring relevant obligations and ideals and by producing favorable consequences.

Obligations are significant to the human action because it occurs directly or indirectly. While closing contributing with relationships we imply obligations. This restricts with our behavior, demans with something to do or may avoid us from doing it. The most obvious obligation is a formal agreement. A formal agreement can be described with obligation as a consent to a long term agreement such as a contract. Considering the person signing the agreement to ethically demand up to their promises. Let's talk moral ideas. Moral idea's is the aspect of excellence. Ruggerio describes this as a way of brining greater harmony within one's self and between self and others. Even with cultures identifying moral ideas differently we are able to relate one to another of practical actions. While the distinction between obligations and moral ideas aren't always clarified we strive to do the right thing and behave the distinction becomes. Moral reasoning is then mostly relegated to ex post facto attempts to justify already- formed moral verdicts. Recent empirical studies have also demonstrated that laypersons broadly share strikingly nuanced intuitions about justice across a wide variety of liability and punishment issues (Robinson et al. 2007), although the reasons for such judgments may be not con- sciously accessible (ibid, p. 1685). Nevertheless, the degree of cross-cultural agreement on intuitions of justice suggests that this effect is a robust one (ibid, p. 1681).
The reason behind this is for fairness, compassion, forgiveness and other moral ideas for personal standards. Lastly, it is consequeucnes that are benefical and or can be harmful effects resulting as a form of action or affect with the people involved. This may include even the person involved that is performing the action. As some may be physical other may also be emotional. Some may be intended by the person performing the act while other are intended.

When analyzing the criteria of the given set by Ruggerio we want to apply them thoughtfully on how we closely approach to accomplish ethical dilemmas. The first step taken is to take a close look into any circumstances that may alter the case. We want to study the case into detail to find any possible unanswered question. Sometimes you may have insufficent details – you want to speculate any possible anwers. Second, consider all perspectives and viewpoints. By identifying the criteria we take in part our obligations, moral ideals and consequences. Asking yourself, '' What are the consequeuces in this case ? '' Third, weighting each side of you're viewpoints or determining all possilbe course of action. Alternative that may be avaialble. Finally, your last step which is not to reject views but decide the most ethical action.

Avoiding error's to overgenerlaization with moral issues and anaylsis are double standard's, unwarranted assumptions, oversimplication and hasty conclusions. These error's are very critical because you do not object to another person's point of view. Based on our personal and professional roles we also have obligations to make amends, be grateful, improve ourselves, do good to others and avoid doing them harm. Double Standard is known as one set of judging case that may concern us or someone we identyify with. Evidence that be selectively or indifferent to serve upon our own interest. Commingting to a certain action is because we have choosen it ourselves. It may have been to avoid self-condemnation. Finding the error in double standard is in you're own moral reasoning. You need tto be alert for sitatuions in which you have a peronal emotional stake. The error with unwarrnated assumtions is taking too much for granted. You should do responsibly morally. You wan to take the position on in issue if it may be known for something different. Oversimplication is what simply matters. It is not objectionable nor is it a oversimplification. This helps communicate our judgement to others. Be sure to consider the relative importance of each and give preference to the more important one versus the one that is less important. Hasty conclusions is emeded as judgement before examinations. Lack of time to do a full analysis can lead to accepting first impressions. Preconceived notions and impressions are natural enough to encounter a case. There are additionl approaches you can take may vary such as thinking of yourself as two different people. You can be an idea producer and an idea evaluator.

Lonergan's four operations of consciousness is explained through Experience, Understanding, Judgement and Decision. He describes conciousness as a set approach that explains appropriation. A method of coming to know what you are doing when you are knowing. Lonergan as brings up intentionality which is also conciousness. It intends objects, if we hear something, see something or intend something. What is the objective? What is the understanding? These are with the four operations of consciousness. When in an experience you firstly use you're senses such as touch,taste,smell and sight and affect them with emotion of feeling such as joy, anger and desire. With experience you contribute you're own mental images and memory. You are able to store and retain from acitivity and experience shared with others. Your experience is part of the biological protcal. As human we can voluntarly acess memory and imagination. By understanding inisght in incooperated that cannot be compelled or forced nor can it be scheduled or planned. Inisght's occure in the ready minds. By wondering, it is a form of self discovery. Discovery is an unknown that can be known. The insight here is to know spontaneous grasp of the patterns in the data of experince. The ethi imperative for undetstnading is to be intelligant and create conditions where inisght is more likely. Judgement asks a qualitalivelt different set of questions. It seeks truth, verification by asking Is it so? Is it real? The jugement of fact is evidence,confirm, disconfirm the insight and the data of experience into fact. The ethical imperative in judgement is to be reasonble, to judge without evidence in unreasoble odubt and fail to judge when evidence is sifficent. Lastly is your decision. We must deliberate, have value and evaluate during decision because the ethical imperative here is to be reasonable.

Robert Kegan's order of mental complexity is based upon three big ideas.

Te first theory is Constructivism. Constructivism is known that human are meaning makers. We are not neutral with respect to the world. We actively interpret the world and make meaning of something. By interpreting images to mean something we compel and impose its meaningful use. As humans we look at three cause such a physical causes, psychological causes and spirtual cuases. The second thoery is on Development. While we evolve in mental complexity through out lives we have adaptive balances or stages of mental complexity. Starting at infacy to late adulthood. There are six order of conciousness which are zero to five. We will be discussing only he stages two through four. We make meaning different depending of which order of conciousness we are in. The two places of grow are slow or very slow. One will never move backwards. The last thoery is Holding Enviroment which consist of three components. The three components are confirmation,contradiction and continuty. Confirmation is described as holding on, support and encourgement. It appeals to our yearning for belonging. Contradiction is described as letting go, challenege and setting limits. It appeals to our yearning for agency,acheivement and autonomy. Continuty is described as staying out, remaining in place and being there. It appeals to our need for stability and predictability. '' A healthy holding enviroemnt provides an ingenious blen of support and challene and attends to the relationship between a persons mental capacity and the demands placed upon her by the cultural curriculum '' (Kegan;

1994)