Ethical Decision Making During Disasters

• Authors: Ján Kalajtzidis
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Neither in theory nor in practice does there exist a single model of decision making. It is very difficult to identify a model, or models, which would be most useful during and after a disaster. Within the disaster timeframe (a difficult and complex situation), specific moral dilemmas arise. All the decision making theories tend to be associated with different assumptions about human nature, the quality of the decisions made and the manner in which they are made. Different assumptions may result in different tools being used and subsequently different consequences. The paper will provide a general introduction to the ethical decision making model, and will suggest two ways in which decisions in ethics might be made. The paper will try to deepen the discussion, and suggest answers to questions such as which type of ethical decision making is better in a specific situation such as a disaster? Is there any need to use a different decision making model (from an ethical point of view) in a disaster than in another event? Nonetheless, the article does not provide explicit solutions to these questions, since providing them would require further investigation than is the aim of this paper.

Keywords

EN

ethics; disaster; decision making; rational; intuitional

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Human Affairs
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 26
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 18-25

Dates

published

2016-01-01

online

2015-12-30

Contributors

author

Ján Kalajtzidis

• Institute of Ethics and Bioethics, Faculty of Arts, University of Prešov, 17 Novembra 1, SK-08078 Prešov, Slovakia

References

• Almond, B. (1998). Applied ethics. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 415-421). London & New York: Routledge.
• Foot, P. (2002). Virtues and vices and other essays in moral philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Greene, D. J. (2002). The terrible, horrible, no good, very bad truth about morality and what to do about it. Princeton: Princeton University.
• Greene, D. J. (2014). Beyond point-and-shoot morality: Why cognitive (neuro) science matters for ethics. Ethics, 124(4), 695-726.[WoS][Crossref]
• Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgement. Psychological review, 108(4), 814-834.
• Kalajtzidis, J. (2013). Ethics of social consequences as a contemporary consequentilist theory. Ethics & Bioethics, 3(3-4), 159-171.
• Kachra, A., & Schnietz, K. (2008). Decision-making models. In R. W. Kolb (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business ethics and society (pp. 554-557). Thousand Oaks: SAGE publications.
• Lahidji, R. (2004). Lessons learned. In Large-scale disasters: Lessons learned (pp. 9-25). Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/futures/globalprospects/40867519.pdf#page=13&zoom=auto,-248,414
• Leoni, B., Radford, T., & Schulman, M. (2011). Disaster through a different lens. Behind every effect, there is a cause. Geneva: UNISDR. Retrieved from http://www.unisdr.org/files/20108_mediabook.pdf
• Malik, K. (2014). The quest for a moral compass: A global history of ethics. London: Atlantic Books.
• Reuell, P. (2013, November 25). Deep pragmatism as a moral engine. Harvard psychologist describes a nuanced approach to conflict in new book. Harvard gazette. Retrieved from http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2013/11/deep-pragmatism-as-a-moral-engine/
• Singer, P. (2005). Ethics and intuitions. The Journal of Ethics, 9(3-4), 331-352.[Crossref]
• Singer, P. (2009). The life you can save: Acting now to end world poverty. New York: Random House.
• Thomson, J. J. (1985). The trolley problem. The Yale Law Journal, 94(6), 1395-1415.
• Weber, J. (2008). Ethical decision making. In R. W. Kolb (Ed.), Encyclopedia of business ethics and society (pp. 778-781). Thousand Oaks: SAGE publications.
• Withanaarachchi, J., & Setunge, S. (2014). Influence of decision making during disasters and how it impacts a community. In R. R. Rapp & W.Harland (Eds.), The Proceedings of the 10th International conference of the international institute for infrastructure resilience and reconstruction (pp. 176-188). Indiana: Purdue University.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/humaff-2016-0003