1.9 Entry table 2  (Page 9/10)

Pitfalls of the harm/beneficence test

1. “Paralysis of Analysis" comes from considering too many consequences and not focusing only on those relevant to your decision.
2. Incomplete Analysis results from considering too few consequences. Often it indicates a failure of moral imagination which, in this case, is the ability to envision the consequences of each action alternative.
3. Failure to compare different alternatives can lead to a decision that is too limited and one-sided.
4. Failure to weigh harms against benefits occurs when decision makers lack the experience to make the qualitative comparisons required in ethical decision making.
5. Finally, justice failures result from ignoring the fairness of the distribution of harms andbenefits. This leads to a solution which may maximize benefits and minimize harms but still give rise to serious injustices in the distribution of these benefits and harms.

Reversibility test

1. Set up the test by (i) identifying the agent, (ii) describing the action, and (iii) identifying thestakeholders and their stakes.
2. Use the stakeholder analysis to identify the relations to be reversed.
3. Reverse roles between the agent (you) and each stakeholder: put them in your place (as the agent) andyourself in their place (as the one subjected to the action).
4. If you were in their place, would you still find the action acceptable?

Cross checks for reversibility test (these questions help you to check if you have carried out the reversibility test properly.)

• Does the proposed action treat others with respect? (Does it recognize their autonomy or circumventit?)
• Does the action violate the rights of others? (Examples of rights: free and informed consent, privacy, freedom ofconscience, due process, property, freedom of expression)
• Would you recommend that this action become a universal rule?
• Are you, through your action, treating others merely as means?

Pitfalls of the reversibility test

• Leaving out a key stakeholder relation
• Failing to recognize and address conflicts between stakeholders and their conflicting stakes
• Confusing treating others with respect with capitulating to their demands (“Reversing withHitler”)
• Failing to reach closure, i.e., an overall, global reversal assessment that takes into account all the stakeholdersthe agent has reversed with.

Steps in applying the public identification test

• Set up the analysis by identifying the agent, describing the action, and listing the key values or virtues at play in the situation.
• Association the action with the agent.
• Describe what the action says about the agent as a person. Does it reveal him or her as someone associated with a virtue or a vice?

Alternative version of public identification

• Does the action under consideration realize justice or does it pose an excess or defect of justice?
• Does the action realize responsibility or pose an excess or defect of responsibility?
• Does the action realize reasonableness or pose too much or too little reasonableness?
• Does the action realize honesty or pose too much or too little honesty?
• Does the action realize integrity or pose too much or too little integrity?