Introduction
In many settings, including workplaces, local communities, places of worship, and academic fields, people often encounter numerous ethical dilemmas that require informed decision-making. To make an informed decision in a moral dilemma, one must explore the application of various virtuous theories and evaluate the moral controversies involved. Ethical dilemmas often compel a person to choose among multiple possible actions. This paper examines an ethical issue related to a new housing development project and applies utilitarianism and virtue ethics to identify the core moral controversy at its heart.
Background Information
This case study examines ethical issues within the local community of Stockton. The ethical issue concerns a new project proposed by the local government to build houses on a greenfield site. According to the local government, this new housing development project will help accommodate the growing community population and be affordable for low-income residents. While the community is doing well, recent reports indicate that about 16.8% of Stockton’s population is poor and cannot afford housing (Leathley, 2022). Therefore, this project will help meet the needs of a portion of the community that has always been forgotten.
Central Moral Controversy and an Ethical Question
Even though launching the new housing development project will also pose adverse impacts on the environment, as it will displace many endangered animal and plant species that have the site as their habitat, while the local government has approved this project, many community members have raised their concerns about the potential effects it will have on the environment. Therefore, the moral controversy in this case study is the conflict between providing affordable housing for low-income families and protecting the environment and its endangered inhabitants. This paper’s ethical question is: Should the local government proceed with the new housing development project, despite its potential environmental effects, to help low-income families?
Philosophy Reading Reflection
In a larger portion of his work, Kant focuses on the benefit of goodwill in determining the moral justification of any decision one makes. This can be evident in one of his excerpts: “A good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes, because of its fitness to attain some proposed end, but only because of its volition, that is, it is good in itself and, regarded for itself, is to be valued incomparably higher than all that could merely be brought about by it in favor of some inclination and indeed, if you will, of the sum of all inclinations” (Kant, 1997, p. 34).
As this excerpt continues, Kant highlights that a person’s goodwill often has inherent goodness in itself and focuses less on its achievements or impacts. He argues that people will always esteem goodwill above all else. Therefore, despite the achievements or consequences of a given action or decision, people will see and choose an act of goodwill.
In this case study, Kant’s argument highlights the influence of motivations and intentions on the housing development project. Kant makes it clear that people will always esteem goodwill above all else. The concept of goodwill compels the local government and community members in Stockton to consider the primary reason for introducing the new project. The concept will guide the analysis of whether the local government and other stakeholders pushing for the project have goodwill and have considered the relevant ethical implications and the danger it exposes the environment to.
Explanation of First Ethical Theory
Historical Background
Utilitarianism is the most relevant theory that will serve as the first in this case study. The utilitarian ethical theory can be traced back to two English economists and philosophers: John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham (Marseille & Kahn, 2019). These individuals developed the theory to answer the question: “What ought a person to do?” (Marseille & Kahn, 2019, p. 3). According to this theory, if a person’s action results in pleasure or happiness, it is considered right; conversely, if it leads to pain or unhappiness, it is considered wrong (Byskov, 2020). This theory focuses on the happiness of the person acting and the happiness of every individual it affects.
Core Principle
The central idea of utilitarianism is that only happiness or pleasure holds intrinsic value in human existence. According to Westacott (2019), the term “utilitarianism” originates from the concept of “utility,” which refers to the pursuit of happiness or pleasure. The theorists believed that happiness is the most valuable aspect people should consider (Westacott, 2019). Therefore, this theory asserts that an action is only right when it is focused on increasing happiness.
Application of the Ethical Principle
The ethical principle of utilitarianism applies differently to other moral questions than to the one in this case study. For instance, when considering the morality of lying, it can be judged right or wrong depending on the overall aim of human well-being (Marseille & Kahn, 2019). Lying can be right when it aims to increase people’s overall happiness and wrong when it causes sadness or pain.
Application of First Ethical Theory
Central Moral Controversy and Analysis of the Theory’s Core Principle
The central ethical conflict is whether the new housing project should be completed or terminated to conserve the endangered species on the land. On one side, the development offers a clear benefit: affordable housing for low-income families. On the other side, pursuing the project means destroying the natural environment and causing the displacement of endangered animal and plant species. Utilitarianism theory can be applied in this case study to examine the moral implications of making each decision.
As mentioned earlier, the core principle of this theory is that a decision will affect the happiness of both the actor and those affected by the action (Marseille & Kahn, 2019). An action is morally justifiable if it leads to people’s happiness and pleasure. The action is morally unjustifiable if it leads to unhappiness, pain, or sadness. This theory’s principle highlights why it is essential to consider the impacts of decisions and actions on the well-being of everyone in society.
Application of Core Principle
Someone using the core principles of the utilitarian approach would answer the ethical question of this case study by weighing the amount of happiness or pleasure gained from continuing or stopping the new house development project. Their decision will be based on its anticipated impact on society and the time required (Westacott, 2019). The case study’s ethical question is whether to continue the new house development project, stop it, conserve the environment, and protect endangered animal and plant species.
On the one hand, the housing development project will build more houses for low-income families, addressing a significant social issue in the community. On the other hand, the housing project will destroy the environment and displace endangered animal and plant species. However, based on the utilitarian principle of promoting society’s well-being, the housing development project is expected to bring happiness and pleasure to the community. Housing is a pressing issue in the community, affecting approximately 16.8% of its population. Meeting this urgent issue will bring happiness to the community.
Explanation and Application of the Second Ethical Theory
Core Principle
The second ethical theory considered for this case study is virtue ethics. Virtue ethics originates in Ancient Greek works such as those of Aristotle and Plato (Berg, 2020). Unlike utilitarianism, virtue ethics emphasizes the role of an individual’s virtue and character in decision-making when faced with a moral dilemma. The theory posits that a morally justifiable action is consistent with positive virtues and character traits, such as honesty, courage, and compassion (Berg, 2020). Instead of focusing on the need to fulfill an individual’s duty or make someone happy, this theory holds that an action must be virtuous.
Application of the Ethical Theory
This ethical theory can also be applied to the case study presented in this paper. When applying virtue ethics in this case study, it is essential to consider why cultivating environmental stewardship is important. According to Dacks et al. (2021), environmental stewardship is the responsible use and protection of the natural environment through activities that conserve and sustain ecosystem resilience while promoting people’s well-being. Based on this principle, the morally justifiable action is to prioritize the conservation of the environment and the protection of endangered species over continuing the new housing development.
Evaluation of First Ethical Theory Application
Answer to the Ethical Question
The ethical question in this case was whether it was morally justifiable to continue with the new housing development or to stop it and protect endangered species. Based on utilitarian theory, the morally justifiable decision in this case study is to proceed with the new housing development. As mentioned earlier, the utilitarian theory focuses on increasing overall happiness as a means to determine what is morally right. Therefore, when the urgent housing issue in Stockton is addressed, the community will be satisfied, and the action will be morally justifiable.
Comparison of the Ethical Theories
Utilitarianism theory and virtual ethics offer significantly different perspectives on answering the ethical question of new housing development. Utilitarianism favors continuing the new housing development, arguing that it maximizes the community’s overall happiness (Marseille & Kahn, 2019). Conversely, virtue ethics advocates for halting the project because it would result in environmental destruction and the displacement of endangered species (Berg, 2020). However, this analysis suggests virtue ethics is the more comprehensive framework, as it successfully integrates concern for environmental protection with the need to address the housing issue.
The Strength of the Application
When evaluating the strength of applying the two ethical theories, virtue ethics offers a more solid resolution to the housing problem in Stockton. As mentioned earlier, virtue ethics emphasizes that a person’s need to consider their virtues and character is crucial when deciding on a dilemma (Berg, 2020). This ethical theory promotes a more comprehensive perspective of people’s moral responsibilities, guiding them in making morally justifiable choices. Halbig (2020) notes that virtual ethics provides people with a framework for considering the well-being of individuals and the safety of the environment and its inhabitants. It puts a person in a position to make a choice based on what they deem right, guided by their virtues.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the new housing development project on a greenfield site in Stockton has raised a significant ethical dilemma. In the case study, the stakeholders involved must decide whether to continue with the project, address the community housing issue, or prioritize environmental protection. The utilitarian theory recommends the new Stockton housing project because it increases general happiness, whereas virtue ethics opposes the project, citing its potential for environmental harm and the displacement of endangered species.
Utilitarianism falls short because it fails to adequately account for the needs of endangered species. At the same time, virtual ethics offers a comprehensive approach to preserving the environment for a better future. Even though the virtual ethics theory offers a more robust solution to the social issue, combining it with utilitarianism will take people’s needs and the environment into account when deciding on the new housing development. This may include developing new housing or site alternatives that would benefit both the environment and people.
References
Berg, H. (2020). Virtue ethics and integration in evidence-based practice in psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 258.
Byskov, M. F. (2020). Utilitarianism and risk. Journal of Risk Research, 23(2), 259-270.
Dacks, R., McMillen, H., Heimuli, P., Kahaleua, K., Burgess, S., Giardina, C. P., Franscisco, K., & Ticktin, T. (2021). The important role of environmental stewardship groups in supporting human health and well-being. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 133.
Halbig, C. (2020). Virtue vs. virtue ethics. Zeitschrift Für Ethik Und Moralphilosophie, 3(2), 301-313.
Kant, I. (1997). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. (M. Gregor, Ed.) Cambridge University Press.
Leathley, A. (2022). Where are the most — and least — impoverished areas in Stockton? This map will show you. Recordnet.
Marseille, E., & Kahn, J. (2019). Utilitarianism and the ethical foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis in resource allocation for global health. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 14(1), 1-7.
Westacott, E. (2019). Three basic principles of utilitarianism, briefly explained. ThoughtCo.