Writing@CSU

Writing Guides

Understanding the Rhetoric of Research
 
Writing@CSU Home Page | Writing Guides | Rhetoric of Research

Some Final Thoughts on Ethics

Back Back to Ethics

There are no absolute prescriptions for "ethical" conduct in the presentation of research, but researchers still have to consider appropriate codes, recommendations, and stories of other researchers where they apply. Ethical considerations must be applied on a case-by-case basis. In "Aristotle, Foucault and Progressive Phronesis: Outline of an Applied Ethics for Sustainable Development," Bent Flyvjerg takes a "contextual" approach in Case Study research as an example of how to address the problem of making generalized knowledge claims in social sciences. Social science research should use "practice-guiding [methodologies]…enabling us to find out what is desirable so we can choose and act wisely. Social science is a kind of applied ethics…" 1

Ethical Arguments that Arise in Case Study Research

If a universally applicable ethical theory exists that guides Case Study methodology, it might look something like the Aristotelian model for triangulating levels of analysis in scientific observation. This pluralistic approach addresses epistemological (How do we know what we know?), technical (What is being produced?), as well as practical (Phronesis) concerns (practices that are good or bad, i.e., questions regarding research conduct). 2 Aristotle's Phronesis promotes an ethical research that we can translate into more user-friendly language.

Bent Flyvjerg engages this idea, addressing the question of "whether or not social sciences can establish general knowledge claims" (epistemology.) He believes research in the social sciences should "rely on the study and analysis of particular cases" (technical) (what is being produced) as opposed to relying upon generalized theory. Flyvjerg's case study methodology is "contextual" and promotes a type of Phronesis that considers

  • "particular and context-dependent" over the universal
  • concrete and practical over the theoretical
  • "power of example"
  • relationship

Most importantly, Phronesis (practices that are good or bad, i.e., questions of conduct) should posit questions concerning values, power, closeness, minutiae, practices, concrete case studies, context, how-questions, narrative/history, actor/structure, and dialogue.

For more information on this particular methodology read:

Flyvbjerg, Bent. "Aristotle, Foucault and Progressive Phronesis: Outline of an Applied Ethics for Sustainable Development," in Applied Ethics: A Reader, Eds. Earl R. Winkler and Jerrold R. Coombs, (Oxford: UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell, 1993, 11-27.

If you are interested in doing case study, this book represents a collection of essays by some principle contributors to the field of Applied Ethics with examples from Critical Literary Theory, Scientific Knowledge, Discourse Ethics, Consensus Formation in the Public Domain, etc. (Bibliography at end of this section.)

What are some ethical theories that are relevant to Case Study research?

Ethical Theory: Cultural Relativism

"Morality differs in every society, and is a convenient term for socially approved habits."-Ruth Benedict, Patterns of Culture (1934)

The basic argument from "Cultural Relativism," as outlined by James Rachels in Elements of Moral Philosophy is as follows:

    1. Different societies have different moral codes.
    2. There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another.
    3. The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is merely one among many.
    4. There is no "universal truth" in ethics-that is, there are no moral truths that hold for all peoples at all times.
    5. The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is, if the moral code of a society says that a certain actions is right, then that action is right, at least within that society.
    6. It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the conduct of other peoples. We should adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures. 3

 

 Rachels finds that this argument is not plausible. Taking the form of argument for Cultural Relativism we are encouraged to believe that:

    1. Different cultures have different moral codes.
    2. Therefore, there is no objective "truth" in morality. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.

Other sources for Cultural Relativity who defend the position:

    1. Ruth Benedict Patterns of Culture (New York: Pelican, 1946)
    2. William Graham Sumner, Folkways (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1906)
    3. Kai Nielsen "Ethical Relativism and Facts of Cultural Relativity," Social Research, vol. 33(19660), pp. 531-551.

Ethical Theory: Simple Subjectivism

Take any action allow'd to be vicious: Wilful murder, for instance. Examine it in all lights, and see if you can find that matter of fact, or real existence, which you call vice….You can never find it, till you turn your reflexion into your own breast, and find a sentiment of disapprobation, which arises in you, toward this action. Here is a matter of fact; but 'tis the object of feeling, not reason.

David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1740)

The basic idea behind Ethical Subjectivism (as argued by James Rachels.)

"X is morally acceptable"

"X is right"

"X is good" all mean: "I (the speaker)

"X ought to be done" approve of X"

Similarly:

"X is morally unacceptable"

"X is wrong"

"X is bad" all mean "I (the speaker)

"X ought not to be done" disapprove of X"

The argument against Simple Subjectivism:

    1. If Simple Subjectivism is correct, then each of us is infallible in our moral judgments, at least so long as we are speaking sincerely.
    2. However, we are not infallible. We may be mistaken, even when we are speaking sincerely.
    3. Therefore, Simple Subjectivism cannot be correct.

Other readings on Ethical Subjectivism:

C. L. Stevenson, Facts and Values (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963)

C. L. Stevenson, Ethics and Language (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944)

G. E. Moore, Ethics (London: Oxford University Press, 1912)

 

NOTES

1 Flyvbjerg, Bent. (1993). "Aristotle, Foucault and Progressive Phronesis: Outline of an Applied Ethics for Sustainable Development" Applied Ethics. Winkler, Earl R. and Coombs, Jerrold R. (Eds.) Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell, 11-27. See Bent Flyvbjerg (1989): "Socrates Didn't Like the Case Method, Why Should You?" in Hans F. Klein, ed.: Case Method Research and Application, Needham, Mass. See also the excellent analysis of this point in Alisdair MacIntyre (19770): "Epistemological Crises, Dramatic Narrative and the Philosophy of Science," Monist, vol. 60.

2 Flyvbjerg, 11-27.

3 Rachels, James. (1993). The Elements of Moral Philosophy, Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 18-19.

Commentary by Beverly S. Hotard, Fall 1998

Copyright © 1993-2009 Colorado State University and/or this site's authors, developers, and contributors. Some material displayed on this site is used with permission.