Four different popular frameworks for evaluating difficult decisions are described in the Science Learning Hub article: autonomy, consequentialism, virtue ethics, and rights and responsibilities. Additionally, it states that while there won’t always be a single right response, more insightful answers result from rigorous reasoning within a well-defined framework. The Markkula Center’s “Thinking Ethically” program has a direct connection to this. It begins with the process step of “get the facts” and then applies ethical lenses such as rights, justice, utilitarianism, virtue, and the common good. When combined, the two sources provide a method as well as a map. Markkula explains the first steps: take your time, collect information, make a list of interested parties, and determine your options. After that, Science Learning Hub provides a simple, four-part checklist for comparing those choices. Are people’s rights upheld? Do advantages outweigh disadvantages? Is there protection for autonomy? Do the behaviors align with fundamental values such as patience and honesty? The two texts’ overlap is significant because they both caution against pursuing a single “perfect” rule and instead advocate for open reasoning and common standards. That common criterion helps a group or class maintain fair and focused discussions. To put it briefly, the Science Learning Hub provides a basic set of lenses that most people can recall under pressure, while Markkula establishes the steps. Ethical decisions are more consistent and simpler to communicate to others when both are used.

Sources: https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/2146-frameworks-for-ethical-analysis

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making