0
How to Think Through an Ethical Dilemma Fairly
A three-step AI prompt guide to a structured ethical analysis with competing considerations. Includes a worked example and practical checks.
0 comments7 views3 steps
Comments
A three-step AI prompt guide to a structured ethical analysis with competing considerations. Includes a worked example and practical checks.
Help me answer this question: How to Think Through an Ethical Dilemma Fairly Use this illustrative situation: You are considering whether to tell a friend an uncomfortable truth that could affect a shared project. The result I want is a structured ethical analysis with competing considerations. Start by helping me clarify facts and affected people.
Ask only the missing questions that would materially change your answer; otherwise state your assumptions and proceed with a concrete starting point. Explain why the first action fits this case, and distinguish supplied facts from suggestions. A framework can clarify judgment but does not remove uncertainty or replace relevant professional obligations.
Separate what you know from what you suspect and identify who may be affected. Ethical analysis can go wrong when the factual premise is unverified.
Before deciding how to speak, confirm whether the concern is supported and whether the friend can act on it. A rumor should not be treated as a proven problem simply because it creates a dramatic dilemma.
Continue our worked example: You are considering whether to tell a friend an uncomfortable truth that could affect a shared project. We have established the starting approach; now help me compare several ethical lenses. Keep the result focused on a structured ethical analysis with competing considerations, using the same facts and constraints rather than changing the scenario.
Give me a worked result I can adapt, not only a list of general tips. Explain the important choice and one limitation, and keep any invented example clearly illustrative. Use the earlier context rather than assuming details we have not established. A framework can clarify judgment but does not remove uncertainty or replace relevant professional obligations.
Consider likely consequences, duties or rights, and the character of the action. These lenses can highlight different concerns without automatically producing identical answers.
Consequences may favor preventing harm to the project, while duties emphasize honesty and confidentiality. A character-focused question asks how to act with courage and care rather than cruelty or avoidance.
Review the approach developed for this situation: You are considering whether to tell a friend an uncomfortable truth that could affect a shared project. Help me choose a proportionate action so I can use the result thoughtfully. I want to understand what to check, what could change the answer, and what to do next.
Show how to judge whether the approach is useful and how to revise it if the first attempt does not fit. Separate checks I should perform from results actually observed, and finish with a manageable next action. A framework can clarify judgment but does not remove uncertainty or replace relevant professional obligations.
Look for an option that addresses the concern while reducing unnecessary harm. State the uncertainty and remain open to correction.
A private, factual conversation may be more appropriate than a public accusation. Explain what you observed, ask for their perspective, and distinguish a request for clarification from a final judgment.
Comments 0
Share how you would use this prompt or suggest a useful improvement.