Final answer:
Ethical dilemmas involving conflicting duties, such as the decision to report a coworker's ethical violation, require careful judgment to balance moral principles. The choice depends on factors like severity and consequences, and may involve prioritizing more pressing duties over others in accordance with the concept of prima facie duties.
Step-by-step explanation:
When addressing the question of whether to report a coworker who has violated ethical communication guidelines, the answer can depend on several factors, including the severity of the violation and the potential consequences of both reporting and not reporting the incident. Ethical decision-making often requires balancing different moral principles, such as honesty and non-maleficence (avoidance of harm). In situations where telling the truth could cause harm, or when one's duties conflict, ethical judgment becomes critical. One must weigh the significance and consequences of each action, considering both the immediate situation and the broader context, including the potential impact on trust and integrity within the organization.
In the example of a researcher collecting data unethically, this could adversely affect the reliability of the data, which in turn might lead to incorrect conclusions or harmful outcomes if used to inform policy or practice. The situation should be corrected by ensuring that the researcher adheres to ethical guidelines and that the data is collected in a manner that respects the rights and welfare of the community involved.
Similarly, when resolving a conflict between two perfect duties, such as never telling a lie and avoiding harming someone, one must exercise judgment. The philosopher W.D. Ross introduced the concept of prima facie duties, which are duties that are binding at first glance unless they conflict with a more pressing duty. In the case of conflicting duties, the individual must determine which duty is more pressing in the particular situation.