Capt. Jan W. Whiteley, CAP
It may be unusual to begin a paper such as this with a military-style Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF) statement. However I did so here because it was in keeping with the way that I pursued my contemplations of (and organized my thoughts about) the three primary ethical theories discussed in the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) Chaplain Corps College Advanced Character Development Course:1 Deontological, Utilitarian, and Virtues. The Bottom Line Up Front: The Virtue-based ethical framework is the superior choice for Civil Air Patrol Character Development programs because it offers the strongest philosophical foundation for continuous personal improvement, the broadest application of principles to the range of life experiences, and the most personal ownership of an overarching moral code.
I treated this BLUF as a hypothesis to be tested – and the choice to test the Virtues framework was a very deliberate one. During my service as a Character Development Instructor, I have had mentoring sessions, participated in online courses and talks, read Chaplain Corps web resources, and studied the Headquarters notes on the monthly Character Development lessons. All of these sources directly or indirectly painted a persuasive picture of the value of the Virtues framework in the CAP organization in general and Character Development in particular.
However, it was not until the Advanced Character Development Course and my study of CAPP 40-802 that I keyed in on other frameworks such as the Utilitarian. I found the “comparison and contrast” discussions to be very useful in advancing my understanding.
As I reviewed the slides, class recordings, and my notes, I did so with an eye to three questions. These questions were not explicitly stated during the class presentations, but emerged for me as a result of our collective dialogue. The questions are:
- Does the stated or implied power of this framework lie primarily in an internal or external source?
- How efficiently and effectively can the underlying principles of this framework be extrapolated by individuals to a wide range of life experiences – particularly those that are complex or highly nuanced?
- How much opportunity does this framework provide to individuals to continuously improve themselves and embrace new levels of personal excellence?
In the Deontological framework, the power (or source of authority) is a set of rules that is largely extrinsic to the individual. While an individual may wholeheartedly embrace and thus internalize the rules, the rules did not originate with the individual.
To be fair, the degree to which rules can be applied to various life circumstances depends on a variety of factors. One key factor is the clarity, practicality, and degree of flexibility of the rules themselves. Another is the perceived soundness of the rules. This is a highly subjective factor that could involve both individuals and group wrestling with the implications and relative importance of the rules, particularly as they related to social structure and individual/group behavior. If the rules are perceived to be Divine in origin, there might be considerable reluctance on the part of both individuals and institutions to consider “bending” or tailoring the rules.
Finally, I would argue that those using a Deontological framework would not particularly concerned with personal growth and development – unless one thought in terms of an individual becoming a more faithful adherent to the rules or more skilled at executing them for the benefit of oneself or others. Once again, however, much would depend on the content of the rules set. For this reason, the Deontological approach would not seem to be well suited to the concept of Character Development as it’s defined and practiced in the CAP.
In the Utilitarian model, as explained in CAPP 40-803, “An act is right if it provides the greatest good (utility) for the greatest number. Using this ethical system, an act is right when the good results (consequences) of an act outweigh the bad.” From this definition (and the comments made in class), I concluded that the source of authority for the Utilitarian framework is primarily external. “The greatest number” could relate to the players on a relatively small stage, such as a town or local business – or it could involve the populations of a nation, continent, or planet. Individual or collective authority figures would be required to determine and dictate just what that greatest good for the greatest number would be – and I find that prospect chilling for a number of social and spiritual reasons.
In the Utilitarian framework, I see little room for a meaningful personal extrapolation of principles to individual life circumstances, and no reward for doing so – unless a case could be made that this new approach better served the greatest number.
Finally, the authors of CAPP 40-80 pointed out that Utilitarianism focuses on what makes an act “right”.4 This focus does not seem to promote the pursuit of personal growth and development (an activity that appears to be more centered in the concept of the “good”5). For that, and the other reasons stated, the Utilitarian framework does not seem well suited to CAP Character Development efforts.
In the Virtues framework, I find a comfortable space for a consideration of what the authors of CAPP 40-80 call a “complete approach to morality”. “A complete morality, then, should address both issues: what makes a person or goal good, and what makes a particular act right.”6 . While those using the Virtues framework place a high value on the good acts that people do as part of their social roles, they place a premium on what makes a person good.
This emphasis on “goodness” encourages individuals to fuel and take ownership of their own self-discovery and self-improvement efforts. The lens of a Virtue-based approach can be used to examine any life issue; time-tested “transcendent” values can provide a reliable set of flexible guidelines that CAP members can use throughout their lives to pursue excellence in a variety of personal and organizational settings. For this reason, I believe that the Virtues framework is the approach that is most compatible with the current goals of the CAP Character Development program and should be used in future Character Development Programs.
I have appreciated this opportunity to more closely examine the Virtues-based approach. It is most in keeping with my personal values – but I firmly believe that all premises should be periodically challenged and refined as necessary.