Moral Reasoning and Rhetoric: The Acceptability of Arguments About AIDS‐Related Dilemmas¹

Abstract

The disease AIDS has given rise to a host of social dilemmas. Here we explore the rhetoric that affects people's reasoning about actions taken in the face of such dilemmas. We presented a group of 514 undergraduates with vignettes depicting dilemmas having to d o with the distribution of sexually explicit educational material to high school students and with the forced HIV blood testing of factory workers. Subjects rated the acceptability of arguments for and against courses of action taken by persons in the vignettes. The arguments embodied concerns typical of moral reasoning at each of Kohlberg's six stages. We found that the acceptability of stagetypical moral arguments about AIDS-related dilemmas depends on both the dilemma at hand and the course of action being argued for. We argue that knowledge of how people respond to different kinds of moral arguments concerning AIDSrelated dilemmas is valuable for informing efforts to advocate humane and lifesaving policies to particular audiences.

Moral Reasoning and Homosexuality: The acceptability of arguments about lesbian and gay issues

“…Kahn, 1997); and AIDS (e.g. Schwalbe & Staples, 1992), a moral developmental framework does not appear to have been previously used specifically to explore reasoning about lesbian and gay issues. Like reasoning about AIDS issues (e.g.…”

“…Like reasoning about AIDS issues (e.g. see Schwalbe & Staples, 1992), people presumably draw on some moral principles to guide their thinking about lesbian and gay rights. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to explore preferences for different types of moral arguments when thinking about moral dilemmas involving lesbian and gay issues, with a view to establishing the extent to which Stage 6 (or human rights) reasoning is employed.…”

“…Schwalbe & Staples, 1992), a structured measure of cognitive moral reasoning was employed in this study. Numerous psychological studies on moral development have been published exploring moral reasoning using well-established measures such as the Moral Judgement Interview (MJI) (see Colby and Kohlberg, 1987) or the Defining Issues Test (DIT) (Rest, 1979).…”

“…Following Lind & Wakenhut's (1985) and Schwalbe & Staples' (1992) work, the hypothetical moral dilemmas employed in this study took the form of vignettes, the first concerning student protest around the failure of a university to institute a lesbian and gay issues awareness programme, and the second, employment discrimination against a gay man.…”

“…Schwalbe & Staples, 1992;see also Lind & Wakenhut, 1985 for a theoretical discussion around the benefits of this method).…”