Nobody gets everything.
Mateo and Jordy cross-check original sources at a white desk.
Which part of the decision is doing the most work in your reasoning?
Peacock: The Good Place
The Good Place uses comedy and a fictional afterlife to explore becoming a better person. Our campus example uses that premise to examine ethical choices; it is not a legal test.
Open the original referenceFull episodes may require a subscription and regional availability; the authored exercise is self-contained.
Dinner has become a debate about the next event.
Everybody can name a benefit. Who can name the cost?
Hear what matters to each person. Choose a question. Notice what their answer adds, then check it against the case materials.
Gia
21, trying to keep the event affordable
“The cheaper option gets more people in. I keep coming back to that.”
Ask Gia
What does the cheaper option make harder?
Gia “It means a less convenient time and more volunteer setup. The saving is real, but so is the work being moved onto people.”
What to check nextName who gains, who does extra work and whose participation changes.
What would make you rethink it?
Gia “If the people we wanted to include could not attend, or the volunteers could not realistically do it. I need to ask rather than guess.”
What to check nextState a condition that would change your preferred option.
Anika
16, balancing rehearsal and getting home
“I like the cheaper ticket. I might not be able to stay for the later finish.”
Ask Anika
Are you asking the whole plan to revolve around you?
Anika “No. I want the group to count the effect instead of saying nobody loses. Then we can look for an adjustment.”
What to check nextMake the concern visible without treating one person’s preference as the entire answer.
Could we compare the options differently?
Anika “Try both the overall benefit and whether the process treats people fairly. I want to know what our favorite answer leaves out.”
What to check nextUse two ethical lenses and explain the trade-off that remains.
Two people to hear from. Start with either one.
Put their perspectives together
An honest choice can have a downside. Explain why you prefer it, who bears the cost and what you would do to reduce that cost.
A person’s account explains their perspective. It still needs checking where it makes a factual claim.
Bring a companion into this.
Six ways to get unstuck
DudaFind the question
Which counterexample makes you revise a criterion or defend it more carefully?
Try your first takePautaCheck who decides
Which program rules are established? Why is an ethical preference not automatically a legal requirement?
Open the source fileLupaFollow the evidence
Separate known capacity from assumptions about need, fairness or likely effects.
Check the originalOndaConsider the people
How would you hear from people who do not receive a place and respond to their concerns?
Consider another viewNexoLook at the bigger picture
What does each allocation method treat as the problem, and what does it leave unresolved?
Read the explanationVozMake a next move
Recommend how an invented program should allocate ten places among thirty students. Compare two approaches, explain your criteria and name who could be disadvantaged.
Build your responseFollow the question.
Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center offers several lenses, including consequences, rights, fairness, the common good, character, and care. These lenses can reveal different concerns rather than producing an automatic score. When allocating a limited campus resource, identify who benefits, who bears costs, whose voice is missing, and what principle you are applying. A reasoned answer can acknowledge a trade-off. Ethical justification and legal permission are related questions, but they are not identical.
A choice can help someone and still create a cost for someone else.
The Good Place makes ethical arguments feel personal because they are. In your own decision, start with the people affected, the options you actually have and the facts you still need.
The Markkula Center framework offers several ethical lenses, including consequences, rights, justice, care and the common good. These lenses can draw attention to different concerns. They do not work like a points calculator that produces one automatic answer. Explain which concern matters in this situation and why. A lawful choice can still deserve ethical scrutiny, and a sincere intention does not establish that the outcome is fair.
- Ethical lens
- A way to examine what a decision values or overlooks.
- Trade-off
- A choice involving competing benefits or costs.
- Consequence
- An effect of a choice, including unintended effects.
The Good Place hace personales los argumentos éticos porque lo son. En tu propia decisión, identifica a las personas afectadas, las opciones reales y los hechos que todavía necesitas.
El marco del Centro Markkula ofrece perspectivas como consecuencias, derechos, justicia, cuidado y bien común. Cada una puede destacar preocupaciones diferentes. No es una calculadora que produzca una respuesta automática. Explica qué preocupación importa en esta situación y por qué. Una decisión legal todavía puede merecer un examen ético, y una buena intención no demuestra que el resultado sea justo.
- Perspectiva ética
- Forma de examinar qué valora o pasa por alto una decisión.
- Tensión entre opciones
- Decisión con beneficios o costos que compiten.
- Consecuencia
- Efecto de una decisión, incluidos los no previstos.
Your club has ten seats at a free workshop and thirty interested students. Which approach can you defend?
Choose an approach. You can explore every response.
Your turn. Make it useful.
Recommend how an invented program should allocate ten places among thirty students. Compare two approaches, explain your criteria and name who could be disadvantaged.
Before you call it done: Can another person understand your reasons and challenge an assumption without needing to agree with the outcome?
How the seven fields work together here
These questions shape the same assignment. Work through them in plain language; you don’t need seven separate essays.
- Public relations
- How would you hear from people who do not receive a place and respond to their concerns? The idea behind this
- Communication strategy
- Can you explain the criteria before announcing winners, rather than justify them afterward? The idea behind this
- Law and legal concepts
- Which program rules are established? Why is an ethical preference not automatically a legal requirement? The idea behind this
- Policy and policy studies
- What does each allocation method treat as the problem, and what does it leave unresolved? The idea behind this
- Education and learning
- Which counterexample makes you revise a criterion or defend it more carefully? The idea behind this
- Journalism and reporting
- Separate known capacity from assumptions about need, fairness or likely effects. The idea behind this
- Creativity
- Prototype two allocation explanations. Test whether readers can identify the trade-off and how to question it. The idea behind this
The research behind this case
These are our teaching applications of the ideas below. For the rule or factual claim itself, use this case’s source file.
What’s the problem represented to be?
Carol Bacchi. Author’s explanation of a policy-analysis approach.
Examine the view of the problem built into a proposed solution, including its assumptions and omissions. Question your own proposal, too.
Keep in mind: Our entry questions adapt part of WPR. They are not the complete approach or a substitute for evidence about an option’s effects.
Read the original sourceReflective inquiry
John Dewey, 1910. Foundational text: How We Think, chapter 1.
Reconsider a belief by examining the reasons supporting it and the conclusions that follow from it.
Keep in mind: This is a foundation for our revision tasks, not evidence that this particular app improves learning outcomes.
Read the original sourceMake it specific.
Write a 150-word decision note defending one option, identifying its strongest objection, and proposing one revision.
Make the disagreement more useful.
- Choose two realistic options and identify who may gain or lose.
- Examine both using two ethical lenses, including the option you prefer.
- Explain your choice, its cost and what would make you reconsider.
How you might tell a friend
I prefer this option, but I can name who carries the cost. Here is why I still think it is defensible, and what I would change.
Una forma de decirlo en español
Prefiero esta opción, pero puedo reconocer quién asume el costo. Esta es mi razón y esto es lo que revisaría.
Use your own voice. Keep the meaning, the evidence and the limits.
Where this example applies
All three choices have defensible concerns; avoid a simplistic ‘correct morality’ score. Ethical lenses are educational tools, not binding legal rules.
The cultural reference starts a question. The other sources support the explanation.
Open the source file.
1Peacock: The Good Place
Official premise and episodes involving ethical learning.
Markkula Center: Ethical Decision Making
Original institution’s ethical framework; multiple lenses and distinction from law.
Sources checked September 23, 2026. General education; no independent expert review is claimed. Source standards