Values-BasedDecision Making

Va lues -based decision making(VBDM) has become acatch-phrase in Reconstruc-

tionist circles, reflecting a desire todevelop an orderly and valid processfor individuals and groups to decideupon their policies, procedures andbehavior. The need for a system asself-consciously considered asVBDM grows out of several realities.Most Jews no longer consider them-selves to be bound by halakha, andwill not simply accept the opinion ofa rabbi. Indeed, most liberal rabbisdo not consider themselves bound bythe decisions of the rabbis' rabbi.

Furthermore, most Jews know theyare living in a society that does notreflect an ethical orientation withwhich they fully agree. The two mostobvious ideologies in America todayare those of the Christian Right andthe materialistic hedonism purveyedby the media and advertising. MostJews are seeking an approach closerto their own moral outlook, an out-look partly shaped by their Jewishbackgrounds. VBDM provides a wayof thinking through and expressingour commitments, allowing us to cre-

BY DAVID A. TEUTSCH

ate ground to stand on somewherebetween the halakha and the NewYork Times. It has been used withinthe Reconstructionist movement fortwenty years and is most recently em-bodied in the new guide to Jewishpractice, the first experimental sec-tion o f which was recently pub-lished.*

Decision Making Process

Many of those who talk aboutVBDM, however, do not recognizethat i t involves the application ofmany other criteria besides valuesalone. In fact, employing values oc-curs nearly at the end of VBDM pro-cess. A typical VBDM process con-tains the following steps:

1. Determine facts, alternative ac-tions and their outcomes.2. Examine relevant scientific andsocial scientific approaches to under-standing these.*David Teutsch, A Guide to Jewish Practice— Introduction; Attitudes, Values and Be-liefs; Kashrut (Reconstructionist Rabbini-cal College Press, 2000).

David A. Teutsch is the President of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Collegeand Editor-in-Chief of the Kol Haneshamah prayerbook series.

22 • Spring 2001 T h e Reconstructionist

3. Consider the historical and con-temporary context, including thehistory and rationales of Jewish prac-tice.4. Look for norms that might excludesome actions.5. Assemble and weigh relevant atti-tudes, beliefs and values.6. Formulate decision alternatives.7. Seek consensus (if a group is de-ciding).8. Make the decision.

VBDM has its roots in the Brit-ish-American tradition of moral phi-losophy that sees our lives as subjectto a complex series of facts and con-cerns that cannot be reduced to a fewvery broad principles from whicheverything else can be deduced. Oneexample of the broad-principle ap-proach is the work of Immanuel Kantand such successors as John Rawls.The Kantian school attempts to de-rive all conduct from such principlesas the categorical imperative, whichstates that we should only do thingsthat would benefit people i f every-one did them. Other people use theGolden Rule ("Do unto others") as abroad principle.

One problem with moral philoso-phies that derive ethical systems fromjust a few core principles is that theydo not capture the richness and com-plexity of most people's moral con-cerns. How do I apply the GoldenRule, for example, to the question ofeuthanasia for someone whose beliefsand values are totally different frommy own? For a decision-making sys-tem to work in real life, it must work

The Reconstructionist

in a cultural context that reflects thethicket o f our moral experience,which is a tangle of beliefs and atti-tudes, rights and norms, obligations,values and practices.

First Principles

Systems that start from a few ba-sic principles (sometimes called "firstprinciples") are difficult to interpretand apply — fatal flaws if non-phi-losophers are to use them. When weapply the Golden Rule to end-of-lifeissues, we need to explore what wewant for ourselves, and why, and howthe other person differs in what thatperson would want and why. Thenwe would need criteria for exploringthe legitimacy of these distinctions invalues, attitudes and practices. Wewould also need to weigh how all thisshould affect the application of theGolden Rule.

For example, a Catholic believesthat only God should take a life. I f Idisagree, how does that affect thedecision I need to make regardingthat person? Clearly the outcomesin different cases will vary person toperson because considerations farbeyond the Golden Rule would haveto be brought to bear.

As for euthanasia, applying theGolden Rule usually involves manyother moral considerations whichshape the decision maker's thinkingwhether or not that person is con-scious of them. Unless these moralconsiderations are examined in theirfull complexity, the legitimacy of theconclusion is undermined.

Spring 2001 • 23

Understanding the Context

VBDM takes for granted that gooddecisions reflect consideration of thecontext in which they are made. Thatcontext is made up of political, eco-nomic, social and techno-scientificfactors over which individuals andsmall groups often have little control.The context is also cultural in thebroad sense (e.g. American, Jewish,Reconstructionist) and in the narrowsense (the culture of a congregation,family, or organization; the web ofsuch cultures within which an indi-vidual lives).

Sometimes people divide decisionsinto moral ones and ritual ones. Butvirtually all decisions have a moralcomponent. For example, the deci-sion about whether to keep kosher,and i f so, where and how, raises is-sues that touch on ecology, kindnessto animals, and the centrality of Jew-ish community. So while issues anddecisions may also have aesthetic andprudential components that are notmoral, they virtually always have amoral component as well. The deci-sion-making method can stay largelythe same.

Thus the best approach to fooddistribution in a drought-strickenAfrican nation with poor transpor-tation and communication systemswill differ considerably from the bestmethod in an American city. This il-lustrates that the moral dimension todecisions exists alongside an array ofprudential concerns. These pruden-tial concerns need to be clarified atthe first stage of VBDM because they

provide the required context for de-cision making. Determining thefacts, possible courses of action, andtheir costs and consequences providesknowledge needed to make ethicaldecisions. Skipping this step oftencreates acrimony and confusion.

Universal and Particular

Once the facts and consequencesunderlying a major decision havebeen established, it is helpful to em-ploy the insights of relevant academicdisciplines. Depending on the deci-sion, this might entail consideringthe issues from the perspectives ofanthropology, medicine, psychology,the sciences and other fields. Thisprocess is likely not only to shape theunderstanding of the decision maker.It will often help in the discovery ofunselfconsciously held beliefs andassumptions that shape decisionmaking. Those beliefs and assump-tions might be about human nature,or expected community conduct, orthe reliability of information or com-mitment-based action, or dozens ofother areas.

All o f this information must beplaced in its cultural context. Wedon't make decisions that are valid forall people in all places. We make de-cisions that are sensible for a certaintime, place and group of people. Butaren't there some rules that are uni-versal? I t may be true that undersome circumstances one can legiti-mately kill — for example, in self-defense — but isn't it the case thatone should never murder? Jewish tra-

24 • Spring 2001 T h e Reconstructionist

dition accepts this as a universal rule,which is what a norm is. Such normsrequire some actions and forbid oth-ers, and they guide us at the extremesof conduct. The Ten Command-ments contains many norms. VBDMonly operates away from these ex-tremes because our conduct at theextremes is regulated by norms. Inother words, VBDM operates withinthe areas not determined by norms.

These norms operate in conso-nance with our underlying attitudes.For example, one fundamental Jew-ish teaching is that human beings arecreated b'tzelem Elohim, in the imageof God. That supports the belief thateach of us has infinite worth. Thisbelief supports the norm that forbidsmurder. The attitudes and beliefs wehave also support our values.

Moral Building Blocks

When our attitudes, beliefs,norms, values and practices are inharmony with each other, they aremutually reinforcing. Since we oftenabsorb these moral building blocksunselfconsciously, absorbing one ofthese elements does not always pre-cede the others in time. While wemight understand some of them asbeing more fundamental than others,each of them depends on the othersfor creating moral lives of substance.Even our understanding of virtues isinteractive with the other moral ele-ments.

Mentshlikhkeit, for example, is apeculiarly Jewish virtue that reflectsmany of our values and beliefs. It in-

cludes such other virtues as honesty,courage, and compassion, which inturn tie to our vision of a just andcaring society. The Reconstructionistunderstanding of our civilization asevolving and of our sacred texts asemerging from their historical con-texts contributes to the possibility oflinking our contemporary moral sen-sibilities with our encounters withJewish texts and traditions. Th ishelps us integrate our theological lan-guage, experience and morality. Thisis critical i f we as a minority groupare to sustain our moral practice.

The very idea of values, of "value,"comes from our consciousness thatthe world is God's (I would prefer tosay that the world is infused with thedivine); that the world has worth isone corollary of that attitude. Whatwe recognize as having worth is atbest consistent with our attitudes, butour attitudes cannot fully predict ourvalues. Our values grow out of ourexperiences and cultures. The atti-tude Ladonay hdaretz umlo'o ("Theworld and all that is in it belongs toGod" — Psalm 24) means that ev-erything in the world has the capac-ity for good, but this insight has tobe fleshed out by values before we caneasily act on it.

Beliefs and AssumptionsWe cannot make decisions wisely

unless we are aware of what shapesthose decisions. Our beliefs about theright balance between communityresponsibility and individual au-tonomy are so powerful in shaping

The Reconstructionist S p r i n g 2001 • 25

decisions that they need careful ex-amination to ensure that the balancebetween those beliefs is the one weconsciously mean to apply. Oftendecision making goes awry becausepeople are not aware of how their be-liefs and assumptions drive their con-clusions. When beliefs and assump-tions are not articulated, dialogueoften generates more heat than light,and individual decision making be-comes erratic and confused. Oncemade explicit, beliefs and assump-tions can be tested against knowledgeand experience, creating a more ra-tional and orderly universe of dis-course.

Assuming we have clarified thefacts and scholarship relevant to adecision and that the decision is notcompletely determined by norms, wenext will need to understand its con-text in past history and practice aswell as in contemporary culture. Un-derstanding our predecessors' prac-tices and what motivated them helpsus to explore our own attitudes, be-liefs, norms, and values. Empatheticconsideration of our heritage givesJudaism a vote. Having done this, wecan turn to exploring the rest of thevalues relevant to a decision.

Each decision that we make has amoral component to which valuescan be applied, but each decision isalso affected by different values. Evenwhen two decisions are shaped bysimilar values, some values will bemore central to one decision than theother. Once we are at the values stage,it is time to consider which valuesare more important and, in light of

all the previous steps in the decision-making process, why. Some valueshave a more direct connection to aparticular issue, and some are feltmore strongly. The history of valuesand their origin affects the weight-ing of values as well. The value ofcommunity is far more central to de-ciding whether to attend a shiva min-yan than it is to how expensive a cutof meat to buy.

Applying that emerging hierarchyof values to the decision and its con-sequences prepares the decisionmaker to select the best — or some-times the least bad — choice. Thusin VBDM, exploring values is the laststep in the process before actuallymaking the decision.

Who Decides?

When groups need to make a de-cision, they should begin by seekingagreement about who ought to makeit. Decisions can most efficiently bemade by the smallest group with suf-ficient authority and competence tomake them. Sometimes a series ofgroups needs to be involved; in a syn-agogue, a membership or ritual com-mittee decision of importance mightrequire board approval. I f the issueis fundamental enough, the boardmight seek ratification by the congre-gation's members. Critical to the le-gitimation o f the decision is thebroad affirmation in advance of thelegitimacy of the process and the de-cision making group. Groups' deci-sion making therefore needs to becarefully planned. I f the process is

26 • Spring 2001 T h e Reconstructionist

affirmed in advance (in part becausethose who care will have sufficientinput to satisfy them) the outcomeof the process will usually be acceptedby those who disagree with it.

At the group level where the rec-ommendation is formulated, thegroup should go through the samedecision-making steps outlinedabove. Once the group reaches a con-clusion, it needs to work on leadingother decision makers through theprocess in a shortened form so thatthey can affirm the group's conclu-sions.

This model of decision making re-quires both an educational processand access to a variety of information.While a sophisticated and dedicatedgroup of volunteers can use it, a pro-fessional often aids in facilitating theprocess and assembling expert input.When a rabbi does this in a congre-gational setting, the rabbi can oftenplay a critical role in successful deci-sion making. This requires differen-tiating among three functions:

• facilitation that creates safety foropen inquiry and exchanges of views;• teaching about Jewish sources andproviding other insights;• stating personal values, reasoningand conclusions.

When these functions are suitablydifferentiated and labeled, the rabbican successfully play a central role inan effective process. When the rabbidoes not differentiate among the fac-tors, this can fuel interpersonal con-flict, disrupt decision making, and

prevent the emergence of a decisionthat the group will accept. The rabbi'sexpertise is very much needed. Itsexercise requires reflection, self-dis-cipline, and commitment to theVBDM process.

Negotiating Priorities

Group conflict often peaks at thestage when members negotiate valuepriorities. At this stage it is possibleto look ahead and see which priori-ties will lead to which conclusions.This is a time when active listeningand facilitation can help build con-sensus, which is not the same as una-nimity. For a consensus to emerge,points of commonality must be dis-covered and emphasized so that peo-ple are willing to move forward de-spite their differences.

Which decisions should a groupmake? It first ought to make the de-cisions needed to mount its core pro-grams and provide for their adminis-tration. As it adds to its program, newdecisions will have to be made. Whencongregations start, they typicallybegin making ideological and ritualdecisions and then quickly move onto dealing with financial and struc-tural decisions as well. Before longdecisions relating to employment andsocial action are added to the mix.All o f these decisions have moralcomponents.

Communities inevitably need poli-cies and procedures, necessitating fre-quent decisions. In the open societyof the United States, group decisionslimiting the freedom of individuals

The Reconstructionist S p r i n g 2001 • 2 7

("Who are you to tell me what todo?") are usually accepted only to theextent that they are needed for as-pects of group life that the individu-als seek. Thus we make decisionsabout whether the synagogue willhave a kosher kitchen or avoid sty-rofoam products, but those decisionsare not binding on synagogue mem-bers when they go home.

Shaping Conduct

One o f the major benefits o fVBDM can be consensus-buildingand establishing shared group behav-ior. This in turn shapes the moralconduct of the members of the group.Research shows that most peopleconform to the attitudes and behav-iors of the groups they are in. Thusgroups using VBDM both provide amodel for personal decision makingand reinforce the moral conduct oftheir members.

I f a Reconstructionist congrega-tion has as one of its goals shapingthe personal conduct of its members,it will use a broadly inclusive processto produce guidelines for personal

conduct — but wil l not enforcethem as rules unless the rules areneeded for the welfare of the congre-gation. This situation results fromthe fact that today congregations arevoluntaristic communities that re-quire the consent of their members.Their health and legitimacy requiresthat they validate their activitiesthrough the consent of their mem-bers and act no more coercively thanneeded to fulfill their agreed-uponpurposes.

In our post-modern world, weknow that no one group has the soleclaim on justice or ethics. But creat-ing a way of living that we share withour community, a way o f livingshaped by our attitudes and beliefs,norms and values, allows us to livemorally coherent, meaningful lives.When our lives are lived in harmonywith the rhythms of our Jewish com-munity, we are reinforced in ourmorality. I f that morality includesattention to improving our world, asauthentic Jewish morality must, thenit has value that extends beyond ourown lives. It brings us to living livesof transcendent meaning.

28 • Spring 2001 T h e Reconstructionist