Real document
A French ethics dossier: evidence cannot choose the value criterion
Read four miniature French ethics sources separating measured change, lived experience, a normative principle and a technical constraint before choosing a criterion.
- C2
- Notice
- Read and answer
- Learn this in the C2 notebook →
In short
Evidence can establish an observed change without deciding which value should take priority. A shorter waiting time does not alone settle a conflict between speed, independent choice and equal access. Identify what each source contributes before drawing the normative conclusion.
Attribution de créneaux · quatre pièces
A · Évolution mesurée
Pendant l’essai, le délai moyen passe de dix à huit jours sur les deux sites suivis.
B · Expérience vécue
Une usagère explique qu’elle a obtenu un créneau plus vite, mais qu’elle n’a pas pu choisir l’horaire compatible avec son travail.
C · Principe
Le comité estime qu’un accès équitable doit préserver une possibilité réelle de choix.
D · Contrainte technique
Le logiciel actuel attribue les créneaux automatiquement ; une modification permettrait d’offrir deux options, au prix d’un délai supplémentaire.
Do not make the sources do the same work
A supplies an aggregate observation. B makes one person’s experience visible, without proving every user shares it. C states a criterion rather than measuring an effect. D identifies an implementation trade-off. A decision can use all four, but cannot derive “speed must always win” from A alone.
A good synthesis can say the measured delay falls during the trial while a concern about choice remains. The recommendation then explains how to weigh that concern, rather than presenting its preferred value as an extra statistic.