Second Response to Staal: Independent Moral Assessment, an Essential Requirement for Ethical Practice in Operational Psychology

摘要

The 2015 Brookline Ethics of Operational Psychology Workshop aimed to advance public and professional deliberation regarding challenges and controversies associated with the ethical practice of operational psychology. In his initial critique, Staal (2018a) criticized our meeting on methodological and ideological grounds and condemned the resulting Brookline Principles (Soldz, Arrigo, & Olson, 2016; Soldz, Olson, & Arrigo, 2017). In an earlier response (Soldz, Arrigo, Frakt, & Olson, 2018), we argued that Staal and his colleagues have failed to adequately address legitimate concerns related to traditional civil-military relations and the social contract of the professions-both essential to broader issues of democratic process. Staal responded by largely ignoring the issues we raised. In this second response, we rebut Staal's critiques and again call on him and operational psychology colleagues to address central issues regarding the ethics of operational psychology practice.