|
Moral Reasoning
Systematic approach
Structure we follow to arrive at our ethical
judgments
Beauty lies in the journey, not the destination
2 people can use sound moral reasoning, but
arrive at different ethical conclusion
Key is being able to defend our judgments against
criticism
Moral Reasoning
Moral Context
Philosophical Foundations
Critical Thinking
Moral Context
Must understand
Issue
Facts of the situation
Values, principles and moral duties involved
Philosophical Foundations
Greek Philosophers
Judeo-Christian Ethic
Immanuel Kant and Moral Duty
Utilitarianism
Egalitarianism
Relativism
Greek Philosophers
Moral absolutes and knowledge
Discovered by intellectual and persistent
curiosity
Or, we are not born with virtue we must work hard
to achieve it
Greek Philosophers
Socrates
Virtue can be identified and practiced
Anyone can arrive at moral rules for life with
careful reflection
Plato (Socrates’ student)
Moral conduct based on
Experience/knowledge of the world
Moderate behavior
Courage
Greek Philosophers
Aristotle (Plato’s student)
Moral virtue attainable
Tough choice must be made
Ends do not justify the means
Golden mean
Virtue lies somewhere between two extremes of
excess and deficiency
Judeo-Christian Ethic
Love they neighbor as thyself
All moral decisions are based on respect for
human dignity
Respect should be the foundation for all ethical
decisions
Journalist’s that investigate private lives
TV movies that exploit (Amy Fisher)
Kant and Moral Duty
German philosopher
Categorical imperative
Can you apply your underlying ethical principles
to all situations?
Live up to standards of conduct because they are
good, not b/c of consequences
Duty-based moral philosophy
Duty to tell truth even if it harms
Utilitarianism
John Stuart Mill
Creating the greatest happiness for the greatest
number
Other utilitarianists argued other values besides
happiness were important
Concerned with Consequences of ethical
judgment (all agree)
Hidden cameras, deceptive practices used for the
greater good (consequence)
Egalitarianism
All should be treated equally in terms of rights
and opportunities
Veil of ignorance (John Rawls-A Theory of
Justice)
Temporarily deprive self of knowledge that
might influence judgments in your favor (race, sex, social standing)
Goal is to protect weaker party and minimize harm
Relativism
Bertrand Russell and John Dewey
a.k.a. Progressivism
Relative values
What is right or good for one person may not be
for another, even under similar circumstances
I’ll decide what’s right for me, you
decide what’s right for you
Ethical Theories
Deontological (Duty-Based)
Teleological (Consequence-Based)
Virtue (Aristotle’s Golden Mean)
Deontological
Nonconsequentialists
Act on principle, don’t worry about
consequence
Kant
Categorical imperative (apply to all)
Moral agent’s motives are important
Don’t use foul means to achieve positive
ends
Deontological
Advantages
Less pressure on moral agents to predict outcomes
Will be regarded as truthful (predictable)
Deontological
Disadvantages
Difficult time resolving moral standoff (Heintz
dilemma)
General rules don’t always fit special
circumstances
Teleological
Consequentialists say the right decision is the
one that produces best outcome
Teleological
Egoists
Out for number ONE!
Maximize good things for self
Utilitarianists
J.S. Mill
Promote greatest good for the greatest #
Provides definite blueprint for choices
Teleological
Minimize harm to others is a key aspect of
teleological theories that is often overlooked
Teleological
Objections
Reliance on unknown and predictive powers of
moral agents
Overlooks special obligations to minority
populations
Virtue Theories
Concerned with character building
Aristotle’s Golden Mean
Moderate solution in cases of extreme positions
Mean does not have to be in the middle of two
positions
May need to lean to one side or the other to
correct an injustice
More pay to certain workers to make up for past
Critical Thinking
The engine that drives moral reasoning
Three-step process
Must possess/acquire knowledge of subject and
understand context of ethical dilemma in order to make an evaluation
Identify ethical issues and consider ethical
alternatives (synthesize relevant info)
Make a decision
SAD Model of Moral Reasoning
Situation Definition
Describe facts, identify principles and values,
state ethical issue or question
Analysis
Weigh competing principles
Consider external factors
Examine duties to others
Apply ethical theories
SAD Model of Moral Reasoning
Decision
Render a decision
Defend the decision based on moral theory
© B.L. Yates 2000
| 
