The Theory Of Moral Reasoning

Moral status is a bioethical concept that concerns the type of beings that possess rights, like human beings. There are five distinct viewpoints, or theories, that help in determining moral status. These theories include: a theory based on human properties, a theory based on cognitive properties, a theory based on moral agency, a theory based on sentience, and a theory based on relationships (HLT-302 Introduction 2, 2015). In the case study, a situation in which a fetus develops a rare condition where its quality of life would be poor is presented. The physician (Dr. Wilson), aunt (Maria), mother (Jessica), and father (Marco) all share different viewpoints that make the process of determining a final plan of action very difficult.

The theory that I find true to the true nature of moral responsibility and its relation to human freedom and determinism would be compatibilism. Compatibilism is the claim that we are both determined and that we have moral responsibility (Lawhead 120).

While the participants of this study may have higher NFC as university students, their likelihood of wanting to engage in effortful thinking does not reflect a high cognition in dilemmas. In addition, having the participants to rate their response does not engage cognitive thinking or moral emotions as much as being forced with a yes-no option in a situation. One would feel urgency to make an instantaneous decision, rather than to take time and weigh their affective or rational judgement. According to Haidt’s Social Intuition Model(2001), moral emotion fuels moral judgement, giving moral responses while reasoning is a post-hoc process to provide rational support to responses. Reasoning process may not be activated until after utilitarian response is made which is slower and requires effort; responses are then made by

This paper will compare the usefulness of character-based and consequence-based approaches in making moral decisions. In a character-based approach, the consideration of the moral agent is central in making decisions, and actions are made in order to reflect and strengthen good character. In a consequence-based approach, the consideration of the outcome is central in making moral decisions, and actions are judged based on the outcome. Usefulness will be defined in terms of three aspects: consistency, convenience and assurance, with assurance being defined as the confidence that the decision made is correct. Through the comparison of the two approaches, it becomes clear that a character-based approach is more useful in making a decision.

Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions. Handbook of affective sciences, 11, 852-870. Retrieved March 18, 2017 from http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab/articles/alternate_versions/haidt.2003.the-moral-emotions.pub025-as-html.html

After amassing and reviewing all information collected through the assessment of moral integrity and the ethical decision framework, the nurse should have a better understanding of the ethical dilemma and how it affect each person and the organization. It will better allow her to show moral courage to overcome fears, and resist pressure and act differently to make “right” decision. Making the “right” decision however requires the nurse to demonstrate moral leadership and courage. The nurse may have to overcome adversities that might test her resolve in ways unimaginable. Commitment will be a key element to obtain changes, if they happen at all. At the end, if the changes lead to creating an ethically conductive environment and workplace, the nurse would have advocated for patients, herself and colleagues.

Mill 's Utilitarianism and Ross ' Intuitionalism both use moral intuitions as core components of their moral theories, though their valuation of these intuition in making morally sound decisions differ. I will argue that it is this mis-valuation of moral intuition in Utilitarian tradition that makes the moral theory unstable and prone to criticism. Ross ' deontological approach to moral intuitions provides a more believable, and morally acceptable account of the role these intuitions play in making ethical decisions. In this paper I will begin with underlying both Ross ' and Mill 's valuation of moral intuitions in the framework of their moral theories, followed by a brief explanation of each philosophers view of “what makes an act moral”. Having established these I will, with the aid of an anecdote about a child and a sled, describe my difficulties with Mill 's utilitarian approach to ethics. Finishing with an assessment of some utilitarian complaints about Ross ' theory. Ultimately Utilitarianism provides a commendable theory for widely applicable and practical moral action, but it 's inability to address conflicts with strong moral intuitions weakens it 's argument leading me to favor that of Ross ' more flexible, yet not relativistic, intuitionalism.

Business corporations are a dog eat world. Business is made up of many aspects from political, social, and environmental responsibilities to those of ethics and responsibility. Every business and major corporation has to deal with these in a much different way. For example, small business’s need more of the social responsibility in order to have more trade and an increased profit. For the major corporations the focus is on what is going on in politics, social, and environmental due to the economy or the state of their countries.

I should also bring up the Kantian moral theory. The Kantian moral theory is the idea that actions are morally depending on the motives the duty gives off. Kant believes what you do, everyone should do. Childbirth has been viewed in the past a duty every woman should to continue on the circle of life. If Kantian view of abortion was pro-choice then there would be no one left on the planet. This immoral because pro-choice would not be able to continue the circle of life. If abortion was allowed, then a universal law would be in state that every time a woman got pregnant, she would have to have the abortion.

Christian moral reasoning combines two different thought processes. These processes are known as reflection and deliberation. Reflection is the process of thinking about something, while deliberation is the process of thinking about action. The difference is considering thought versus action. These are important considerations when evaluating moral reasoning. One must understand that he or she must have some moral foundation before one can think toward any moral dilemma.

In James Rachels’ book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, he expresses ideas within the concluding chapter, “What Would a Satisfactory Moral Theory be like?” that lay an silhouette of every moral approach we have discussed so far and compounding it into a final discussion with a couple of final contentions towards a comprehensive understanding of morality and the approaches we can make as moral guides to make decisions that are virtuous for each class without exception. Rachels’ gives thoughtful perspective on all subjects that we have learned about and makes final accumulations for the way we can decide to use these for our own benefit. While then expressing the virtues we must value for ourselves to have a best plan, and the ways our choices can help others in a positive aspect.

At eighteenth century, the cost of increasing development of capitalism is anomie: people chasing material life insanely even sacrifice others’ benefits. Because of this, Adam Smith, a successful philosopher and economist, released that the original morality principle was not suitable for that society anymore, and it needed to build another new theory system to suit the developing society. He wrote two masterpieces that proposed his ideas: The Theory of Moral Sentiments, which discusses the human development by analysing the human emotion, and The Wealth of Nations, which summarises the development of capitalism and it is also a foundation for today’s economy. This essay will analyse the self-interest, plays as a motivator role in morality and economy field, and benefits the development in that society. Moreover, will suggest some limitations of Smith’s idea.

Moral theories can help justify the decisions that are made. Each theory has separate viewpoints in which other theories borrow elements from. Moral theories attempt to explain what it is that makes some actions right and others wrong. These are then used as a guide to making choices. They operate at a more general level than moral or legal principles and rules. The four main groups that one should be aware of are: Utilitarian, Kantian, Aristotelian and Feminist.

The textbook describes Moral Realism as the position that there exist objective ethical facts “beyond the morality of cultures and individuals.” One of the proponents of this view is the British philosopher G. E. Moore (1873-1958). Moore is also one of the founders of the analytic school of philosophy, a tradition that continues to have impact on modern thought. In Moore’s seminal work Principia Ethica, he presents several arguments that form the basis of realist thought, specifically his description of intrinsic good and the introduction of the naturalistic fallacy as a criticism of ethical philosophies that define “good” in natural terms. In this paper, I will present and describe Moore’s view of intrinsic good and the naturalistic fallacy. I will then argue that this definition of good and the use of the naturalistic fallacy against reductive definitions of good is too abstract and subjective itself to have any useful ethical value. I will also suggest that and that the naturalistic definitions of good are not only what we experience, but the only reasonable way to determine good and correct action.

Now that both sides have been established, those stakeholders who favor and those who oppose the policy in question, each of their argument 's evidence and reasoning will be analyzed. The corresponding pages which follow will provide an understanding of each side through three developed sections: a critical analysis, moral reasoning, and a tentative solution. The critical analysis will thoroughly measure to what level an argument 's authoritative, accuracy, reliability, precision, applicability, and etc. is able to represent their claims. At the same time the critical analysis includes a judgement call on whether or not a side 'wins ' or 'loses ' each of their arguments based upon the strength and weakness of the argument 's claims and evidence. The moral reasoning section will then secondary the value of each side 's evidence, and focus on analyzing each side 's moral reasoning, or rather, evaluating what "values, obligations, consequences, and normative principles" present reasonableness to their position on morality. Following these two sections of analysis, a conclusion will be made on which of the two sides makes an overall stronger, more conclusive and moral argued solution to the normative question.