1 / 28

MORAL REASONING

MORAL REASONING. A methodology to help people deal with moral dilemmas The Key to doing well on paper 3. Moral Reasoning Requirements for the Capstone Project. For Each Side in Paper 3 you must identify analyze for the proponents and opponents The Obligations inherent in the position

fritz-cleveland
Télécharger la présentation

MORAL REASONING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MORAL REASONING • A methodology to help people deal with moral dilemmas • The Key to doing well on paper 3

  2. Moral Reasoning Requirements for the Capstone Project • For Each Side in Paper 3 you must identify analyze for the proponents and opponents • The Obligations inherent in the position • The Values underlying the position • The potential consequences of the position • The position in terms of the normative principles and theories that support it

  3. Moral Reasoning and Capstone • Don’t simply list the values, obligations and consequences • Use the literature to justify these things for each side. Do not just assume that they believe it.

  4. CONSEQUENCES They are the projected results that might occur from any given action. • Beneficial or detrimental • Immediate or long-range • Intentional or unintentional • Involve the person performing the action and/or others

  5. Measuring Consequences • Difficult to predict because people behave irrationally • Immoral Acts that produce good results – No • Moral Acts that produce mixed consequences- maybe • What if a choice must be made

  6. Normative Principles

  7. What are they • Short statements about how humans “should” act. • Choose those that apply to your stakeholders’ positions and why they are applicable

  8. FOUNDATIONAL NORMATIVE PRINCIPLE:RESPECT FOR PERSONS • Honor others’ rights • Do not treat them as a means to our ends • Theological • Humans are created in God’s image • Philosophical • We wish the best for others, since they are the same as us

  9. OTHER FOUNDATIONAL NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES • Principle of consistency • Principle of impartiality • Principle of rationality • Principle of least harm • Principle of right desire

  10. Principle of Consistency Moral reasons and actions are binding on all people at all times in all places, given the same relevant circumstances.

  11. Principle of Impartiality Each person should be treated equally unless there is a good reason not to do this.

  12. Principle of Rationality All legitimate moral acts must be supported by generally accepted reasons.

  13. Principle of Least Harm When one has to choose between evils, he/she should choose the one which will cause the least harm. When one has to choose between goods, one should choose the one which will cause the most good.

  14. Principle of Right Desire • we ought to desire what is really good for us and nothing else

  15. Kantian Theory • The Categorical Imperative- you should act as if your act were going to become a universal law of nature • The Principle of ends- never treat human beings as mere means to an end

  16. Utilitarianism • The closest “moral” law in politics. • Act Utilitarianism- an act is morally right if it produces the greatest good (utility) for the greatest number. This can be a government service, wealth, freedom, etc. • Rule Utilitarianism- similar to above, but it applies to all cases over a long term.

  17. Utilitarianism II • Principle of Consequences- the only thing that matters is the amount of good that results • Fixed Budget Approach • Fixed effectiveness approach

  18. Other Normative Principles • Social Contract Theory • Principles of Distributive Justice • Medical Ethics Page 117-119

  19. Making a moral decision

  20. USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY • Study the details of the case • Identify the relevant criteria • Obligations • Values • Consequences • Identify the foundational values at play • Determine courses of action • Choose the most morally responsible action

  21. USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY • Study the details of the case • sometimes there are not enough details to satisfy the three criteria. • Use creative thinking to speculate about possible answers, depending on different imagined details. 

  22. USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY Identify the relevant criteria • Here you should identify the obligations, values and consequences. • Whom will they affect, in what way. • Consider which of the three is most important in the given case. • Many times with public policy, you will find the consequences to be the most important. 

  23. USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY • Determine possible course of action- consider all the choices of action that are available. • It is only in rare circumstances that an individual has just one course of action.  • E.g. adopt, reject the policy

  24. USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY • Choose the action that is most morally responsible after reviewing the information above

  25. In Paper 3 • Conclude your moral reasoning section with a justification of which side has presented the more moral argument • Use their arguments • Avoid presenting a straw man

  26. Paper 3 Reminders

  27. THREE SECTIONS • Critical Thinking • Moral Reasoning • Tentative solution

  28. Mechanics • 6-8 pages long (estimate only) • Critical thinking = 3 pages • Moral reasoning = 3 pages • Conclusion/solution = 1 pages • Works Cited as needed • Writing = as perfect as you can make it • MLA format = as perfect as possible

More Related