MODULE 5: FEELINGS, MORAL DECISION-MAKING, REASON AND

IMPARTIALITY

Feelings and Moral Decision-Making Feelings as Instinctive Response to

Moral Dilemmas

Some ethicists hold that moral judgments at their best should also be emotional.
Emotions can be rational in being based at least sometimes on good judgments
about how well a circumstance or agent accomplishes appropriate objectives.
Feelings are also instinctual by providing motivations to act morally. Many times,
ethical judgments are highly emotional as people emotionally express their strong
approval or disapproval of different acts.

Feelings as Obstacles to Making the Right Decisions

Feelings and emotions, however, can become obstacles or impediments to

becoming ethical. Ethical Subjectivism It is fundamentally a meta-ethical theory. It is
a theory about the nature of moral judgments. It holds that the truth or falsity of
ethical propositions is dependent on the feelings, attitudes, or standards of a person
or group or persons.
For every controversial ethical topic, we usually hear at least two opposing views
concerning the matter. ! One camp which declares the action as immoral ! Another
camp which claims that the action is moral ! There is a third stance – that of the
Ethical Subjectivist: People in the first two groups are expressing their respective
opinion, but where morality is concerned, there are no objective facts and no
position is objectively right. The theory proposes that when we say something is
morally good, this just means we approve of or like that thing.
Similarly, when we state that something is morally bad, this means that we
disapprove of or do not like that thing. Analysis of Ethical Subjectivism On a positive
note, ethical subjectivism allows us to think for ourselves because it implies that we
need not agree with culture or society. It indicates, unbelievably, that the mere fact
that we like something would make it good. It provides a weak foundation for
dealing with topics like drug addiction, bullying, slavery, racism and discrimination.
According to ethical subjectivism, when we express one’s actions as evil, we merely
say we have negative feelings toward the deeds. The moral judgments we make do
represent the “truth”. If Ethical Subjectivism is correct, then each of us is infallible in
our moral judgments as long as we are speaking sincerely. But we are not infallible –
we may be mistaken, even when we are speaking sincerely. Therefore, Ethical
Subjectivism cannot be correct. When A says “X is morally acceptable” and B says
“X is morally unacceptable,” they are disagreeing.
But if Ethical Subjectivism is correct, there would be no disagreement between A
and B. Therefore, Ethical Subjectivism cannot be correct. It could have dangerous
implications in moral education. Deficient in providing us any guide on how to
develop sensible and proper feelings, it, in effect, tells us to simply follow our
personal feelings and emotions. Emotivism It was developed chiefly by the
American philosopher Charles L. Stevenson. It has been one of the most influential
theories of Ethics in the 20 th century. It is actually the most popular form of non-
cognitivism , the meta-ethical theory that claims that ethical sentences do not
convey authentic propositions. According to Emotivism, moral judgments are not
statements of fact but are mere expressions of the emotions of the speaker,
especially since they are usually feelings-based.

Some emotivists base their stance on logical positivism, which claims that any
legitimate truth must be empirically verifiable. Since moral judgments cannot be
tested by sense experience, they cannot be authentic truth claims but can only
express feelings.

According to Emotivism, utterances in ethics are not fact-stating sentences. They

are not used to convey information; instead, they have two entirely different
purposes:

 First, moral sentences are used as a means of influencing others' behavior.

 To say "X is immoral," it is equivalent to saying "Do not do X!"
 To say "X is moral" is to say "Do X!"
 Thus, the utterance is more like a command.
 Second, moral sentences are used to express (not report) the speaker's
attitude.
 "X is moral" merely means "Hooray for X!"
 "X is immoral" just means "Boo on X!"
 Thus, the utterance is more like an exclamation.

Since ethical judgements are essentially commands and exclamations, they are not
true or false; so there cannot be moral truths and moral knowledge.

Evaluation of Emotivism

It is barely sensible to base a moral theory on logical positivism. Logical positivism

is self-refuting as the view is not itself verifiable by sense experience and thus
would not be a genuine truth claim on its own grounds.
In denying moral truths and moral knowledge, Emotivism seems to dilute what
morality is instead of elucidating it. It is also unclear how the ethical "good" can be
resolve them.
Emotivism also fails to distinguish moral judgments from mere expressions of
personal preference. For an utterance to become a genuine moral or value
judgment, it must be supported by pertinent reasons.

Having logical positivist background, Emotivism discards moral truths. Maintaining

that moral claims are not testable by empirical observation and experimentation, it
reduced morality to mere matters of feelings. It however fails to notice that humans
have not only feelings but also reason, and reason plays a vital role in Ethics.

FEELINGS CAN HELP IN MAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS

Admittedly, there are situations in which our feelings and likings are relevant to the
rightness of our decisions and actions, Ethics-without-feeling also appears to go
against Christian philosophy's emphasis in love, for love is basically a strong liking,
desire, or emotion. Emotions are a crucial art of what gives life meaning, and ought
to play a guiding role in morality.
Nonetheless, the feelings or emotions involved in moral thinking should be
anchored on careful consideration of a full range of right goals, including altruistic
ones,
Moral decision-making involves choosing actions based on ethical principles,
personal values, and what's considered proper behavior. It's a complex process
influenced by factors like cultural beliefs, religious teachings, and reasoning. These
decisions can affect not only the individual but also others, making them
significant.

1. What it is:
 Moral decision-making is about selecting a course of action based on ethical
considerations.
 It involves recognizing that a decision has moral implications, applying
relevant values and principles, and choosing the most appropriate response.
2. Factors influencing it:
 Ethics and values:
An individual's personal moral code and beliefs about what's right and wrong
guide their choices.
 Culture and society:
Cultural norms and societal expectations can shape moral decision-making.
 Religious beliefs:
Religious teachings and doctrines often provide frameworks for moral decision-
making.
 Reasoning:
Logical thinking and analysis play a role in evaluating different options and their
potential consequences.
 Emotions:
Empathy, compassion, and other emotions can influence how individuals
perceive moral dilemmas.
3. Different approaches:
 Rationalist:
This approach emphasizes reasoned deliberation and logical analysis in moral
decision-making.
 Intuitionist:
This approach suggests that moral choices are often made intuitively, based on
immediate emotional reactions.
 Dual Process Theory:
This theory suggests that both rational thought and intuitive reactions play a
role in moral decision-making, with different brain regions activated for each.
4. Challenges:
 Multiple defensible options:
Sometimes, multiple courses of action may seem morally justifiable, making it
difficult to choose.
 No acceptable options:
In some cases, none of the available options may be morally acceptable,
requiring careful consideration of the consequences.
 Unawareness of influences:
Individuals may be unaware of psychological, organizational, or social factors
that can influence their moral judgment.
 Automatic and instinctive:
 Moral decision-making can be automatic and instinctive, making it difficult to
consciously analyze and justify choices.
5. Importance:
 Moral decision-making is crucial for fostering ethical behavior and building
trust in individuals, groups, and institutions.
 It helps individuals develop their sense of right and wrong and make
responsible choices that align with their values.

Why Feelings Can Be Obstacle to Making the Right Decision?

Feelings can be obstacles to making the right decisions because they can lead to
biases, emotional reasoning, and impulsive actions, hindering objective judgment
and rational decision-making. While emotions can provide valuable insights and
motivations, relying too heavily on them can cloud judgment and lead to suboptimal
choices.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

1. Biases and Emotional Reasoning:

 Overconfidence:
Intense emotions can lead to overconfidence, causing individuals to overestimate
their abilities and the likelihood of success, potentially leading to reckless
decisions.
 Confirmation Bias:
Individuals may seek out information that confirms their existing feelings or beliefs,
ignoring contradictory evidence, which can skew their perception of the situation.
 Anchoring Bias:
Initial emotional reactions can create an anchor, making it difficult to adjust one's
perspective even when presented with new information.
 Emotional Reasoning:
When emotions are used as the primary basis for decision-making, individuals may
misinterpret their feelings as objective facts, leading to illogical or irrational
choices.

2. Impulsive Actions:
 Instantaneous Reactions:
Intense emotions can trigger immediate, instinctive reactions that bypass careful
consideration of consequences.
 Ignoring Long-Term Consequences:
Impulsive decisions driven by immediate feelings may not take into account
potential long-term negative outcomes.

3. Clouded Judgment:
 Emotional Hijacking:
When strong emotions overwhelm rational thought, it can be difficult to analyze a
situation objectively, leading to poor decisions.
 Difficulty Quantifying Problems:
Emotions can make it challenging to objectively assess and quantify the various
factors involved in a decision.

4. The Importance of Balance:

  Recognizing Emotional Influence:
It's crucial to acknowledge the potential impact of feelings on decision-making and
to be aware of the biases they can introduce.
 Integrating Emotional Insights with Logic:
While feelings can offer valuable insights, they should be balanced with rational
analysis and logical reasoning.
 Seeking Objective Perspectives:
When facing important decisions, it can be helpful to seek input from others or
consider alternative viewpoints to mitigate the influence of emotions.

Non-Deliberate Nature
The non-deliberate nature of feelings refers to the fact that emotions are typically
experienced as spontaneous and involuntary responses, rather than as the result of
conscious thought or decision-making. They arise in reaction to situations or stimuli
without prior intention or planning. This contrasts with deliberate actions, which are
preceded by conscious thought and intention.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
 Spontaneous and Unplanned:
Emotions are often described as happening to a person, rather than being
something a person actively chooses to experience. For example, you might feel
fear in response to a sudden loud noise or joy when receiving good news, without
consciously deciding to feel those emotions.
 Automatic Responses:
Many emotional responses are automatic and physiological, involving changes in
heart rate, breathing, and hormone levels. These bodily changes occur as a result of
the emotional response and are not typically something we can consciously control.
 Contrast with Deliberate Actions:
In contrast, deliberate actions involve conscious planning, intention, and effort. We
make a conscious decision to perform a deliberate action, whereas emotions often
arise without our conscious control.
 Implications for Morality:
The non-deliberate nature of emotions has implications for how we understand
moral responsibility. If emotions are not chosen, then can we be held morally
responsible for them? Some philosophers and researchers have discussed this
issue.
 Examples:
Feeling anger at a perceived injustice, experiencing sadness when a loved one is
hurt, or feeling joy when experiencing success are all examples of non-deliberate
emotional responses.

Partial Nature
he partial nature of feelings refers to the idea that emotions are inherently limited
and subjective, rather than objective and comprehensive. They focus on a specific
object or situation, reflecting a personal and interested perspective rather than a
detached, neutral viewpoint. This means that emotions can be biased, selective,
and not always reflective of the full complexity of a situation.
Here's a breakdown of the key aspects:
 Focus on a narrow area:
Emotions are directed at specific objects or situations, rather than encompassing
the entirety of a person's experience. For example, feeling fear at the sight of a
spider doesn't mean one is generally fearful of everything.
 Personal and interested perspective:
Emotions are not detached observations but are inherently linked to the individual's
personal experiences, needs, and concerns. A person's emotional response to a
situation will be influenced by their past experiences and current state of mind.
 Not comprehensive or objective:
Because emotions are selective and personal, they don't offer a complete or
objective picture of a situation. They highlight certain aspects while potentially
ignoring others, leading to a subjective interpretation.

 Influence on judgments and actions:

Emotions can significantly influence our judgments and actions, often in a way that
is not fully rational or objective. A strong emotional reaction can lead to biased
decision-making.

Capricious Nature
The "capricious nature of feelings" refers to the idea that emotions can be
unpredictable and change suddenly, without a clear or consistent reason. This
contrasts with the idea that feelings should be stable or logical. This unpredictability
can make emotions difficult to manage and understand, both for oneself and for
others.
Here's a breakdown of what makes feelings capricious:
 Sudden shifts:
Feelings can change rapidly, seemingly without cause. A person might be happy
one moment and deeply sad the next, or experience a surge of anger in response to
a seemingly minor event.
 Unpredictable triggers:
The things that trigger emotions can be inconsistent. A situation that evokes joy in
one instance might cause sadness or anger at another time.
 Individual variation:
People experience and express emotions differently. What triggers a strong
emotional response in one person may not affect another person in the same way.
 Influence of external factors:
External factors like stress, fatigue, or even physical discomfort can significantly
impact emotional responses.
 Lack of logical connection:
Emotions don't always follow a logical sequence. A person might feel an emotion
that doesn't seem to be connected to the current situation or their thoughts about
it.
The capricious nature of feelings is also explored in psychology and philosophy, with
some theories suggesting that emotions are a product of both internal and external
factors, and that their intensity and duration can vary greatly.

Reasons and Impartiality as Part of Ethics

Reason and impartiality are essential components of morality. Reason involves
logical thinking and making decisions based on principles and evidence, while
impartiality means treating all individuals and groups equally without bias or
favoritism. Together, they form a foundation for ethical decision-making, ensuring
fairness and consistency in moral judgments.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

Reason:
 Definition:
Reason is the capacity of the mind to derive conclusions from premises, using logic
and avoiding fallacies.
 Role in Morality:
Reason helps establish general moral principles, analyze situations, and understand
the consequences of actions. It allows us to assess situations objectively, weigh
evidence, and make informed decisions based on principles rather than emotions or
personal biases.

 Example:
Using reason, one might conclude that breaking a promise is generally wrong
because it violates trust, which is a foundational element of social relationships.

Impartiality:
 Definition:
Impartiality is the principle of treating all individuals and groups equally, without
favoritism or bias. It's about recognizing the equal worth and importance of
everyone's interests and perspectives.
 Role in Morality:
Impartiality ensures that moral decisions are not swayed by personal preferences,
prejudices, or the desire to benefit certain individuals or groups over others.
 Example:
In a situation where a friend is accused of cheating on a test, an impartial response
would involve considering the potential impact on the friend, the teacher, and the
other students, rather than simply protecting the friend.

The Interplay of Reason and Impartiality:

 Reason provides the framework for ethical decision-making, while impartiality
ensures that this framework is applied fairly and consistently to all individuals
involved.
 For example, when making a moral decision, one should use reason to
identify the relevant moral principles, analyze the situation, and consider the
potential consequences. Then, impartiality requires that these principles be
applied equally to all parties involved, without favoritism or bias.
 This combination of reason and impartiality is crucial for promoting fairness,
justice, and ethical behavior in all aspects of life.

Moral Reasoning Model

The 7-step moral reasoning model provides a structured approach to making ethical
decisions. These steps involve gathering information, identifying ethical issues,
considering relevant principles and consequences, and ultimately arriving at a
decision. The steps are: 1) Gather the facts; 2) Determine the ethical issues; 3)
Identify relevant principles; 4) List alternatives; 5) Compare alternatives with
principles; 6) Consider consequences; and 7) Make a decision.

Here's a more detailed explanation of each step:

1. Gather the Facts:
This step involves collecting all relevant information about the situation. Clarifying
the facts can sometimes resolve the dilemma without further steps.
2. Determine the Ethical Issues / Identify the Stakeholders
Identify the specific moral dilemmas or conflicts present in the situation. Moral
dilemmas involve competing interests and values.
3. Identify Relevant Principles/ Articulate the Dillemas
Determine which ethical principles (e.g., honesty, fairness, loyalty) apply to the
situation and the competing interests.
4. List Alternatives:
Generate a list of possible actions or courses of action that could be taken.
5. Compare Alternatives with Principles:
Evaluate each alternative against the relevant ethical principles identified
earlier. Eliminate alternatives that conflict with those principles.
6. Consider/Weigh a Consequences:
For the remaining alternatives, consider the potential consequences of each action,
both positive and negative, for all involved parties.
7. Make a Decision:
Based on the information gathered and analyzed, make the most ethically sound
decision possible.

REFERENCES:
 https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-a-moral-decision-
definition-examples-quiz.html
 https://www.scribd.com/presentation/598863685/Presentation
 https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/for-
feelingandmoraldecisionmakingpptx/267220048#:~:text=Emotions
%20and%20intuition%20play%20a%20major%20role,feelings
%20directly%20influence%20moral%20judgments%20and
%20choices.&text=However%2C%20overreliance%20on%20feelings
%20can%20also%20be,that%20prevent%20objective
%20consideration%20of%20the%20options.
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
226621415_Emotions_and_morality
 https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/the-7-step-moral-
reasoningpptx/261696248
