Chapter 3: Ethical Decision Making and Moral Judgments

3.1. Chapter Introduction

o Core Puzzles:
1. How to make right/correct decisions.
2. What standard makes one decision right and another wrong.
3. How society maintains order and solves conflicts reasonably.
o Function of Morality:

1. Provide principles and rules acceptable to everyone.

2. Encourage peaceful and cooperative living.

o Chapter Aim: Introduce ethical decision-making processes and the need to be moral.

3.2. Chapter Objectives (Students will be able to):

o Identify moral foundations for ethical standards.

o Understand how standards apply to specific situations.
o Identify how good ethical decisions are made.
o Understand why morality is necessary.

3.3. How Can We Make Ethical Decisions And Actions?

o Challenges:
1. Difficulty in always doing the "right thing".
2. Subjective justifications for actions.
3. Ethical nature of actions depends on notions of "Good/Bad" and
"Right/Wrong".
o Types of Good/Bad:

1. Instrumental Good: Desirable for their results (what they lead to).
2. Intrinsic Good: Desirable for their own sake (what they are in themselves).
3. Actions can be both (or opposite, e.g., instrumentally/intrinsically bad).
4. Examples of unethical/bad practices (Ethiopia): Female Genital Mutilation,
early marriage, kidnapping, abduction, ignorance, poverty, corruption,
murder.

o Key Tasks of Ethical Reasoning:

1. Analyze and critically consider values and claims related to obligations (e.g.,
sanctity of life, quality of life, autonomy in end-of-life care).
2. Evaluate adequacy of reasons for actions (e.g., health professional's
argument for resuscitation, parent's refusal of medical treatment).

o Nature of Ethical Problems:

1. Ethical values often harder to understand than other values (e.g., courage vs.
energy).
2. Ethical problems often less clear, definitive solutions not always possible.
3. Aim of ethics is not to dictate, but to offer tools for thinking; purposefully
seeks "grey" areas.
4. Obligation to resolve problems sincerely, reasonably, collaboratively; be
prepared to review/revise positions.
3.3.1. Ethical Principles and Values of Moral Judgments

o Definition: Branch of philosophy building coherent rules/principles for living.

o Everyday Morality: People use "rules of thumb" (e.g., 'wrong to steal', 'right to
help').
o Complexities Challenge Simple Rules: Examples like capital punishment, killing
animals, self-defense, abortion, euthanasia show need for deeper analysis.
o Need for Theoretical Frameworks: To analyze complex problems and find rational,
coherent solutions.
o Philosophers aim for general answers applicable to everyone.

3.3.2. Moral Intuitions and Critical Reasoning

o Reasoning about Feelings: Ethics involves making sense of and rationalizing

intuitions about right/good.
o Empathy: Provides "moral sentiments" (Traer, 2013).
o Moral Principles: Ethical reasoning about sentiments gives moral principles.
o Conscience: Integration of moral sentiments and principles, supported by reason
(Traer, 2013).
o Societal Influence vs. Philosophical Reflection: Customs and laws influence
conscience, but philosophical ethics demands critical reflection.
o Rationalisation:

1. Using seemingly rational/credible motives to cover true (unconscious) ones.

2. Example: Landowner claiming job creation as motive, while true motive is
profit.

o Types of Critical Reasoning:

1. Reasoning by Analogy: Explaining by comparing to similar but different

things (e.g., ascribing rights to nonhuman animals).
2. Deductive Reasoning: Applying a general principle to a specific situation
(e.g., all persons have human rights, so you have human rights).
3. Inductive Reasoning: Providing evidence to support a hypothesis (e.g.,
fossil fuels and climate change supporting duty to reduce emissions).

o Ethics and Religious Faith:

1. Connection: Many view morality and religious faith as intertwined (actions

commanded by God).
2. Philosophical Critique: Some philosophers argue rational reflection alone
can determine right/wrong, rendering divine commands unnecessary.
3. Relevance: Despite critiques, faith-based arguments are relevant due to
public reliance on religion for moral guidance and its persuasive power.

o Testing Moral Arguments:

1. Process: Ask questions about reasoning type, principle rationality, evidence

reliability, underlying motives (avoid rationalizations), and logical
conclusions.
2. Importance: Develops ability to test arguments for personal, community,
and organizational dilemmas.
3. Three Main Ways to Test:
  Factual Accuracy: Discussions should not be divorced from facts;
inaccurate facts weaken moral arguments (Hume's 'ought' from 'is'
still allows for factual importance).
 Consistency: Arguments must be consistent; different treatment
requires demonstrating morally relevant differences (e.g., national
vs. individual debt cancellation).
 Good Will: Arguments should "exemplify good will"; involves
integrating intuitions and emotions, though difficult to quantify.

3.3.3. Thinking Ethically: A Framework for Moral Decision Making

o First Step: Get the facts (crucial, often overlooked).

o Beyond Facts: Facts tell "what is," not "what ought to be"; requires appeal to values.
o Complexity: Ethical issues difficult, even for different ideological stances; some
universally wrong, others less clear.
o Five Approaches (Framework for Reflection):

1. Fairness and Justice Approach:

 Root: Aristotle ("equals treated equally, unequals unequally").

 Question: "How fair is an action?".
 Avoid: Favoritism (unjustified benefits) and discrimination
(unjustified burdens).
 Aristotle's View: Ethical knowledge is general and practical;
happiness is activity in accordance with reason (human function).
 Focus: Fair distribution of benefits and burdens among group
members.
 Principle: "Treat people the same unless there are morally relevant
differences between them".

2. The Common Good Approach:

 Root: Greek philosophers (life in community is inherently good).

 Basis: Interlocking societal relationships; requires respect and
compassion for all, especially vulnerable.
 Focus: Common conditions important for everyone's welfare (e.g.,
laws, public safety, healthcare, education, public recreation).
 Origin: Plato, Aristotle, Cicero; John Rawls: "certain general
conditions that are equally to everyone's advantage".
 Emphasis: Viewing self as community member, pursuing shared
values/goals.
 Principle: "What is ethical is what advances the common good".

3. The Rights Approach:

 Root: Immanuel Kant (individual's right to choose freely).

 Dignity: People have dignity based on free choice, not objects to
be manipulated.
 Fundamental Moral Right: To have choices respected.
 Related Rights:

 Right to the Truth.

 Right of Privacy.
 Right not to be injured.
 Right to what is agreed (contracts).

 Assessment: Action is wrong if it violates moral rights; severity of

violation determines wrongfulness.
  Core Idea: Behavior must respect certain interests, activities, areas
of life that merit protection.
 Implied Rights: Privacy, free consent, freedom of conscience.

4. The Utilitarian Approach (mentioned as a framework, discussed in

Chapter 2).
5. The Virtues Approach (mentioned as a framework, discussed in Chapter 2).

o Five Questions for Ethical Problem Solving (Summary):

1. What benefits/harms will each action produce, leading to best overall

consequences?
2. What moral rights do affected parties have, and which action best respects
them?
3. Which action treats everyone the same, without favoritism/discrimination,
unless morally justifiable?
4. Which action advances the common good?
5. Which action develops moral virtues?

3.4. To Whom or What Does Morality Apply?

o Four Aspects:

1. Religious Morality: Human's relationship to supernatural beings (e.g., first

three Ten Commandments).
2. Morality and Nature: Human's relationship to nature (e.g., Native
American cultures, Western tradition's awareness, nature as valuable in
itself).
3. Individual Morality: Individual's relationship to self, personal code (may
not be sanctioned by society/religion); "higher morality" from conscience.
4. Social Morality: Human's relationship to other human beings (most
important, cuts across others, found in most ethical systems).

3.5. Who is Morally/Ethically Responsible?

o Only Human Beings: Morality pertains only to humans; animals/plants are non-
moral or amoral (instinctual behavior).

1. Future possibility: animals might be taught morality if they develop human-

like thought processes.
2. Wolf/eagle example: killed for protection, not moral responsibility.

3.5.1. Moral Judgments

o Definition: Deciding right/wrong in human relations.

o Application: Applies to voluntary actions (freely chosen); involuntary actions
typically not judged.
o Nature: Evaluative (places value), Normative (assesses worth based on standards).
o Complexity: No simple algorithm; requires sensitivity, experience, discernment,
intelligence, goodwill.
o Factors in Judging Conduct:

1. Motives (Intention): Why an action is done; fundamental for morality

(Jesus, Kant's "good will" acting out of duty).
 2. Means: Agency, instrument, or method used to attain an end. Condemn
unjust means; danger in "end justifies the means".
3. Consequences: Effects or results; expected to be good for "right" actions
(utilitarian focus). Society generally approves actions with good motives,
best means, good consequences.
4. The Moral Situation: Involves moral agents (humans with choices, duties,
rights); understanding ingredients helps weigh alternatives.

3.5.2. What Makes an Action Moral?

o Scope of Morality: An action is "moral" if it falls within the scope of morality

(morally significant, positive or negative).
o Not All Actions Moral: Many actions are morally neutral/non-moral (e.g.,
sharpening a pencil).
o Key Features for Moral Action:

1. Involves an Agent: Performed by creatures capable of free choice/free will

(humans).
2. Involves Intention: Done on purpose with a particular motive;
unintentional acts (negligence) can still be morally culpable.
3. Affects Others: Has significant harmful or beneficial consequences for
"moral patients" (others).

 Debate: does morality govern only behavior affecting others, or

also self-affecting behavior (e.g., recreational drugs, not
developing talents)?.
 Religious influence: link between self-affecting behavior and
divine commands.

3.6. Why Should Human Beings Be Moral?

o Fundamental Question: Is there a clear foundation or basis for morality?.

o Premise: No society without moral regulation; human existence tied to social life.
o Moral Purpose: Rules to overrule self-interest for collective benefit (John Hospers).
o Arguments for Morality:

1. Argument from Enlightened Self-Interest:

 Generally better to be good; benefits individuals if all act morally

(e.g., no killing, stealing).
 Individual benefits and avoids ostracism/punishment. Compelling,
though not foolproof.

2. Argument from Tradition and Law:

 Traditions and laws, established over time, urge morality; respect

for the effort put into them.
 How most people learn morality (self-interest, divine command,
social norms).

3. Common Human Needs:

 Humans share needs/desires (friendship, love, happiness, freedom,

peace, creativity, stability).
 Satisfying these needs requires moral principles: cooperation,
freedom from fear.
  Morality not identical to self-interest (Hospers).
 Morality exists due to human needs and importance of cooperative
living.
 Adhering to principles enables peaceful, happy, creative,
meaningful lives.

o Consequences of Moral Decline: Crime, death, looting, instability, deviance,

suicide, human rights violations, corruption, socio-economic-political crises.
o Motivations to "Be Moral":

1. Self-respect.
2. Social acceptance.
3. Avoidance of societal punishment.
4. Religious command.
5. Role modeling for children.
6. Note: Not all apply to every person (e.g., nonbelievers, nonparents).

o Two Components of "Why be moral?":

1. 1) Why Society Needs Moral Rules (Hobbes's perspective):

 Prevent societal collapse.

 Reduce human suffering.
 Promote human flourishing.
 Resolve conflicts justly.
 Assign praise/blame, reward/punishment, guilt.
 Morality is a social activity; requires more than one person.
 Rules enable collective goals.

2. 2) Why I Should Be Moral:

 Occasional personal disadvantage leads to overall, long-term

advantage.
 A complete moral life (rooted in moral acts) is ultimately not
against self-interest.

Chapter Summary

o Ethics is vital for healthy society and individual well-being.

o Morality involves habits, customs, values, laws, and ideologies governing human
actions; it promotes peace and stability.
o Traditional ethical theories (utilitarianism, deontology, virtue theory) continue to be
developed and complemented by newer insights (principlism, narrative ethics,
feminist ethics).
o Moral practice is essential for developing a moral character.
o Understanding why one should be moral is crucial for committing to moral principles.