Moral Reasoning Part II 3/8/2012. Learning Objectives Use knowledge and analyses of social problems...

Moral ReasoningPart II

3/8/2012

Learning Objectives

• Use knowledge and analyses of social problems to evaluate public policy, and to suggest policy alternatives, with special reference to questions of social justice, the common good, and public and individual responsibility.

Opportunities to discuss course content

• Today-11-2

About Paper 2• What it Contains– Revised Paper I paper – A critical analysis and a moral analysis of the

Controversial Policy Solution

• 9-11 TOTAL Pages- 15 Works Cited

• Due in class on 4/12• Rubric

MORAL REASONING

MORAL REASONING

• A methodology to help people deal with moral dilemmas

• The Key to doing well on paper 2

MORAL REASONING

• Value-laden, i.e., ethical, perspective

• Based on Ruggiero method

Moral Reasoning and Paper 2

• Your paper has a value-laden problem

• Paper 2 uses moral reasoning to assess the moral components of each position

• Read the Handbook section on Moral Reasoning

Moral Reasoning Requirements for the American Dilemmas Project

• For Each Side in Paper 2 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

VALUES, OBLIGATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES

The Heart of the Model

ACCEPTABLE CRITERIA FOR MORAL DECISION-MAKING

• Obligations

• Values

• Consequences

Be sure to consider each criteria before making any moral decisions.

WHAT ARE VALUES?

• Beliefs about what is good/desirable and bad/undesirable

• Guide us on how to behave• Unique to each individual

• Change due to time, experience

SOME EXAMPLES OF VALUES

(terminology: Milton Rokeach)

TERMINALNational securityFamily securityEconomic prosperityA peaceful worldInner harmonySalvationEqualityWisdomJusticeAn exciting life

INSTRUMENTALImaginativeHonestKindFriendlyProductivePoliteFairObedientGenerous

Questions to Help identify Values

• What utility do those holding a side expect to achieve?

• What interest do those holding a given position wish to protect or gain?

• What harm do those holding a position wish to prevent?

When Values Conflict

• Select the higher ideal (value)

• Select the action that will achieve the greatest good

• If there is no good, then choose the one with the lesser evil

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

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

Moral Reasoning and Dilemmas

• 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.

NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES

What are they

• Short statements about how humans “should” act.

• Choose those that apply to your stakeholders’ positions and why they are applicable

• These help you select the more moral choice

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

Principle of Consistency

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

Principle of Impartiality

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

Principle of Rationality

All legitimate moral acts must be supported by generally accepted reasons.

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.

Principle of Right Desire

• we ought to desire what is really good for us and nothing else

MAKING A MORAL DECISION

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

1. Study the details of the case

2. Identify the relevant criteria• Obligations• Values• Consequences• Identify the foundational values at play

3. Determine courses of action

4. Choose the most morally responsible action

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

1. 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.

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

2. Identify the relevant criteria• Here you should identify the obligations,

values and consequences. • Whom will they affect, in what way. • Rank 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.

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

3. 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

USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY

4. Choose the action that is most morally responsible after reviewing the information above– No Set Formula

– See which side wins the most important criteria

– See which side wins the most criteria

Conclude by saying which side has the more “moral” argument