Moral Reasoning 1

Applied ethics is a branch of moral philosophy that attempts to apply ethical theories, principles and concepts to real-life moral issues.

To deal with real-life, practical moral issues, it is necessary to develop good moral reasoning skills. Through moral reasoning, we analyze and examine the justifications for moral beliefs, judgments and decisions.

Moral reasoning involves not only a thorough understanding of the backgrounds of various moral issues but also the ability to think critically about these issues.

Moral reasoning Rule #1: Distinguish what is relevant (e. g Moral reasoning Rule #1: Distinguish what is relevant (e.g. shared moral values; objective knowledge of actions, events and situations) from what is irrelevant (e.g. subjective feelings; personal preferences).

Moral reasoning Rule #2: Focus on what is relevant and ask the right questions.

Moral reasoning Rule #3: Consider alternative viewpoints Moral reasoning Rule #3: Consider alternative viewpoints. Try to understand why different people may have different views by examining and evaluating their arguments.

Moral reasoning Rule #4: Construct reasoned arguments to support your own point of view.

A theory is a framework of principles and related concepts that can be employed to make sense of people, things, actions, events and situations. Theories can also be used to analyze and deal with various types of problems.

We can make use of moral theories, principles and concepts [1] to justify our moral beliefs, judgments and decisions, and [2] to evaluate other people’s arguments and viewpoints.

While moral theories, principles and concepts are useful tools of moral reasoning, they should not be seen as ready-made solutions that can be applied mechanically to deal with moral problems.

Take Kantian ethics as an example Take Kantian ethics as an example. It is a theory that provides important insights about the moral duties we have towards one another as members of the moral community.

However, the Kantian framework seems inadequate when it comes to moral issues that involve other beings such as fetuses, infants, the severely retarded, people in an indefinite coma, non-human animals, corporations, or robots with artificial intelligence.

In this regard, Mary Anne Warren’s account of ‘moral status’ is particularly useful as it encourages us to think seriously about how far we should extend our moral concern to other beings.

For Kant, a being is either a ‘person’ (with the highest intrinsic value or full moral status) or ‘not a person’ (with no intrinsic value or moral status). For Warren, moral status comes in degrees which vary between full and none, depending on the ‘morally relevant properties’ of a particular being.

Finally, according to Kant, only humans can qualify as ‘persons’ (i. e Finally, according to Kant, only humans can qualify as ‘persons’ (i.e. all persons are ‘human persons’). But for Warren, ‘humans’ and ‘persons’ are two distinct categories: some beings can be classified as ‘non-person humans’ (e.g. infants) while some other beings can be classified as ‘non-human persons’ (e.g. chimps).

As we will see, the concept of ‘moral status’ is key to understanding the abortion debate, issues surrounding animal rights and various other topics of applied ethics.