Moral Reasoning Part 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

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) TERMINAL National security Family security Economic prosperity A peaceful world Inner harmony Salvation Equality Wisdom Justice An exciting life INSTRUMENTAL Imaginative Honest Kind Friendly Productive Polite Fair Obedient Generous

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.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