Moral Reasoning
Introduction
Moral values are the principles or standards that are set to help people to distinguish between right and wrong. Moral values may include honesty, respect, integrity, and loyalty, etc. Moral values are crucial in the shaping of a person’s personality as well as character. Moral values may be shaped by a person, their family, the community, their religion, or even the government. This paper will analyze the two conceptions of moral values (Naturalistic and nonnaturalistic). Conversely, the paper will also tackle the processes of moral reasoning (Intuitive and relational).
The debate between the naturalist and nonnaturalistic is regarding how moral views and how they are related to the world (Natural). Naturalist tries to explain in an ethical language using facts which correspond to the natural world. For example, a statement like “Drinking is bad” is depicted as correct by looking at the facts that prove the bad side of drinking alcohol. Conversely, Nonnaturalist tries to explain moral values differently. They say that despite the moral facts and the truth value of this statement, moral values are determined by someone’s intuition’s nonnaturalist argue that the Statement “Drinking is bad” is only verifiable only based on one’s intuition of moral agency (Johnson,2015).
The naturalistic fallacy is one difference between these two conceptions; this is identified when we look at the appeal to nature. Some people may be tempted to rule something as morally acceptable due to it being natural. Therefore, because this property is not natural, then it’s termed as undesirable. This is the idea people have about what is found in nature; they may view it as good (Ridge,2003).
The Open Question Argument, Philosophers, maintain that it is always possible for one who is competent with moral values to decide on something but later question the choice. For instance, i may choose option A instead of option B, but later i may start questioning whether the answer is option B. Moore used the Open Questions to support the Nonnaturalistic view. He concluded that when a statement like “she is a spinster but is she married” when subjected to open questions may be vulnerable (Johnson,2015).
Intuitionism states that people get to know more about moral properties by observing theses properties. For example, we may watch a dog sleep on a chair through direct observation. We can also know that beating the dog is a wrong thing to do. If we look closely and more keenly, we can discern the appropriate moral properties. It may be easier to watch children abuse their obese friends; it should be easier to identify the wrongness of the child’s acts. For one to discern some properties, it needs someone to be trained to recognize, and the person is keen to identify this property. Intuitionism blends better with nonnaturalistic view as compared to the naturalist view (Ridge,2003).
Explanatory Impotence, Anti reductionist argue that the natural properties that constitute the moral properties play a role in explaining people’s experiences. For instance, during the slavery days, the reference to the moral property being oppressive figures explains the rise of Anti-slavery in the United States. The strategy isn’t available to non-naturalist on how to discern if a property is natural or not. Motivation is achieved through the recognition of moral properties. For instance, moral properties have some power, which makes them motivate people who recognize them. Philosophers argue that the identification of moral properties has a direct influence on the will of those who recognize them. Non-Naturalist argues that moral values don’t motivate individuals (Ridge,2003). The reason for the non-naturalist argument is that people may do specific moral actions but fail to be moved by this action.
In my view, i think nonnaturalistic moral values are more superior and dictate the person’s belief system. People may not be motivated by the moral properties as they may fail to influence them into doing more moral actions. The person’s intuition can determine the actions of an individual as it entails someone closely observing and discerning the moral properties which are desirable and those which aren’t.
Johnson explains two processes that account for moral psychology. The intuitive process affects the process of moral evaluation, which guides most part of an individual’s moral life. Johnson argues for either a third process, or another version of the second process of moral reasoning, which he calls moral deliberation. The theory of moral deliberation occupies seen in chapter 4. Johnson does not go against the dual-process theory, but rather he argues the presence of another crucial process in the lives of our lives that the theory leaves out (Johnson,2015).
The moral deliberation account by Johnson is completely Deweyan. Moral deliberation is the inquiry into problem-solving which seeks to address a certain situation in which the desires, habits, and values of individuals are insufficient when compared to the conditions of the specific scenario. It entails the generation of information regarding the situation and the dramatic rehearsal of imagination of different ways to solve the issue (Johnson,2015). Johnson has adopted the Hog view by Dewey, which is regulated by the qualitative considerations. The objective of inquiry is always to change a certain problematic situation into a stable and viable condition that enables us to move onwards in a satiable way.
The procedure of inquiry in Moral deliberation is said to be reasonable. The reason for this name is because it entirely changes the situation in a way that handles the problem fully in a good way. The process doesn’t only alter individuals’ views on the world, but they also change the world at large. The change also enhances the relations of the individuals to the world (Johnson,2015).
Conclusion
The paper has tackled the differences between naturalistic and nonnaturalistic moral views. I used different aspects to distinguish the differences between the two accounts. Furthermore, i have addressed the intuitive and Moral deliberation processes. The paper discerned that the best account of moral reasoning is the Nonnaturalistic reasoning as it entails observing actions closely and identifying the moral properties which are desirable and non-desirable.
References
Johnson, M. (2015). Morality for humans: Ethical understanding from the perspective of cognitive science. University of Chicago Press.
Ridge, M. (2003). Moral non-naturalism.