• To define reason and impartiality as minimum requirements for morality '

• To apply the 7-step moral reasoning model and the value clarification process

ACTIVITY 

Read these arguments. Are these based on reason? Defend your answer.

1."You didn't even finish high school. How could you possibly know about this? "

2. I am filing for reconsideration of the offenses complained about. Since I am a well-known athlete, I can make your University great again.

3. Oh, Officer, there s no reason to give me a traffic ticket for going too fast because I was just on my way to the hospital to bring blood bags to my dying child. They are needed in a few minutes. 

4. After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe and anything from a woman who is not married, was once arrested, smells a bit weird.

5. Linus Pauling, winner of two unshared Nobel prizes, chemistry, another for peace, stated his daily medication of Vitamin C delayed the onset of his cancer by twenty years. Therefore, vitamin C is effective in preventing cancer.

6. "UFOs are not real, because the great Carl haven't held a Sagan said so." You steady job since 1992. Worse than that, we couldn't find a single employer who'd provide you with a good reference."

7. People like you don't understand what it's like to grow up in the slums. You have no right to argue about the gang violence on our streets."

8. Well it's not like you graduated from a good school, so I can see why you wouldn't know how to properly grade a writing assignment. 

9. You're clearly just too young to understand."

10 "How can problems make a decision about someone having mara if you've never been married yourself?

ANALYSIS 

1. Which arguments are attacks on the personality of the source of the argument?

 2. Which arguments are an appeal to pity? 

3. Which argument/s is/are appeal to authority?

4. Are these arguments based on reason?

The minimum requirements of morality are reason and impartiality. "Moral judgments must be backed up by good reason and impartiality. "Morality requires the impartial consideration of each individual interests." Moral judgments, or resolving a dilemma of moral judgments must be backed by good reason. 

Reason and impartiality refer to a mental activity following the basic principle of consistency, the lack of contradiction between one idea and another. It is a process of deriving necessary conclusions from premises, avoiding all forms of deception or fallacy of reasoning. It avoids ad hominem, by not attacking the personality of the opponent and instead directing one's argument against his idea. Examples of argumentum ad hominem are # 1, 4, 8 and 9 in the Activity phase of this Lesson. Reason avoids ad misericordiam, appeal to pity, since appearing miserable does not improve an argument. Reason does not resort to ad verecundiam, appeal to authority, one's power and infiuence cannot make a wrong right. Examples of argumentum ad verecundiam are # 2, 5, 6, 7 and 10. In other words, good reasons include consistent and coherent reasons.

A logical, impartial, objective reason avoids ambiguities like equivocation, circular reasoning, amphibology, etc. Coherent reasoning is needed to establish truth and meaningfulness of moral judgments. "Morality requires impartial consideration of each individual's interest In arriving at a sound moral Judgment you must listen to everyone trying to speak. Biases and prejudices must be placed between brackets, suspended. Everyone's message, silent or verbal, should be allowed to be unveiled. Everyone has always something to tell. No has a monopoly of the truth. A moral subject must be seen from various perspectives and standpoints.

SCOTT RAE'S 7 STEPS OF MORAL REASONING

The following is another sample method of arriving at an ethical moral decision, the 7 steps of Scott Rae's moral reasoning. (1996)

First, gather the facts, and information. "The simplest way of clarifying an ethical dilemma is to make sure the facts are clear. Ask: Do you have all the facts that are necessary to make a good decision? What do we know? What do we need to know?" 

Second, determine the ethical issues, similar to "statement of the problem.".... The competing interests are what create the dilemma. Moral values and virtues must support competing interests in order for an ethical dilemma to exist. If you cannot identify the underlying values/virtues then you do not have an ethical dilemma. Often people hold these positions strongly and with passion because of the value/virtue beneath them." 

Third, determine what virtues/principles have a bearing on the case. This is similar to identifying the relevant factors (internal and external). "In an ethical dilemma certain values and principles are central to the competing positions. Identify these. Determine if some should be given more weight than others. Ask what the source for the principle is constitution, culture, natural law, religious tradition.. These supplement biblical principles."

Fourth, list the alternatives or develop a list of options. "Creatively determine possible courses of action for your dilemma. Some will almost immediately be discarded but generally the more you list the greater potential for coming up with a really good one. It will also help you come up with a broader selection of ideas."

Fifth, compare the alternatives with the virtues/principles. "This step eliminates alternatives as they are weighed by the moral principles which have a bearing on the case. Potentially the issue will be resolved here as all alternatives except one are eliminated. Here you must satisfy all the relevant virtues and values so at least some of the alternatives will be eliminated (even if you still have to go on to step 6). Often here you have to weigh principles and virtues make sure you have a good reason for each weighing.

Sixth, consider the consequences or test the disclose options. "If you the information directly possible consequences include; -family feel alienated, cultural values have been violated to family may take patient another hospital patient may 'give up' -patient might be happy are they finally being told the truth." If possible you continue withholding information consequences include; -about the patient continues to be fearful and anxiouS treatment-patient finds out somehow and trust is family compromiseu are happy cultural values are being respected.

In general, the following may be used to test the options: (Davis, 1999)

• Harm test: Does this option do less harm than the alternatives? 

• Publicity test: Would I want my choice of this option published in the newspaper? 

• Defensibility test: Could I defend my choice of this option before a congressional committee or committee of peers? 

• Reversibility test: Would I still think this option was a good choice if I were adversely affected by it?

• Colleague test: What do my colleagues say when I describe my problem and suggest this option as my solution?

• Professional test: What might my profession's governing body for ethics say about this option? 

• Organization test: What does my company's ethics officer or legal counsel say about this?

Seventh, make a decision. "Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions -it might be you have to choose the solution with the least number of problems/painful consequences. Even when making a "good" decision you might still lose sleep over it!"

Values Clarification

Moral reasoning either arrives at what is right or wrong, good or bad (valuable or not valuable). The moral reasoning process may thus follow a model called values clarification. 

Values clarification method as a part of the moral reasoning model consists of a series of questions which one may ask himself or others in order to arrive at one's true values, values that he really possesses and acts upon. The following consists of the steps of the values clarification model (Raths, L. et al, 1978)

1. Choosing freely. Did you choose this value freely? Where do you suppose you first got that idea?" or "Are you the only one among your friends who feels this way?"

2. Choosing from alternatives

"What reasons do you have for your choice?" or "How long did you think about this problem before you decided?"

3. Choosing after thoughtful consideration

"What would happen if this choice were implemented? If another choice was implemented?" or What is good about this choice? What could be good about the other choices?"

4. Prizing and being happy with the choice

Are you happy about feeling this way?" or "Why is this important to you?"

5. Prizing and willing to affirm the choice publicly 

Would you be willing to tell the class how you feel?" or "Should someone who feels like you stand up in public and tell people how he or she feels?"

6. Acting on the choice

What will you do about your choice? What will you do next? or "Are you interested in joining this group of people who think the same as you do about this?*

7. Acting repeatedly in some pattern of life

Have you done anything about it? Will you do it again?" or "Should you try to get other people interested in this?"

To discover whether or not one really values something, one may go through the process of asking and answering the seven questions. First is choosing freely. Are you free to choose? Are you not under duress? Second, are you choosing from alternatives? If there is only one option, you may not be able to really choose what you really value. Third, are you choosing with a thoughtful consideration of the alternatives. Why are you considering one of the alternatives as your choice and not the others? Fourth, after making a choice, are you happy with it? Or are you having second thoughts? Fifth, are you willing to let others know about your choice, affirm your choice publicly, and are happy to tell them about it? Sixth, are you acting on your choice. If it is about a course in college, are you going to enroll and seriously pursue it? f it is about food, are you going to eat it. If it is about a game, are you going to play it? If it is a choice of principles or rules, are you going to follow it? Seventh, are you acting on it repeatedly? In other words, are you pursuing the course and making it as your career? Would you repeat eating the food? Would continue playing the game, given the chance? And do you always abide by the principle you have chosen to follow? The answers to these questions will ultimately reveal what you really value in life, they will clarify your values.

 The 7 questions can be summed up into 3 big clarifying questions: 1) Did you choose your action freely from among alternatives after thoughtfully considering the consequences of each alternative:

2) Do you prize or cherish your choice by publicly affirming it and by campaigning for others to choose it?;

3) Do vou act on your choice repeatedly and consistently? If the answers to the questions are a IES, then moral the moral choice or decision can be said to be a product of reason.

As a result of the process, one may discover an ideal priority of values. One may need to recollect and re-orient oneself to genuine moral values.

Critique: Creative Responsibility

When a moral problem comes one's way, which may be communicated as a silent or verbal message, or through a happening or an incident, the serious response would be a process of moral reasoning. One may use the aforementioned reasoning models. One may automatically apply classic or traditional frameworks or norms. One may be legalist or situationist. But one significant guide to the moral reasoning process is what ethicist like Fr. Gorospe (1974) termed as "creative responsibility," which has the following characteristics:

First, a creative and fitting response involves some form of positive human action... Second, to give a fitting human response in some form of positive action inevitably means "create" a response. The creative responsibility is something to be discovered and created and is best envisioned in concrete cases...

Third, a creative response means one has to choose from among many possible fitting responses. It is impossible to find only one possible fitting response to a human situation... Fourth, in order that creative response of the individual be authentic he must be in constant dialogue with the community and culture in which he lives. Creative responsibility is not only individual but collective; it is co-responsibility.

Creative responsibility is responding silently or verbally to a call and address an ethical problem creatively by considering all possible points of view, thinking outside the box, using relevant frameworks. There are always available norms or rules to follow, but one should apply them creatively, apply them in the light situations and conditions and be ready to bend the rule where there is no other remedy in sight. It is easier to understand this concept from a wider point of view, like that of a ruler or government. For instance, the response of the government to the problem of drugs, like adopting the policy of killing (murdering) the drug addict, upon the assumption that he/she is a dangerous and useless being, is uncreative and irresponsible.

One technique of coming up with a creative response is applying the phenomenological method of suspending Judgment, placing former knowledge, biases, prejudices, etc. between brackets, letting the thing be or show itself as itself.

1.Group case analysis. Using Scott Rae's 7-step model on the business ethics case, how should the salaries and benefits of a star employee determined?

2. You are the newly elected mayor of your municipality. You got IRA amounting to 20 million pesos. You can work on 3 projects: 1 extension of the municipal hall; 2) construction or a welcome arch boundary on the highway, and 3) scholarships for out-o1-school youths for livelihood programs. Rank these 3 projects from the most important to the least important. Do you really value that which you ranked # 1? Ask yourself the value clarifying questions to test if you really value most your rank 1.

3. State in a metaphorical statement Gorospe's creative responsibility as an approach to a moral problem, e.g. Creative responsibility is thinking without the box for the solution to a moral problem.

CHECK FOR UNDERSTANDING 

1. Why are argumentum ad hominem, ad verecundiam, ad misericordiam out of place in moral response?

2. Reason and impartiality are minimum does requirements of morality. What does this mean? How is this done?

REFLECTION 

Have you used reason and have you been impartial in moral your most recent decisions?

 How have you applied creative responsibility in your approach moral problems?