PREFINAL EXAM & QUIZ REVIEWER

Feeling as a Modifier of Moral Decision-Making

Feelings in Decision-Making
Feeling – in general, is an emotional state or reaction, experience of physical sensation.
Examples: feeling of joy, warmth, love, affection, tenderness, etc.
“Several studies conclude that up to 90% of the decisions we made are based on emotion. We
use logic to justify our actions to ourselves and to others.”
Positive effects of emotional decision-making:
 A totally emotional decision is very fast in comparison to a rational decision. This is
reactive (and largely subconscious) and can be useful when faced with immediate danger,
or in decisions of minimal significance.
 Emotions may provide a way for coding and compacting experience, enabling fast
response selection. This may point to why expert’s “gut” level decisions have high
accuracy rates.
 Decisions that start with logic may need emotions to enable the final selection, particularly
when confronted with near equal options.
 Emotions often drive us in directions conflicting with self-interest.
Negative effects of emotional decision-making:
 We make quick decisions without knowing why and then create rational reasons to justify
a poor emotional decision.
 Intensity of emotions can override rational decision-making in cases where it is clearly
needed.
 Immediate and unrelated emotions can create mistakes by distorting and creating bias in
judgments. In some cases, this can lead to unexpected and reckless action.
 Projected emotions can lead to errors because people are subject to systematic inaccuracy
about how they will feel in the future.
Moral Statements as Expressions of Feelings
According to some linguistic philosophers called emotivists, the statement “stealing is wrong” is
not a statement of fact, it is an expression of desire or emotion. The rule or maxim “Stealing is
wrong” means “I desire that you do not steal.” An emotional statement is not verifiable like
factual statement.
Emotivism – is the view that moral judgments do not function as statements of fact but rather as
expressions of the speaker’s or writer’s feelings.
To further explain this view, the emotivists thus goes further by saying that ethical statements
being emotional expressions are not verifiable. Emotional expressions are not assertions of what
is true or false. There is no dispute or there can be no dispute on matters of taste. “De gustibus
non dis putandum est” one cannot argue with one’s taste/emotion.
Managing Feelings
Aristotle wrote:
“Anyone can get angry --- that is easy --- but to do this to the right person, to the right extent, at
the right time with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for everyone, nor is it easy
(Book II, Nicomachean Ethics). In other words, your anger should not be displaced. The moral
person manages his/her feelings well. (In short, to be an ethical person, one must manage
his/her feelings well).

Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirements for Morality

The minimum requirements of morality reason and impartiality. Moral judgments must be
backed up by good reason and impartiality. Morality requires the impartial consideration of each
individual’s interest. Resolving a dilemma of moral judgments must be backed with good reason.
Reason – conducts the study, research, investigation, fact-finding. It uses logic, the principle of
consistency, avoids fallacious reasoning to come up with a truthful and accurate proposition.
PREFINAL EXAM & QUIZ REVIEWER
Impartiality – decisions should be based on objective criteria, rather than on bias, prejudice, or
personal preference.
Fallacious reasoning such as:
 Ad Hominem – attacking the personality of the opponent
 Ad Verecundiam – appeal to authority
 Ad Miserecordiam – appeal to pity
Have no place in moral decisions.

Scott Rae’s 7 Steps of Moral Reasoning

1) gather facts, information
2) determine ethical issues, similar to the statement of the problem
3) determine relevant virtues/principles have a bearing on the case
4) list alternatives or develop a list of options
5) compare the alternatives to virtues/principles
6) consider consequences or test the options
7) make a decision

In general, this 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 to 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 the 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?

Values Clarification
“Moral reasoning either arrives at what is right or wrong, good or bad (valuable or not valuable).”
Values clarification method as a part of the moral reasoning model consists of a series of
questions which one may ask himself/herself or others in order to arrive at one’s true values,
values that the person really possesses and acts upon. The following consists of steps of the
values clarification model: (Raths, L. et al, 1978)
1. Choosing freely (Did you choose this freely? Where do you suppose you first got that idea?
Are you the only one among your friends who feels this way?)
2. Choosing from alternatives (What reasons do you have for your choice? How long di 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? What is good about this choice? What
could be good about other choices?)
4. Prizing and being happy with the choice (Are you happy about feeling this way? 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? Should someone who feels like you stand up in public and tell people how he/she
feels?)
6. Acting on the choice (What will you do about your choice? What will you do next? Are you
interested in joining this group of people who think the same as you do about this?)
PREFINAL EXAM & QUIZ REVIEWER
7. Acting repeatedly in some pattern in life (Have you done anything about it? Will you do it
again? Should you try to get people interested in this?)
These 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 publicly affirming it and by campaigning for others to
choose it?
3. Do you act on your choice repeatedly and constantly? If the answer to the questions is
YES, then the moral choice or moral decision can be said to be a product of reason.

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 significant guide to the moral reasoning process is what ethicist like Fr. Gorospe (1974)
termed as “creative responsibility,” which has the following characteristics:
1. Involves positive human action;
2. Creates a response;
3. Means to choose from among many possible fitting responses;
4. Individual must be in constant dialogue with the community.
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.

The Difference between Reason and Will

The “will” is what “disposes” what the “intellect proposes.”

“The moral person is endowed with an intellect and will.”
Reason – conducts the study, research, investigation, fact-finding. It uses logic, the principle of
consistency, avoids fallacious reasoning to come up with a truthful and accurate proposition.
Will – is the faculty of the mind that is associated with decision making. It is the one that says
yes or no. The job of the will is to make a decisive conclusion.
Decision making is an activity in which the will can be developed while a culture of spoon feeding
does not develop the will.
Jean Paul Sartre – A French philosopher and also the most popular existentialist says that an
individual is nothing until he/she starts making decisions.
Free Will – is the “capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various
alternatives.” It is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded,
the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants. It is the power of self-determination.
When the will is free, there is freedom.
To Hornedo (1972), the stuff of the free will is a multi-dimensional power, energy, or strength.
One is free to the degree that he has energy, that is physically free to the degree that he is
physically strong; materially or economically strong and so on.
“Emphasis is made on what freedom is, and not on what it is not.”
According to Søren Kierkegaard, “Purity of the heart is to will one thing.”
According to Paul Tillich (1952), “courage is self-affirmation ‘in-spite-of,’ that is in spite of the
which tends to prevent the self from affirming the self.
Courage – is “the affirmation of being in spite of non-being.” It is affirming the world in spite of its
tragedies.
PREFINAL EXAM & QUIZ REVIEWER

The Meaning of Ethical Framework

Ethical framework – a set of codes that an individual uses to guide his or her behavior. It is what
people use to distinguish right from wrong in the way they interact with the world. It is used to
determine the moral object of an action.
 Virtue or Character Ethics of Aristotle – For Aristotle, the ethical person is virtuous, one
who has developed good character or has developed virtues. One attains virtues when
he/she actualizes his/her potentials or possibilities, the highest of which is happiness.
Happiness is the joy of self-realization, self-fulfillment, the experience of having actualized
one’s potentials.
 Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St. Thomas Aquinas – For St. Thomas, what is
right is what follows the natural law, the rule which says, “do good and avoid evil.” In
knowing the good as distinguished from evil, one is guided by the Ten Commandments
which is summed up as loving God and one’s fellowmen.
 Deontological and Duty Framework of Immanuel Kant – Deontology centers on the “rights
of individuals and the intentions associated with particular behavior… equal respect…
given to all persons.” The “deontological approach is based on universal principles such as
honesty, fairness, justice, and respect for persons and property.” It is based on the
categorical imperative that is, one must act such that his/her maxim will be the maxim of
all. Acting out of duty (deon) is acting out of good will or intentions.
 Utilitarianist, Teleological and Consequentialist Framework – This approach focuses on
consequences. What is ethical is what has good consequences.
 Love and Justice Framework – What is ethical is that which is just and that which is loving.
Justice is giving what is due to others while love is giving even more than what is due to
others.

Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics – is person-based rather than action-based. It looks at the virtue or moral character
of the person carrying the out an action rather than at ethical duties and rules or the
consequences of particular actions. It provides guidance as the sort of characteristics and
behaviors a good person will seek to achieve. It is the “ethics of behavior” which focuses on the
character of the persons involved in the decision or action. If the person in question has good
character and genuine motivation and intentions, he/she is behaving ethically.
Aristotle gave two types of virtue:
1. Intellectual virtues – refer to excellence of the mind. It includes the ability to understand,
reason, and judge well.
2. Moral virtues – refer to a person’s dispositions to act well. It disposes a person to act well.
Virtue – is an attained, actualized or self-realized potential or possibility.
In short, virtue means excellence and virtue ethics is excellence ethics.
Virtue as a Mean
For Aristotle, virtue is the Golden Mean between two extremes. The virtue of courage is a mean
between two extremes of deficiency and extreme namely cowardice and foolhardiness
(recklessness), respectively. Too little courage is cowardice and too much courage is
foolhardiness. (MacKinnon, et al., 2015)
Virtue Ethics in Other Traditions
Confucius emphasized two virtues:
 Jen (or Ren) – means humaneness, human-heartedness, and compassion
 Li – means propriety, manners, and culture
Hinduism emphasizes 5 basic moral values: Non-violence, Truthfulness, Honesty, Chastity,
Freedom from greed.
Buddhism has intellectual virtues: (right understanding and right mindfulness) and moral virtues:
(right speech, right action, and right livelihood)
PREFINAL EXAM & QUIZ REVIEWER
Christian tradition teaches four cardinal moral virtues namely: prudence, justice, temperance,
and fortitude.
“Being a person of virtue is a product of deliberate, consistent, continuous choice and practice of
living the virtue of virtues.”
St. Thomas’ Natural Law Ethics

Eternal Law – is what God wills for creation which is beyond human understanding or which we
cannot fully grasp given our limitation.
Natural Law – is the “ordinance of Divine Wisdom, which is made known to us by reason and
which requires the observance of moral order.” This is also defined as “the eternal law as far as it
made known by human reason.” (What is ethical is what the natural law says or simply, do good
and avoid evil as St. Thomas says).
Divine Law – decreed by God.
Human Law – decreed by man.
Positive Law – laws that are enacted and requires for their promulgation a sign external to
persons. (In other words, it is a law must be made known to the people who are expected to
obey it).
St. Thomas defined law in general as “an ordinance of reason which is for the common good and
has been promulgated by one having charge of the community.”
For a law to be a law, it must have four requisites namely:
a. Ordinance (order, command) of reason
b. For the common good
c. Promulgation (proclamation)
d. By one who has charge of the community
“A law must be a product of reason not purely of emotion.”