CHAPTER THREE

ETHICAL DECISION MAKING AND MORAL JUDGMENTS

3.1. Introduction
One has to make decisions about which desire to satisfy and which to give up or postpone. How
to make a right or correct decision and by what standard that one decision is right and another
wrong is always a puzzle. One of the functions of morality is to give guidance in dealing with
these puzzles. On the other hand, there are always conflicts among people. It is always a problem
for a society to maintain order and to prevent or solve the conflicts among people reasonably.
Another function of morality is to provide principles and rules that are acceptable to everyone
and encourage people to live together peacefully and cooperatively. Many problems will arise
in people’s lives and in society. It is better to go back to the ethical theories to reflect upon the
meaning and the end of morality and see what kind of principles can be a guide in taking action
or in making moral judgments. One also needs to know why one should be moral.

3.1.1. How Can We Make Ethical Decisions And Actions?

In real life conditions we may get difficulties to always do the right thing. What we often
considered as right and correct might put us in difficult condition with others and affect our
social relation adversely. Individuals could give their own justification to testify that they are
Right or correct! We often claim that we make right decision and actions. We regret when
we make wrong decision and action. The ethical nature of our action and decision, however, is
very much dependent upon our notion of ``Good’ and ``Bad, `` Right and`` wrong``.

What things are good or bad? There are things which we consider good or desirable for their
result-for what they lead to. There are also things which we consider good not because of
what they lead to but because of what they are in themselves: this are considered as worth
having or perusing not merely as way of getting other things but because of their own intrinsic
nature. The first kind of good is called instrumental good because the goodness of these things
lies in their being instruments towards the attainment of the other things which are considered
good not simply as instruments. The second category of good is called intrinsic good because
we value these things (whatever they may turn out to be) not for what they lead to but for
what they are.

There are things which are instrumentally bad and intrinsically bad. Some things can fulfill
both qualities. In our country things such as Female Genital Mutilation, early marriage,
kidnapping, abduction, Ignorance, poverty, corruption, murder some of the things which are
considered to be unethical or bad or evil practices which are to be eradicated.

One of the key tasks of ethical reasoning, generally, is to analyze and critically consider the
values we hold and the claims we make in relation to the perceived obligations that we might
have towards one another.

A second key task of ethics is to evaluate the adequacy of reasons that we give for our actions:
it considers, for example, whether the reasons offered to support a particular course of action are
based on sound evidence and/or logical argument.

Ethical values are usually not as easy to understand as other kinds of values, e.g., it is
probably easier to explain the (mainly) practical value of energy than it is to explain the ethical
value of courage. In turn, it is easier to test a person’s blood pressure than it is to determine
whether or not they are virtuous. Moreover, ethical problems are often not as clear as other
kinds of problems and resolving ethical problems as definitively is not always possible.

The aim of ethics is:

 To take the high moral ground and tell people what to do,

 to offer tools for thinking about difficult problems

As complex as ethical situations may be, however, there is still an obligation on everyone
involved in ethically-challenging situations to resolve any problems that arise in the most
sincere, reasonable and collaborative way possible. This means that they must be prepared
to review and revise their position in the light of reflection, discussion and changing
circumstances.
 3.1.2. Ethical Principles and Values of Moral Judgments

Sometimes the ups and downs and complexities of life mean that these simple rules are
sometimes put to the test. Consider the idea that it is wrong to kill. Does this mean that capital
punishment is wrong? Is it wrong to kill animals? Is killing in self-defence wrong? Is the
termination of pregnancy wrong? Is euthanasia wrong? If we try to apply our everyday
notions of right and wrong to these questions, straightforward answers are not always
forthcoming. We need to examine these questions in more detail; and we need theoretical
frameworks that can help us to analyze complex problems and to find rational, coherent solutions
to those problems. Whilst some people attempt to do this work individually, for themselves,
philosophers attempt to find general answers that can be used by everyone in society.

3.1.3. Moral intuitions and Critical Reasoning

 The study of ethics involves reasoning about our feelings

 It involves making sense of and rationalizing our intuitions about what is ‘right’ or ‘good’.
 Almost all people, to a greater or lesser extent, are capable of experiencing feelings of
empathy towards others.
 Empathy provides us with a sense of what others are feeling and may thereby allow us to
identify with other people.
 Our moral conscience, then, is based on emotions, but should also be supported by reason.
 All societies are characterized by their own ethical ideas – expressed in terms of attitudes
and beliefs – and their own customs (their notions of what is considered customary).
 Philosophical ethics, however, asks us to take a step back from these influences and instead
to reflect critically on our sentiments and attitudes.

3.1.3.1. Rationalization

 A rationalization occurs when we use what at first glance seem to be rational or credible
motives to cover up our true (and perhaps unconscious) motives.
 Studying ethics, then, involves attempting to find valid reasons for the moral arguments that
we make.
 Most people already have general ideas – or what philosophers call ‘intuitions’ or
‘presumptions’ – about what they think is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’.
 But a philosophical approach to ethics requires people to think critically about the moral
ideas that they hold, to support or refute those ideas with convincing arguments and to be
able to articulate and explain the reasons and assumptions on which those arguments are
based.
 In moral philosophy, an argument is not simply about our beliefs or opinions; instead, it is
about the reasons underlying those beliefs or opinions.
 This means that the real value of discussing and debating ethical questions is not to ‘win the
argument’ or to ‘score points’ against the other person!
 It is more important to provide carefully considered arguments to support our ideas, and to
allow for rational – and deeper – understanding of the reasons underlying our beliefs, ideas
and attitudes.
 Crucially, this requires careful listening to, analysis of and learning from the arguments that
others make.
3.1.3.2. Types of reasoning
We can uncover the types of errors in our own and others’ arguments by using ‘critical
reasoning’. Three forms of critical reasoning that individuals can use to justify their arguments
are outlined below;

A. Reasoning by analogy explains one thing by comparing it to something else that is similar,
although so different. In a good analogy, the similarity outweighs the dissimilarity and is
clarifying. For instance, animals are like and unlike humans, as humans are also animals.
B. Deductive reasoning applies a principle to a situation. For instance, if every person has
human rights, and you are a person, then you have human rights like every person.’
C. Inductive reasoning involves providing evidence to support a hypothesis.

3.1.3.3. Ethics and Religious Faith

There is another important argument that people use when making ethical arguments: religious
faith. For many people, ’morality and religious faith go hand in hand’.

Rather than relying on rational arguments, some people view actions as being right or wrong in
terms of whether they are commanded by a god.
Some moral philosophers believe that we can determine through rational reflection what is
right and wrong.

However, faith-based arguments are relevant to moral philosophy for several reasons. It is
not therefore clear that we can determine what is right and wrong simply through rational
reflection.

3.1.3.4. Testing moral arguments

Critical reasoning is about asking questions whenever anyone gives us a reason to support an
argument. There are three main ways of testing a moral argument.
(1) Factual accuracy. The 18th century philosopher David Hume (1711—1776) argued that we
should not derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’. This means that we cannot say that something is
wrong or right simply based on how things are.
This is reasonable, but it does not mean that ethical discussion should be divorced from fact; the
accuracy of the factual content of a discussion is very important.
Consider the example — of someone who maintains that giving aid to charities working in
Africa is wrong because they believes that 90% of the money donated in fact goes to paying
wealthy consultants and NGO workers, and only 10% goes to alleviate poverty. If this person
were shown that this was factually incorrect, and that in fact 90% of all donations were used to
alleviate poverty, then their moral argument would lose its force.

(2) Consistency. Arguments need to be consistent. One can only argue that it is morally wrong
to kill one person and yet morally acceptable to kill another, if one can demonstrate that there
is a morally relevant difference between the two individuals.

(3) Good will. This one is the most difficult criterion to quantify. While arguments may be
factually correct and consistent, they also need to ‘exemplify good will’. This involves resorting
to our intuitions and emotions, which are notoriously difficult to integrate with rigorous
theoretical debate.
 3.1.4. Thinking Ethically: A framework for Moral Decision Making

The first step in analyzing moral issues is Get the facts. But having the facts is not enough.
Facts by themselves only tell us what is; they do not tell us what ought to be. In addition to
getting the facts, resolving an ethical issue also requires an appeal to values.

Although ethics deals with right and wrong, it is not a discipline that always leads everyone to
the same conclusions. Deciding an ethical issue can be equally difficult for conservatives and
liberals. To guide our reflection on such difficult questions, philosophers, religious teachers
and other thinkers have shaped various approaches to ethical decision-making. The five
different approaches to values to deal with moral issues are: Fairness and Justice, the
common Good, the Utilitarian, the Rights, and the Virtues.

3.1.4.1. Fairness and Justice Approach

The fairness or justice approach to ethics has its roots in the teachings of the ancient Greek
philosopher Aristotle who said that “equals should be treated equally and unequal’s unequally”.
The basic moral question in this approach is:

 How fair is an action?

 Does it treat everyone in the same way, or does it show favoritism and discrimination?

Favoritism gives benefits to some people without a justifiable reason for singling them out;
discrimination imposes burdens on people who are no different from those on whom the
burdens are not imposed. Both favoritism and discrimination are unjust and wrong.

Aristotle believed that ethical knowledge is not precise knowledge, like logic and
mathematics, but general knowledge like knowledge of nutrition and exercise. Also, as it is a
practical discipline rather than a theoretical one; he thought that in order to become "good",
one could not simply study what virtue is; one must actually be virtuous. Aristotle first
establishes what was virtuous. The ultimate goal he called the Highest Good: happiness.
 3.1.4.2. The Common Good Approach
This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical
reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others especially the vulnerable are
requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common conditions
that are important to the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police and
fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreation areas.

This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own good is
inextricably linked to the good of the community. Community members are bound by the pursuit
of common values and goals. The common good is a notion that originated more than 2,000
years ago in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero.

More recently, contemporary ethicist John Rawls defined the common good as "certain general
conditions that are equally to everyone's advantage. Examples of goods common to all include
affordable health care, effective public safety, peace among nations, a just legal system, and an
unpolluted environment. The principle of the common good approach states; “What is ethical
is what advances the common good.”
3.1.4.3. The Rights Approach:
It has its roots in the philosophy of the 18th century thinker Immanuel Kant who focused on
the individual’s right to choose for her or himself. People are not objects to be manipulated; it is
a violation of human dignity to use people in ways they do not freely choose. The basic rights
are:

 The Right to the Truth: We have a right to be told the truth and to be informed about
matters that significantly affect choices.
 The Right of Privacy: We have the right to do, believe, and say whatever we choose in our
personal lives so long as we do not violate the rights of others.
 The Right not to be injured: We have the right not to be harmed or injured unless we freely
and knowingly do something to deserve punishment or we freely and knowingly choose to
risk such injuries.
o The Right to what is agreed: We have the right to what has been promised those with
whom we have freely entered into a contract or agreement.
Generally, in Ethical Problem Solving;
 Once facts have been ascertained, consider five questions when trying to resolve a moral
issue:
1) What benefits and what harms will each course of action produce, and which alternative will
lead to the best overall consequences?
2) What moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course of action best respects those
rights?
3) Which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there is a morally justifiable
reason not to, and does not show favoritism or discrimination?
4) Which course of action advances the common good?
5) Which course of action develops moral virtues?

3.2. To Whom or What Does Morality Apply?

In discussing the application of morality, four aspects may be considered: religious morality,
morality and nature, individual morality, and social morality.

3.2.1. Religious Morality

Religious morality refers to a human being in relationship to a supernatural being or beings. For
example: the Ten Commandments of the Jewish and Christians.

3.2.2. Morality and Nature

“Morality and nature” refers to a human being in relationship to nature. Natural morality has
been prevalent in all primitive cultures. More recently, the Western tradition has also become
aware of the significance of dealing with nature in a moral manner.

3.2.3. Individual Morality

Individual morality refers to individuals in relation to themselves and to an individual code of
morality that may or may not be sanctioned by any society or religion. A person may or may not
perform some particular act, not because society, law, or religion says he may or may not, but
because he himself thinks it is right or wrong from within his own conscience.
 3.2.4. Social Morality
Social morality concerns a human being in relation to other human beings. It is probably the
most important aspect of morality, in that it cuts across all of the other aspects and is found in
more ethical systems than any of the others.

3.3. Who is Morally/Ethically Responsible?

Morality pertains to human beings and only to human beings; all else is speculation. If one wants
to attribute morality to supernatural beings, one has to do so solely on faith. Therefore, when we
use the terms moral and ethical, we are using them in reference only to human beings.

3.3.1. Moral Judgments

Moral judgments refer to deciding what is right and what is wrong in human relations.
Individuals are continually judging their own conduct and that of their fellows. They approve of
some acts and call them right or good. They condemn other acts and call them wrong or evil or
bad. Moral judgments are evaluative because they place value on things or relation or human
actions; determine what is right or wrong, good or bad. They are also normative because they
evaluate or assess the moral worth of something based on some norms or standards. In judging
conduct or action we have to consider motives, means, and consequences and sometimes the
situation.

1. Motives: Motives, as Jesus, Kant, and others have pointed out, are basic for a determination
of morality. The motive refers to the intention or why an action is done. A good motive is a
prerequisite to conduct that we approve without qualification.

2. Means: The term means can be defined as an agency, instrument, or method used to attain an
end. Once chosen, the means become part of the general effect of an act.

3. Consequences: Consequences are the effects or results of a moral decision based on a value.

4. The Moral Situation: A moral situation involves moral agents - human beings who act, are
empowered to make choices, and consciously make decisions. As moral agents, demands are
made on us and place us under obligations: we have both duties and rights.
3.5.2. What Makes an Action Moral?

Philosophically moral, refers to an action which comes within the scope of morality, that is, an
action which is morally significant either in positive way or in a negative way. Not all actions
have a moral sense. Some actions are morally neutral or non-moral. Generally, a moral action
is one which:

 Is performed by agents, creatures that are capable of free choice/ free will
 Is the result of intention; the action was done on purpose with a particular motive
 Has a significant consequence on others in respect of harm or benefits it brings about.

3.4. Why Should Human Beings Be Moral?

There can be no society without moral regulation; man is man only because he lives in a
society; take away from man all that has a social origin and nothing is left but an animal compare
with other animals. We should be moral because being moral is following the rules designed to
overrule self-interest whenever it is in the interest of every one alike that everyone should set
aside his interest.
A. Argument from Enlightened Self-Interest

One can certainly argue on a basis of enlightened self-interest that it is, at the very least,
generally better to be good rather than bad and to create a world and society that is good rather
than one that is bad. As a matter of fact, self-interest is the sole basis of one ethical theory,
ethical egoism. However, it is not being suggested at this point that one ought to pursue one‘s
own self-interest. Rather, an argument is being presented that if everyone tried to do and be good
and tried to avoid and prevent bad, it would be in everyone‘s self-interest.

B. Argument from Tradition and Law

Traditions and laws, established over a long period of time, govern the behavior of human
beings, and because these traditions and laws urge human beings to be moral rather than
immoral, there are good reasons for being so.
 C. Common Human Needs

Morality exists, in part, because of human needs and through recognition of the importance of
living together in a cooperative and significant way. It may not be the case that all human beings
can be convinced that they should be moral, or even that it will always be in each individual‘s
self-interest to be moral. “Why be moral?” Among the more common answers are these:

 Behaving morally is a matter of self-respect.

 People won’t like us if we behave immorally.
 Society punishes immoral behavior.
 God tells us to be moral.
 Parents need to be moral role models for their children.

However, many of these answers won’t apply to every person: nonbelievers, nonparents, people
who don’t respect themselves, people who think that they can escape punishment.

There are two distinct components to the question “Why be moral?”

1) Why does society need moral rules?
2) Why should I be moral?

The five social benefits of establishing and following moral rules accomplish the following:

a) Keep society from falling apart.

b) Reduce human suffering.
c) Promote human flourishing.
d) Resolve conflicts of interest in just and orderly ways.
e) Assign praise and blame, reward and punishment, and guilt.