The African metaphysic, to be sure, is a theistic metaphysic; yet it does not nurture a theistic or supernatural ethic. Just as it was their own reflections that led to the creation of a natural religion, so it was their own reflections on living a harmonious and cooperative life in a human society that led to the creation of a ‘natural’ (a humanistic) ethic. Thus, side by side with Africa 's natural religion (or, theology) is a ‘natural’ ethic grounded in human experiences in living together, a society-oriented morality that, thus, arises from the existential conditions in which people conduct their lives. And so it is, that the moral values of the African people have a social and humanistic, rather than a religious, basis and are fashioned …show more content…
The leading idea of moral intuitionism is that it is possible for us to know some particular and general objective moral facts in a non-inferential fashion. In its classic formulations, moral intuitionism was the favoured view of a number of significant British moral theorists in the first part of the twentieth century, including A.C. Ewing, G.E. Moore, H.A. Prichard, Henry Sidgwick, and importantly, W.D. …show more content…
There is a conception of an inner urge relevant to moral practice referred to as conscience creating a sense of guilt in the individual, convicting him or her of wrong deeds. Since response to a moral rule is ultimately an individual or private affair, the notion of conscience is of great importance to our moral life. It is by virtue of this that the notion of self-sanctioning in moral conduct becomes intelligible. Because of its power to induce a sense of guilt, conscience is held to influence the individual 's moral choice, decision, response, and attitude. This is certainly what the ethical intuitionist would refer to as the intuitive mind. Intuitionism says that basic moral truths are objective; that facts involving moral properties are obtained independently of us, insofar as they do not depend on our actual or hypothetical beliefs or attitudes, provided that the facts in question do not involve these beliefs or attitudes
A conscience is known as an inner feeling or voice that acts as a guideline for the morality of one’s behaviour. In Lorna Dueck’s “Why conscience (or lack of it) is in the news”, she portrays the purpose of a conscience in an individual’s decisions and actions. Dueck questions individual’s conduct then provides solutions to achieve a better world. She includes other sources to strengthen her argument on how one’s conscience reflects their behaviour. As well, Dueck uses a logical perspective to convince the audience the importance of a morally shaped conscience.
In both the Kantian and Utilitarian cases, moral intuition is at odds with established moral philosophies. I see no reason why gut feelings should outweigh tried and tested
This paper will attempt to summarize and explain the essay How to Argue about Disagreement: Evaluative Diversity and Moral Realism by John M. Doris and Alexandra Plakias. They claim that moral realism has a problem with its assertion that all disagreement is superficial, and would not persist under ideal conditions. They cite an experiment by Nisbett and Cohen in 1996 where there seems to be a fundamental disagreement between northern and southern white American men surrounding acceptable violence. Moral realism is the philosophical idea that morality is based in objective fact.
Stout (2005) defines conscience as a seventh sense. She says that conscience is not a behavior or something that we think about, instead conscience is what we feel. “Conscience is neither behavioral nor cognitive. Conscience exists primarily in the realm of affect, better known as emotion” (Stout, 2005, p. 25). Stout (2005) also gives the history of conscience going all the way back hundreds of years when the church taught people that conscience was the difference between doing something “good” and doing something “bad.”
In his article “Framing Moral Intuitions”, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong sets out to reject moral intuitionalism by questioning whether moral intuitions can be justified non-inferentially. He defines a moral intuition as a strong and immediate belief (Sinnott-Armstrong, 47) and for it to be justified non-inferentially is to be able to justify it independently of any other belief (Sinnott-Armstrong, 48). His primary aim is to demonstrate that many of our moral intuitions are unreliable and consequently, that no moral intuition can be justified without inference. He does this by citing several studies that demonstrate how moral intuitions can be subject to “framing effects”. Framing effects are the effects that wording and context can have on our
Evaluating the morality within ourselves they evaluate morality on the principle of what is wrong or right. As equally
10). From the perspective of African ethics, the family is intrinsically good, that is, "good in and of itself" (Molefe, 2016, p. 11). It is unethical not to extend "botho" (humanness) to one's family but also to the community at large (Molefe, 2016, p. 11). In African culture, personhood is evaluated as an aspect of moral virtue. For example, "if p is a person then p ought to display in his conduct the norms and ideals of personhood" (Molefe, 2016, p. 13).
Hence, a police officer’s duty then is to do the right act as approved by moral standards. Therefore, deontological ethics are duty based. Non-consequentialist ethics are divided into two standpoints; act non-consequentialism and rule non-consequentialism. Act non-consequentialism or intuitionism is described as the act of following one’s intuition in order to determine the morality in a particular situation. However, rule non-consequentialism explains that people should follow the rules that are the basis of morality where the consequences are given less importance.
Conclusion Moral objectivism is the idea that moral standards are capable of being applied universally around the world. There are many challenges to this theory stripping it of its validity. However, Shafer-Landau and other philosophers provide evidence to some exceptions still allowing moral objectivity to stand and be valid.
Questions of morality are abstract and extremely touchy. They are subject to enduring debates regarding its origins, nature, and limits, with no possibility of a consensus. Although the theories on morality often pursue diverse angles, among the most interesting ones that have come up in recent times revolve around the question whether human beings are born with an innate moral sense. Some scholars hold the view that humans are born with an inherent sense of morality while others believe the opposite that humans are not born with an innate moral sense holds true. By using Steven Pinker’s
In every day life, we face many situations that require a moral decision. We have to decide what is right and what is wrong? Not always is this an easy task thus, it seems important to analyze how we make our moral decisions. I will start with an analysis of how we make decisions in general
Thesis Statement: Origin of Morality Outline A.Universal Ethics 1.Karl Barth, The Command of God 2.Thomas Aquinas, The Natural Law 3.Thomas Hobbes, Natural Law and Natural Right 4.Immanuel Kant, The Categorical Imperative B.Morality and Practical Reason 1.Practical Reason a.Practical Reason and Practical Reasons C.Evolution of Morality 1.What makes Moral Creatures Moral 2.Explaining the Nature of Moral Judgments F. Answering Questions 1. What is the origin of Morality: Religion or Philosophy? 2. What does religion say about morality?
Manning's Speaking from the Heart: A Feminist Perspective on Ethics (1992). In the first, Callahan offers an optimistic analysis of the heart's contributions to morality. Her eight untechnical chapters provide a clear picture of a complex phenomenon, one that takes into account new psychological understandings of the self, emotion, reason, intuition, developmental change and problem solving. Central to Callahan's case for realism in making moral decisions is her conviction that complete detachment and objectivity are not only impossible, they are undesirable, since the stronger our convictions and the more we appreciate something, the deeper our affections. Callahan argues that emotion, reason, and intuition should be fully integrated and engaged in our depictions of decision making, that we "need to make decisions in a wholistic way that does justice to all our moral resources" (113).
The two moral reasonings are consequentialist and categorical. Consequentialist means the consequences that will result after whatever you do, whether it is the right or wrong thing to do. Categorical moral reasoning locates morality in certain duties and rights. Somethings are just morally wrong even if it brings good outcomes. According to Mill the principle of utility means realizing a consequence of something before you do it,whether your intentions are good or bad.
Hutcheson and Shaftesbury believed that human nature contained all it needed to make moral decisions, along with inclinations to be moral. Moral sense is a kind of sense because, like external senses, it is common to all mankind. It is independent of our will and its deliverances are not conclusions mediated by premises. In particular it is not mediated by considerations of personal advantage or harm. It is on account of this feature that we are able to admire actions that took place in remote times and regions and even actions that are contrary to our own interests .