Naturalistic Fallacy Examples

What is an ethical or moral dilemma? How does a moral argument differ from a non-moral one? Discuss the implications of the “naturalistic fallacy” (by which I mean the “is-ought fallacy”).

An ethical dilemma is a situation where a person has to choose between two or more moral imperatives that when acted upon will breach the other moral imperative(s). An example of an ethical dilemma is abortion. Abortion is a topic that is has been debated for many years and will be continue to be discussed in the years to come. The act of ending a pregnancy has invoked debates on a woman’s right and questions about when a fetus becomes a human life. If a pregnancy puts a woman’s life at risk or if a woman chooses not to continue pregnancy for personal reasons

For instance, doctors should not falsify information during a clinical trial in order to pass a drug. These arguments are centered on a need to adhered to morals rather than with self-interest in mind. Non-moral argument on the other hand is an argument that does not contain a moral premise.

Naturalistic fallacy (“is-ought fallacy”) is the assumption that things should be a certain way because a certain thing is this way. For example, someone might argue that eating candy is harmful for one’s teeth and thus one should prohibit from eating candy. This assumption gives value to the fact that eating candy can harm one’s teeth and assumes that the wellness one’s teeth is a concern, which may not be the case. The is-ought fallacy, proposed by David Hume give rise to the question of how one knows what is of value or what is morally right or should be promoted based on a positive.

With regards to the Kansas City Hyatt disaster, is it unethical for design engineers to not ensure that their designs are followed to the letter? Regardless of your answer, would it be a good idea to add such a requirement to engineering codes? Please reference some law or codes for MI or