Ethical Reasoning Definitions

Ethical Reasoning Final

Theology

The study of the nature of God and religious belief. Who is God? Is there a God?

Cosmology

The branch of philosophy that deals with the nature, origin, and structure of the universe. Where are we?

Anthropology

The study of humans, their behavior, societies, and cultures. Who are we?

Epistemology

The study of knowledge, belief, and the nature of justification. How do we know what we know? (Bible is epistemological claim)

Theodicy

The attempt to justify the goodness of God in the face of evil and suffering in the world. Why is there pain in the world? IS>Ought

Soteriology

The study of salvation and how it is achieved in various religious contexts. It explores the means and significance of being saved. Is change possible?

Ecclesiology

The study of the church, its structure, function, and role in society. Who are our people? (Us vs Them, defining our we)

Eschatology

The study of the future, of end times. Where are we going?

Christendom

A period from 313 (Constantine) to 1517 (Luther) when the church was all one unified regime of truth. Faint sense of personal identity. Bible only priests could explain, authorities put in place by God to rebel against them was to rebel against God. God’s always up to something, no rain = He’s angry. Trust church with life, heretic behaviour would be choosing your own thing.

Moral Philosophy

Branch of philosophy that considers what is right and wrong and why

Theological Ethics

Trying to think about moral philosophy while believing in God

Practical theology

Highlighting the connections between what we believe about God and how we actually live our lives.

Is-Ought Dilemma

Is - Facts or experiences in the world

Ought - Our conclusions about how things ought to be in our world.

• We don’t all agree on our OUGHTS.

• Reason is how we get from Is → Ought.

2024

Lack of church, Major individualism, self-entitlement/interpretation.

Identity-based epistemology

Identity-Based Epistemology/Standpoint Epistemology - ON EXAM

How we know things.

Lived Experience of an individual is how we know things

We all have different groups, separated by a wall and everyone has their own truth. As a result we are rooted in a particular standpoint and fail to see the other side.

• Members of diff identity groups can never fully understand each other

• Each has their “my truth” rooted in their experiences which provide a certain “standpoint”

Ethics

the discipline that studies and prescribes norms for human behaviour in the context of broader convictions on the proper goals of individual and social life.

• What should we do and why?

• Normative discipline

Descriptive Disciplines

Describe things as they are, think IS

Normative Disciplines

Make claims about the way things should be, think OUGHT

Relative Ethics

Ethical Norms are simply conventions of a particular culture or social group (they are different in each group, no universal standard)

Universal Ethics

Ethical norms exist across all cultures regardless of cultural uniqueness (same ethics for all)

Foundations for Christian Ethics

1. Basic Convictions

2. Context-Based Loyalties

3. Method of Reasoning

1. Basic Convictions

THEOLOGY - Fundamental beliefs that shape our view of everything else

• Often invisible, they are “obvious” and thus taken for granted

• Evident in how we live and what we say

• Cannot be proven with certainty but not irrational

  • For example, Human rights are universal, or the bible as our authority

2. Context-Based Loyalties

IDENTITY - Elements of our social environment and personal history that influence how we perceive the world

• Not primarily rational but emotional too

• Not try to eliminate loyalties but become aware of them

• Key Loyalties to ourselves, to relationships, to practices, to communities.

3. Method of Reasoning

RATIONALITY - Organized patterns of thinking about ethical decisions

• Methods that are described by field of moral philosophy (what is right and wrong)

• Based on our rational capacity to evaluate arguments and draw conclusions.

1. Pre-Modern Time

Pre 1700

Dominant disciplines: Philosophy and Theology

Dominant Orientation: Toward the Past

Relied heavily on biblical authority for reason.

Reason reliable

2. Modern

1700-1950

Dominant Discipline: Rationalist Philosophy (less about past, more about present and future reasoning) and Natural Sciences

Dominant Orientation: Toward the Future (reason reliable, lots of science, age of enlightenment).

3. Post Modern

Suspicious of reason in light of 20th century disasters (Holocaust/World Wars etc.)

Dominant discipline: Sociology (social context, where you from is everyt)

Dominant orientation: Inward

Reason unreliable, knowledge came from where you were from therefore all biased. No facts only interpretations.

4. “Woke”

Post-modern Skepticism replaced with extreme moral certainty through lenses of identity and social justice

Dominant Discipline: intersectionality (what makes you)

Dominant Orientation: Around and Forward (situations of injustice and a progressive future)

Reason not reliable all about identity and power.

Argument

Any chain of thought in which reasons or premises are offered in support of a particular conclusion.

Usually go wrong if false premises, conclusion not req’d by premises.

Motivated Reasoning (a word of caution)

Basic Problem: human motivates complex and rarely objective(w/ our personal feeling and opinions)

Cognitive dissonance: state when confronted with info that contradicts previous beliefs

Confirmation bias: reduce dissonance by elevating evidence that confirms our beliefs and ignores evidence that rejects our beliefs.

Fallacy

A particular kind of poor reasoning in which all forms are invalid

Ad Hominen Fallacy

Argument that avoids content of opposing perspective by attacking the person advancing it.

Guilt by Association Fallacy

Discrediting a claim/idea by associating it with an undesirable person. Substance of argument buried by negative common association.

Straw Man Fallacy

Summarizing an argument in a way that makes it easy to refute or ridicule.

Settled Question Fallacy

Acting as if the debate is settled and consensus has been reach on complex and controversial questions that are not actually settled.

Sunk Cost Fallacy

Persisting with an opinion even after the evidence against it mounts because of our investment in our opinions.

Naturalistic Fallacy

A form of reasoning which argues if something is “natural or occurs in nature then it is good. An is is an ought. breastfeed natural, formula bad. sexual desires good all natural.

The Elephant and the Rider

Elephant is emotion, usually arises first, then the reasoning comes after

Moral Foundations/Characteristic Emotion

1. Care/Harm - Compassion

2. Fairness/Cheating - Anger/Gratitude/Guilt

3. Loyalty/Betrayal - Group pride/rage at traitors

4. Authority/Subversion - Respect/Fear

5. Sanctity/Degradation - Reverence/Disgust

   

Care/Harm

Compassion

Fairness/Cheating

Anger/Gratitude/Guilt

Loyal/Betrayal

Group Pride/Rage at Traitors

Authority/Subversion

Respect/Fear

Sanctity/Degradation

Reverence/Disgust

We must tell the truth. We must Remember or Progaganda Arises

YES.

Why Reasoning Frameworks?

Since we feel before we think, these allow us to guide the elephant and follow established patterns of reasoning based on clarified sources and goals.

Virtue Ethics

An ethical model that is primary concerned with not what we should do but who we should become: the focus of being a good person, on one’s character.

Virtues= positive traits

Vices= Negative traits

Benefits: Puts the question of character at the centre of ethics, shows importance of exemplars or role models

Challenges: Hard to apply in concrete and complex situations OR some situations appear to put virtues in competition. (not enough clarity)

Natural Law Ethics

Natural Law ethics is the belief that all things in nature have a purpose and are good if they fulfill said purpose. All naturally inclined to life(survival), procreation, sociability and knowledge).

Benefits: Insists that ethics are objective and are not rooted in our opinions but our nature

Challenges: If nature is all there is, there is no way to consistnetly affirm human worth and dignity.

Social Contract Ethics

Our ethical norms originate from a cultural social contract that free, equal and rational people would accept for the purpose of mutual benefit. Thus, they come from our consensus on what we want the world to look like.

Benefit: Opposes tyranny bc people get to decide what rules they accept

Challenges: Shared ethics only apply to our shared communities, something can only be wrong for us not universally wrong.

Hedonism

Suggests a good life is one that is filled with pleasure, happiness and pain-free. All decisions should be geared toward please and happiness.

Benefits: Allows for human freedom to determine what to pursue and for what reasons

Challenges: Denies the benefits of suffering, OR, our desires can mislead or betray us.

Utilitarianism

Places emphasis on decision making that maximizes overall collective-well being in the world. All emphasis on consequences.

Benefits: It is impartial, treating every human life as equal. OR It is flexible for complex situations

Challenges: Don’t always know consequences of our actions, can make decision making extremely demanding.

Deontological Ethics

Non-consequentialist ethic (opp utilitar) that focuses primarily on motives not results. Kant emphasizes a motive is only good if it can be willed to be universalized. Strong focus on duty.

Benefits: Recognizes desires can blind us and that we must do our duty even if we don’t feel like it. OR strong emphasis on justice or fairness universally.

Challenges: Sometimes duties conflict. Can lead to lack of love to fulfill ones duty, appearing cold and rationalistic. Context unavoidable.

Ethics of Care/Feminist Ethics

Our moral obligations depend majorly on personal relationships and compassion for those around us, identity is integral, overcoming past injustice.

Benefits: Emphasizes that there are diff ethical priorities between men and women and insists all people be heard.

Callenges: Prioritizes lived experience and neglects rationality. can lead to competition between sexes.

Concept Creep

Over time concepts like racism, trauma, mental illness, prejudice etc. begin to encompass both a broader range of phenomena and an increasing sensitivity to the experience of harm

Biological Sex

Embodied, inherited, physiological features (chromosomes, genes, genitalia, etc.

Gender Identity

Internal sense of masculinity, femininity, or fluidity and the socially ascribed roles associated with each

Gender Binary

The (increasingly challenged) assumption that there are only two available gender identities (males and female).

Transgender

Umbrella term for experiences of gender identity that do not align with an individual's biological sex.

Iceberg

Often there are questions lingering beneath the waterline

CULTURAL CONTEXT OF 2024 ETHICS

• Judeo-Christian legacy - Current culture is deeply influenced by Christian ethical assumptions.

• Diminished appreciation for the church - Mostly negative judgments on its moral legacy.

• The collapse of consensus around authorities for moral reasoning.

• Identity-based epistemology and politics (the self or the tribe bears incredible weight).

  • The rise of social media - radically expanded access to opinions

  • Radically shortened timelines for judgments - fast snapping judgments

  • Polarization - splitting of two groups, views are expanded in both intensity and distance from one another

  • Public righteousness - increasing need to display the right opinions and shame people who dont display.