Moral Reasoning

Stated that there were two kinds of reasoning:

Reasoning proper to scientific or metaphysical problems
- Corresponds to the Greek word, "theoria"
The standpoint occupied by detached spectators
Deals with Matters of Fact
- Involves describing the world, giving true or false statements about the world
Asks, What is true (or not)? What should we believe?

Reasoning proper to practical matters
- Practical → Refers to anything or any state of affair where an actor/agent decides on something that he must do
- Hence, practical reasoning reasons about matters of value
The standpoint occupied by actors, by action and acting
- It is concerned with matters of decision regarding courses of action that they must take
Deals with Matters of Value
Asks, Why is this value is worth pursuing as an end of actions?

When we engage in Moral Reasoning, we engage with Normative Reasons
- Normative Reasons For Action
- Rational principles that specify what constitutes good or appropriate reasons for action
  - The end of normative reasoning is to have reasons for action
  - In contrast with the end of theoretical reasoning, which is contemplation
- Determines what we ought to do in virtue of one or more of these reasons
  - The action determines what we must do
How do we know whether it is right or wrong?
- In Ethics, we try to arrive at reason and logical tools tell us that there are better ways of reasoning
- Logical tools help us determine if the reasoning is valid, sound, or if the argumentation is strong. Based on these tools, we can know if the particular course of action has strong reasons, good reasons, to do it or not. This is how we decide, because as actors, who live by reason
Moral reasoning is the ability to recognize and respond to good reasons for actions
- These normative reasons are taken as the primary material that constitutes the process of moral reasoning

Any argument whose conclusion is a moral claim
Gives reasons to think that a particular action (person, event, etc.) is morally right (or wrong, or good or bad)

Any claim about what is morally right, wrong, good, or bad
The conclusion of an argument
- But sometimes, the claim/conclusion is at the beginning without saying the premises prior

To recognize and construct strong arguments for and against such claims - that is, how to reason well about moral issues
To recognize and support evidences and premises to moral claims and conclusions
The become better thinkers

Concerned about whether something is (morally) good
- May also refer to actions, but more often than not, it is deontic claim that says something about actions
- As axiological claims have a different scope
Includes claims that something is morally good, morally bad, or morally neutral - that is, neither good nor bad - as well as claims that one thing is morally better than another
- Could also be about a hierarchy of values, whether something is better or best
About people, characters, traits, events, and even states of affairs

Normative Claims → Claims about how the world ought to be, or what is good or bad
- Any claim that says that the world ought or ought not to be a certain way, or that a person should or shouldn't do something, or that something is good or bad (in some way)
Normative claims are sometimes called "Evaluative claims"
- Because they evaluate some person, thing, or (possible) state of the world
Normative Claims PRESCRIBE things
- They judge and evaluate things based on principles, and prescribes ideals
- Invokes norms, standards, and ideals we subscribe to
Different from Descriptive Claims
- Descriptive Claims describe how the world is, not how it ought to be
- Descriptive Claims are the result of Theoretical Reasoning, whereas Normative Claims are the result of Practical Reasoning