Arabelle Jean P. AlmanzorAB Psychology/I2D

MORAL REASONING

Moral reasoning is a study in psychology that overlaps with moral philosophy. It

is also called moral development. Prominent contributors to the theory

include Lawrence Kohlberg and Elliot Turiel. The term is sometimes used in a different

sense: reasoning under conditions of uncertainty, such as those commonly obtained in

a court of law. It is this sense that gave rise to the phrase, "To a moral

certainty;"[1] however, this sense is now seldom used outside of charges to juries.

Moral reasoning can be defined as being the process in which an individual tries to determine the difference between what is right and what is wrong in a personal situation by using logic.[2] This is an important and often daily process that people use in an attempt to do the right thing. Every day for instance, people are faced with the dilemma of whether or not to lie in a given situation. People make this decision by reasoning the morality of the action and weighing that against its consequences.

Although all moral choice can be seen as personal choice, some choices can be seen as an economic choice, or an ethical choice described by some ethical code or regulated by ethical relationships with others.

There are four components of moral behavior. The first of these is moral sensitivity, which is "the ability to see an ethical dilemma, including how our actions will affect others."[3]The second is moral judgment, which is "the ability to reason correctly about what 'ought' to be done in a specific situation." [3] The third is moral motivation, which is "a personal commitment to moral action, accepting responsibility for the outcome."[3] The fourth and final component of moral behavior is moral character, which is a "courageous persistence in spite of fatigue or temptations to take the easy way out."[3]

Distinctions between theories of moral reasoning can be accounted for by evaluating inferences (which tend to be either deductive or inductive)based on a given set of premises.[4] Deductive inference reaches a conclusion that is true based on whether a given a set of premises preceding the conclusion are also true, whereas, inductive inference goes beyond information given in a set of premises to base the conclusion on provoked reflection.[4]

This branch of psychology is concerned with how these issues are perceived by ordinary people, and so is the foundation of descriptive ethics. There are many different moral reasonings. Moral reasoning is culturally defined, and thus is difficult to apply; yet human relationships define our existence and thus defy cultural boundaries.

UTILITARIANISM

Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways, but is usually related to the well-being of sentient entities. Classically, Jeremy Bentham defined utility as the aggregate pleasure after deducting suffering of all involved in any action. John Stuart Mill expanded this concept of utility to include not only the quantity, but quality of pleasure. Others have rejected that pleasure has positive value and have advocated negative utilitarianism, which defines utility only in terms of suffering. In contrast to this hedonistic view, some define utility with relation to preference satisfaction whereas others believe that a range of values can be included in its definition.

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which states that the consequences of any action are the only standard of right and wrong. This view can be contrasted or combined with virtue ethics which holds virtue as a moral good. Some believe that one's intentions are also ethically important. Utilitarianism is distinctly different from other forms of consequentialism such as egoism as it considers all interests equally. Proponents of utilitarianism have been split about whether individual acts should conform to utility (act utilitarianism) or whether agents should conform to ethical rules (rule utilitarianism). Utilitarians additionally remain split about whether utility should be calculated as an aggregate (total utilitarianism) or an average (average utilitarianism).

RIGHTS

Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory. [1] Rights are of essential importance in such disciplines as law and ethics, especially theories of justice and deontology.

Rights are often considered fundamental to civilization, being regarded as established pillars of society and culture,[2] and the history of social conflicts can be found in the history of each right and its development. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "rights structure the form of governments, the content of laws, and the shape of morality as it is currently perceived.