SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL

Scott Rae’s model for moral reasoning presents a 7-step approach to moral analyses and
evaluation. It is oriented towards virtues and principles with consideration of consequences as a
supporting role (Rae 2018). This model is free from cultural, ethnic and religious background and biases, though
it is consistent/uses biblical principles. The 7-step model is as follows:

1.   Gather the Facts

➢   It is essential that in moral decision- making, one has to know the general facts of the moral
situation, before coming up with a moral analysis, more so, a decision or an evaluation.

➢   The simplest way of clarifying an ethical dilemma is to make sure the facts are clear. Ask: Do
you have all the facts that are necessary to make a good decision? What do we know? What
do we need to know? In this light it might become clear that the dilemma is not ethical but
about communication or strategy (Rae, 2018).

2.   Determine the ethical issues

➢   After having identified the facts and overall context of the moral situation, the ethical
issue/s

involved
a decisioninto.
theThis
situation,
sectionmust
mustbe clearlyclearly
likewise statedstate
in order
the to specify
major what
moral issue one
dilemma has toin
involved make
the
case.

➢   Ethical interests are stated in terms of legitimate competing interests or goods. The
competing interests are what create the dilemma. Moral values and virtues must support the
competing interests in order for an ethical dilemma to exist. If you cannot identify the
underlying values/virtues then you do not have an ethical dilemma. Often people hold these
positions strongly and with passion because of the value / virtue beneath them (Rae 2018).

3.   Determine what virtues / principles have a bearing on the case

➢   Applicable ethical values and principles relevant to the case must be identified and briefly
explained in order to justify how such principles could be used in coming up with a decision

co n c er n i n g th e m o ra l d i le m m a la t r o n . In a d d
a ck n o w l e d g e d l i ke w is e . T h es e v a lu e s , p r i nc ip l e s
i ti o n , t h e so u rc e s o f th e s e p ri n c i l e s m u s t b e
co u l d c o m e f ro m : ( 1 ) e st a b l i sh e d p h i lo so p h i c a l
ethical principles; (2) socio-cultural norms; (3) socio-political norms and laws; (4) religious
traditions; and others.

➢   In an ethical dilemma certain values and principles are central to the competing positions.
Identify these. Determine if some should be given more weight than others. Ask what the
source for the principle is - constitution, culture, natural law, religious tradition... These
supplement biblical principles (Rae 2018).

4.   List the alternatives

➢   After having identified relevant values, virtues, and principles involving the moral situation,

psuogsgsiebslte da ltceorunrasteivse cf oaucrtsieosn so fm aucsti otnhse nm ubset

o
ethveanlu abte dp rboapsoesde do na nitds barpiepfliyc aebxilpitlya,i nsedn. sTibhileitsye,
 practicality before selecting one as the course of action or decision to be made regarding the
moral situation.

➢   Creatively determine possible courses of action for your dilemma. Some will almost
immediately be discarded but generally the more you list the greater potential for coming up
with a really good one. It will also help you come up with a broader selection of ideas (Rae
2018).

5.   Compare the alternatives with the virtues / principles

➢   The initial list of suggested courses of actions must then be evaluated from the vantage
point of the identified ethical values and principles.

➢   This step eliminates alternatives as they are weighed by the moral principles which have a
bearing on the case. Potentially the issue will be resolved here as all alternatives except one
are eliminated. Here you must satisfy all the relevant virtues and values - so at least some of
the alternatives will be eliminated (even if you still have to go on to step 6). Often here you
have to weight principles and virtues - make sure you have a good reason for each weighting
(Rae 2018).

6.   Consider the consequences

➢   If principles have not yielded a clear decision consider the consequences of your alternatives.
Take
the alternatives and work out the positive and negative consequences of each. Estimate how
beneficial each positive and negative consequences are – some might have greater weight than
others (Rae 2018).

7.   Make a decision (including one’s justification for the decision)

➢   After having analyzed the moral dilemma situation (from steps 1 thru 6), one must now
make a decision based on what has been previously discussed and must clearly justify the
decision that has been made.

➢   Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might be you have to choose the solution
with the least number of problems / painful consequences (Rae 2018).

REASON, EMOTIONS, AND IMPARTIALITY: WHAT IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF MORALITY?

•   REASON
o  It allows us to think rationally about the choices you have and keeps your emotions in check. We
likewise use this in order to make sense out of the world.  
•   IMPARTIALITY
o  Entails being fair and considerate of others and the impact of your actions on them. As
a principle of justice whichstates that decisions should be based on objective criteria, rather than on
the basis of bias, prejudices, or preferring the benefit to one person over another for improper
reasons. 
•   MORAL COURAGE
o  It is the ability to take action for moral reasons despite the risk of adverse consequences.
This could be seen in the statement, “Know what is right and fight for what is right through
doing the right thing.” 
•   ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
 o   Entails evaluating and choosing among alternatives in a manner consistent with ethical
principles. This requires discipline and reason and the necessity to perceive and eliminate
unethical options and select the best ethical alternative.
•   IMPEDIMENTS TO ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING
o  Egocentrism
o  Immaturity
o  Wrongful Thinking

TELEOLOGICAL AND VIRTUE ETHICS (POINTS TO REMEMBER)

•   TELOS – Goal or end. Teleological Ethics is the ethical theory which emphasizes the achievement of a
goal or end and the means to achieving such is one that is proper to human nature.

•   Virtue Ethics is focused on the cultivation of ethical virtues and the development of an ethical
character. The theory emphasizes that a moral life should never be concerned with cultivating a
sinful character; and that the moral good of the individual consists in the development of
capabilities as perfectly as possible. Virtue is not a skill that cannot be learned through
experience. Virtue is practical wisdom through contemplation.

 
•

eKtnhoiwcsi negn tahiyls eselfl fis-q aupepsltieiodn intgr,o seplef-crteifolnec otino onu arn sdt rsenlfg-
tahss easnsdm weenat.k Anne sesxeasm. Ipnl re olaf tihoins tiso i tnh Palta, tVoi’rstue Allegory of the
Cave. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave discusses that opinion cannot be complex. Plato’s
Allegory of the Cave can be seen as a metaphor for the true and good through philosophy.

•   Plato believed that a moral person must know, follow, do and possess the Good. Ideas are
eternal, immortal, and perfect and the only evil or absence of good is ignorance. The proper
function of man is the act of reason because he is rational. Moral virtue follows the rule of
moderation. Having virtue is doing the right thing, at the right time, in the right way, in the right
amount toward the right people. If we focus on being good people, the right actions will follow
effortlessly.

•   Plato says the act of contemplation is not the most perfect and best virtue. The Golden Mean is
the midpoint between excess and deficiency.

•   For Aristotle, the goal of human striving is happiness / eudaimonia. A life of eudaimonia is the
result of a virtuous living, the proper exercise of reason in all of man’s action and endeavors.  A
eudaimonistic life entails a life of striving, pushing oneself to the limits and achieving success.
Virtue, for Aristotle, is the mid-point between deficiency and excess. Courage is the mean
between rashness and cowardice. Honesty is not about knowing how to deliver hard truths in a
heartless manner. When we fail to say the things that are need to be said, we are being dishonest.
A moral exemplar is a person without flaws and imperfections. A person’s character can be
developed through a constant habit of exercising virtues.

•   On the other hand, St. Thomas Aquinas was a medieval philosopher who Christianized Aristotle’s
Ethics. Aquinas teaches us that moral life is guided by our reason through our conscience.
Through our conscience, we are directed towards happiness which allows us to attain perfection
with God. In synderesis, we are naturally called to do good and avoid evil through our conscience.
God gave us
 human freedom and intelligence as gifts to lead an ethical life. Obedience to Natural Law is rational
participation in the Divine Law. Ignorance and emotion are violations of the Natural Law.

DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS: RIGHTS AND DUTY 

•   Deontology comes from the Greek Word = DEON, which means duty. Deontological Ethics
determines actions as either morally right or wrong depending on if one upholds his/her
duty.
•  W.D. Ross mentions that the following are our duties towards others:
o  Justice
o  Reparation
o  Fidelity – a duty to demonstrate
o  Self-Improvement – duty to oneself wherein improve our capacities and abilities.
•   Immanuel Kant was a modern philosopher who formulated his concept of the
Categorical Imperative which has three main formulations:
o  Act only on that Maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law. (UNIVERSALITY)
o  Act in such a way that you always treat humanity never simply as a means but always at the
same time as an end. (HUMAN DIGNITY)
o  Act always on that maxim such a will in us as can at the same time look upon itself as making
universal law. (AUTONOMY)