Feelings: What is its role to reason?

 Moral philosopher Mary Midgley writes: “Sensitivity requires rationality to complete it, and vice versa. There is
no siding onto which emotions can be shunted so as not to impinge on thought.”
 We rely on our reason to guard against feelings that may reflect a bias, or a sense of inadequacy, or a desire
simply to win an argument, and also to refine and explain a felt conviction that passes the test of critical
reflection and discussion. We rely on feelings to move us to act morally, and to ensure that our reasoning is not
only logical but also humane.
 Scientific evidence supports this approach to ethics. As children, we manifest empathy before developing our
rational abilities, and there is evidence for the same order of development in the evolution of the human brain.
 Empathy enables us to identify with others, and may generate a “perception of the other as a being who
deserves concern and respect.” This does not guarantee ethical conduct, but it makes morality possible.
 “Aid to others in need would never be internalized as a duty without the fellow-feeling that drives people to
take an interest in one another. Moral sentiments came first; moral principles second.”
 Conscience, at its best, reflects our integration of moral sentiments and principles. ..This is especially important
when dealing with ethical issues among family members or friends, but applies as well to concerns about the
environment.
 both our feelings and our reason reflect our participation in a moral community, or more likely several moral
communities. As children, our moral community is our family, which soon broadens to include our friends and
then is defined by the rules of our school.
 As adults, our moral community extends from our family to our friends (at work, in our neighborhood or a
support group, and perhaps in our religious community), to our city, our country, the people of the world whose
moral and legal rights are defined by international law, and perhaps also to a moral community that includes
non-human organisms and ecosystems.

Seven Step Reasoning Model

1. Gather the facts. 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.
2. Determine the ethical issues. Ethical interests are stated in terms of
legitimate competing interests or goods. The competing interests are what
creates 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
3. Determine what virtues / principles have a bearing on the case. 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.
4. List the alternatives. 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.
5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues / 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. Often here you have to weight principles and
virtues - make sure you have a good reason for each weighting
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 +ve and -ve consequence is - some might have greater weight than others.
7. Make a decision. Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might be you have to choose the solution
with the least number of problems / painful consequences. Even when making a “good” decision you might still lose
sleep over it!