Feelings and Moral Decision Making

Love is the most powerful intuition of feeling. Meaning if we will choose base on
our feeling, the choice that we will make is out of love.
Man, by nature is lovable being. We cannot set aside this truth. We will live
miserably if we don’t know how to love. We exist because of love. We survive because
of love and we will die because of love. It seems that love embrace our entire existence.
However, talking of moral decision making, does love still matter? Or it is already
love that destroys the authenticity of our moral actions. Let’s try to look at this case.
Ana is a third-year college student. She is considered as the brightest student in
their class. She already proved herself in any field of academic performances. However,
despite of her achievements, a lot of her classmate considered her as fool in her love
life. This conception occurred because her boyfriend is continuously cheated and
betrayed her many times. Yet, Ana is strong enough to forgive him many times.
One day, one of her classmates asked her why she is tolerating the actions of
her boyfriend. Ana answered with a smile, “Love is also imperfect. I know he loves me
and I love him. My heart big enough to forgive him”.

Is Anna really fool when it comes to her love life? What do you think Anna should
do? Do we have enough reasons to question the love that Ana has to her boyfriend?

We hope that the discussion below will help us settle this case.

Feelings as Instinctive Response to Moral Dilemmas

Some philosophers firmly believe that feelings play an important role talking of
morality. Others believe, to the extent, that ethics is only a matter of feelings/emotion.
They look at it as instinctive or trained response to moral dilemmas.

Some also hold that there is no specific difference between reason and emotion.
Both of them have relative roles in moral decision making. For example, feelings and
emotions are said to be judgments about the accomplishment of one’s goal. Therefore,
emotions or feelings can be rational, atleast sometimes, if we will base it on good
judgments about how an agent accomplish appropriate objectives. Feelings and
emotions are also instinctual by providing motivations to act morally.

Most of the time, moral decisions are highly emotional as people emotionally
show their agreement or disagreement in different human acts. Moral sentiments
highlight the need for morality to be based also on sympathy and empathy on other
people. Some ethicists conclude that feeling overpower thinking in moral decision
making.
Feelings as Obstacles in Making the Right Decisions

It is clear in the discussion above that feelings and emotions have undeniable
role in moral decision making. However, it can become an obstacle to be an ethical one.
This will obviously happen if the role of feelings and emotions will be exaggerated or
misinterpreted. To prove it, let us discuss the two famous (but erroneous) theories in
Ethics.

Subjectivism

This theory is contrary to the principles that stand for objective truth. Ethical
subjectivism is not about what things are good and what things are bad. It also does not
tell how we should live or what moral norms we should practice. Instead, it is a principle
that speaks the nature of moral judgment.

Subjectivism admits that moral judgment are truth bearers. However, it holds that
the truth or falsity of ethical propositions is dependent on feelings, attitudes, or
standards of a person. This theory states that moral judgments totally rely on our
personal perspectives.

Looking at these controversial topics will help us understand more what is

subjectivism all about. Let say homosexuality or abortion. The first group declares that
homosexuality or abortion is immoral because it is written on God’s Commandment. On
the other hand, the opposite group says that it is perfectly normal and practitioners must
be tolerated, if not respected. But there is a third instance – another group might say
that people in the first two groups are expressing their opinion, but where morality is
concerned, there are no objective facts and no position is objectively right. This third
argument stand as Ethical Subjectivism. It claims that our moral opinions are based on
our feelings and nothing more.

For Subjectivism, it is true that some people are homosexual and some are
heterosexual; but it is not the fact that one is really good and the other is bad. They are
just saying it based on their personal point of view. Meaning, moral opinions are based
on our feelings, and nothing more.

The theory therefore proposes that when we say that something is morally good,
this only means that we approve of that thing. Hence, the statement “Abortion is moral”
simply mean the believer believes it on his own. Similarly, when we state that something
is immoral simply mean also that the believers believe it on his own and nothing more.
Emotivism

A lot of Ethicist considered this one as an improved version of Subjectivism. It is

more subtle and sophisticated than subjectivism. Emotivism is deemed invulnerable to
any objections. This theory was postulated by the American Philosopher Charles L.
Stevenson (1909-1979). It has been one of the most influential theories of Ethics in the
20th century.

Emotivism is actually the most popular form of non-cognitivism. It claims that

ethical arguments do not convey authentic and real propositions. For this theory, moral
judgments are not statement of fact rather it is only a mere expression of the emotions
of the subject simply because these are all feelings-based.

For example, the statement “X is right” merely means “Hooray for X!” Same thing
with the statement that “X is immoral” just means “Boo on X!” Since ethical judgments
are essentially commands and exclamations, they are not true or false; so there cannot
be moral truths and moral knowledge.

In denying moral truths and moral knowledge, emotivists based their belief on
logical positivism which claimed that any legitimate truth must be empirically
verifiable. Since they believe that moral judgment cannot be tested by sense
experience, the impossibility of proving it follows. Thus, again, for them it is no other but
feelings-based alone.

According to Emotivism, utterances in Ethics are not fact-stating sentences. For

them these are only a command or a conveyor of information. Emotivism claims that
ethical judgment has two different purposes:

First, they are used as a means of influencing other’s behavior. If someone says
“Stealing is immoral,” Emotivism interprets it as an attempt to stop you from doing the
act. Thus, the utterance is more like a command. An equivalent only of saying “Don’t do
that!”

Second, moral sentences are used to express the point of view of the subject.
Accordingly, saying “Fair play is good” is not like saying “I approve of fair play,” but it is
like saying “Hurrah for fair play1”

3. Loopholes of Emotivism and Subjectivism

 Emotivism and Subjectivism are almost the same as what is written above.
Hence, the errors of Subjectivism are also the errors of Emotivism. Below are the
loopholes of the said arguments.

1. They are inconsistent in promoting tolerance.

These two principles always promote tolerance simply because they tolerated the
actions (even if it is obviously wrong) of others by saying let them do that because that
is what is right for them.
So now, they are inconsistent because once the action of the others go against
with them, they cannot tolerate it. For example, if I will steal money to them because this
is what is right for me, they cannot tolerate me because they are the direct victim of the
said action. In this case, they are really inconsistent in promoting it.

2. It considers wrong practices such as selfishness and egoism.

Man by nature is social being. We cannot live alone. Even our history speaks
about this truth. Meaning, our unique existence is not just for us but also for others.
Obviously, Subjectivism and Emotivism destroy this natural activity of humanity.
They show self-centeredness kind of life. Thus, to live in accordance with their thoughts
is going against our human nature as a social one.

3. Self-contradictory Theory

In Metaphysics there are four basic principles. Among those principles is the
Principle of Contradiction. It states that “You cannot be and can be at the same time,
same place, and same respect”. For example, I cannot say that I am a boy if I am a girl.
This example is in the state total contradiction.
Emotivism and Subjectivism are self-contradictory theory because there claim
that there is no absolute truth is claiming that there is absolute truth. What I would like to
say is that, there claim that “there is no absolute truth” is the one that absolute truth for
them.
Thus, these two principles are contradicting themselves.

4. Cognition and Persuasion as Two Pillars of Moral Decision Making

Cognition pertains on the function of the mind. It focuses on rationality.

Persuasion, on the hand, refer to the emotional choice of human person.
In moral decision making, cognition alone is not enough. The threat to become
inconsiderate is always there. Let us try to look at this case;
Danny is a 2nd Year College student taking of Bachelor of Science in
Accountancy. His teacher in one of his subjects give them an activity that they need to
pass via google classroom on time. When the said deadline came, Danny did not able
to pass the said activity because he is from the remote place of their municipality
wherein network signal is not good. After two days, Danny got a chance to explain to his
teacher why he is late with humility and forgiveness. However, his teacher is very strict
on the deadline. He wanted teach Danny a lesson. He got angry to him and did not
allow Danny to pass the said requirement.
Base on this case, the teacher is acting cognitively. There is no presence of
emotional participation on the side of the teacher. There is no mercy, there is no
understanding and there is no love.
If the teacher decided persuasively and cognitively, he will be considerate on the
part of Danny. For sure his decision will flow in the different manner. He will be lenient
and he will be understandable. Thus, the role of emotion in moral decision making is
also important. However, let’s not forget that persuasion/emotion alone is not also good
in moral decision making. Others will make you fool or they will be abusive if our
decision making is always in accordance with our emotion. Human feeling may be
important in moral decision making but they ought to be guided by reason.
To conclude, moral decision making is always a decision not by emotion alone
neither by rationality alone. It should be a choice of both heart and mind. These two
serves a wing of a bird. It cannot fly with only one wings.