JOSEPH ERWIN GO SILANGIL

III. The Moral Act: 2. Moral Reasoning

__________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Moral Reasoning
∙ According to our lessons, feelings can be an obstacle to make the right decision when it is based on
Ethical Subjectivism — a theory which states that the basis of what is morally right or wrong ultimately
lies on the person's own standard.1 Due to self-interest, the act is done through a mere instinctive feeling, for
it is made without further thinking or reasoning, and thus, it is an obstacle to make the right decision.
∙ However, feelings can be helpful to make the right decision when it is based on Ethical Conventionalism
—a theory which states that the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on society's norms. 2In this
theory, feelings may be helpful to make the right decision because it is based on society's norms about
feelings.
∙ Consequently, these thinking process either ethical subjectivism or conventionalism has been rejected due
to its criticisms for we can't able evaluate the validity of an action.
∙ Thus, this topic aims to discuss moral reasoning that is directed towards deciding what to do involving
judgments about what one ought, morally, to do.3 Meaning to say, we must consider an act that is based
on moral reasoning, i.e., ought to confined values, established based on the adequacy of the reason that
supports and justifies an action (frameworks), and has universal validity (impartiality).4

A. 7 Step Moral Reasoning Model

∙ This 7 Step Moral Reasoning Model is a principle that guides a moral agent to decide what to do, involving
judgments about what one ought, morally, to do.
Step 1. State the Problem
∙ What is the main issue in the case?
Step 2. Check the Facts
∙ It is important to address the non-ethical issues raised within the case: Ex. Persons involved,
laws, professional codes, and other practical constraints.
Step 3. Identify Relevant Factors
∙ Think broadly and generate a list of all possible individuals, groups, or entities (e.g.,
environment) who will be affected by the decisions to be made.
Step 4. Develop List of Options
∙ Develop options that will avoid the dilemma.
Step 5. Test the Options.
a. Harm Test - does this option do less harm than the alternatives?
b. Publicity Test - would I want my choice of this option to be publicized?
c. Defensibility Test - could I defend my choice of this option before other's look?
d. Reversibility Test - would I still think that this option was a right choice if I were adversely
affected by it?
e. Virtue Test - what would I become if I choose this option?
f. Colleague Test - what do my colleagues say when I describe my problem and suggest this
option as my solution?
g. Professional Test - what might the profession's ethics committee say about this option? h.
Organization Test - what does the organization's ethics officer or legal counsel say about this? Step 6.
Make a Tentative Choice based on Steps 1-5.
Step 7. Make a Final Choice
∙ After reviewing steps 1-6, make a final choice. However, do not forget to evaluate the result of
your choice by asking yourself:
a. What are the effects of your choice for yourself and other people?
b. Does it give support to yourself and other people?
c. Does it give improvement to yourself and other people?

When your action has values, verifiable or truthful claims, and universal validity, it is therefore based on moral
reasoning.

1
Francis Julius N. Evangelista and Napoleon M. Mabaquioa Jr., Ethics; Theories and Applications, (Mandaluyong City,
PH: ANVIL Publishing, Inc., 2020), 13. Hereafter Cited as Ethics.
2
Ibid., 12.
3
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasoning-moral/#DefiMoraReas. (Accessed on September 30, 2020).
4
Ethics, 18.