Scribd
Upload
33 views4 pages

Chapter 5

Uploaded by

jessabongbong
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
33 views4 pages

Chapter 5

Uploaded by

jessabongbong
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

MODULE: VAL02 – ETHICS

HUMAN REASONING

A. Understand the importance of human reasoning.


B. Differentiate between types of human reasoning.
C. Learn the steps for moral reasoning.

Reason is the faculty of consciously


making sense of information, establishing
and verifying facts, applying logic, and
justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs
based on existing or new information. In
essence, it's the ability of humans to make
decisions, akin to morality. However, it's
important to distinguish here, as Immanuel
Kant explained, that while morality
involves using our freedom of choice
based on what we desire, reason compels
us to do what is right even when it
contradicts our desires.
For instance, consider a scenario where you have a limited budget and must choose
between two items at a canteen. Morality dictates making a choice, but reason dictates
making a practical choice within your means.
Reason is a defining characteristic of humanity. It enables us to understand and relate to
absolute truths, often associated with a higher power such as God. While reason guides
human actions, supernatural truths lie beyond human comprehension. Sensations,
perceptions, and observations, though experienced by animals, are uniquely transformed into
understanding by human intellect.
Ethical reasoning helps determine and differentiate between right thinking, decisions, and
actions and those that are wrong, hurtful and/or harmful— to others and to ourselves. Ethics is
based on and motivated by facts, values, emotions, beliefs, emotions, and feelings. Ethical
actions are based on conscientious reasoning of facts based on moral principles and
standards.
In any human endeavor, thought precedes action. Thoughtfulness involves anticipating
future events by reflecting on past actions or occurrences. Every action is built upon ideas
related to causal relations, forming the basis of theories that guide human behavior. While
action without thinking is nonsensical, erroneous reasoning may still lead to acceptable

1
MODULE: VAL02 – ETHICS
actions. Despite societal influences, individual thinking remains paramount. While collective
action is possible, collective thinking is not, as people think differently.
From a religious perspective, human reason is viewed as a divine gift, enabling rational
beings to understand God. Divine revelations, whether concerning spiritual salvation or natural
phenomena, align with human reason.

TYPES OF HUMAN REASONING

1. Deductive Reasoning:
Deductive reasoning is the form of reasoning in which a conclusion logically
follows from the factual premises and propositions. Arguments are grounded in the
concept of logical reasoning. The premise on which the validity of the conclusion hinges
is that if the premises are true, then the resulting statements are also true and valid.
This is plain logic.
2. Inductive Reasoning:
Inductive reasoning involves drawing broader generalizations from specific
information, acknowledging that the conclusion may not be entirely accurate. This type
of logic relies on experiences to formulate conclusions based on general observations
that may yield similar results. To differentiate, deductive reasoning starts with a
premise, while inductive reasoning begins with a conclusion. Examples:
• Deductive Reasoning: The Pope is the Representative of God. God is never wrong;
therefore, The Pope is never wrong.
• Inductive Reasoning: Mark shows a golden ring to his friend Paul. Mark said he
would marry Martha. Therefore, Paul thinks Martha will receive the ring.
3. Abductive Reasoning:
Abductive reasoning is a method in which one selects the hypothesis that would
best explain the relevant evidence if true. It is a type of reasoning that arrives at its
conclusion through an abductive argument of what is possibly true. This logic is also
known as inference to the best explanation, choosing the most likely or best hypothesis
based on the most relevant evidence. Example: You wake up in the morning, and you
notice that your roommate has left, but you see half-eaten food in the kitchen. Hence,
you infer that he left early.
4. Reductive Reasoning:
Reductive reasoning involves proving a statement true by reducing it to its
opposite and demonstrating the absurdity of the opposite result. Example: People do
not attend college because they don't need it. This method is also referred to as
Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: "reduction to absurdity").
5. Fallacious Reasoning:
Fallacious reasoning is not genuine reasoning but rather relies on faulty
premises for critical thinking and logic. Example: God is love, love is blind, ergo, God is
blind.

2
MODULE: VAL02 – ETHICS

STEPS FOR MORAL ETHICAL DECISIONS:

1. Identify the problem.


2. Gather relevant facts.
3. Distinguish between relevant and irrelevant factors.
4. Develop a list of options.
5. Prepare test questions for each option.
6. Choose the best answer.
7. Review steps if necessary.

THREE CRITERIA IN ETHICAL REASONING

The following criteria can be used in ethical reasoning according to Weiss:

• Moral reasoning must be logical. Assumptions and premises, both factual and inferred,
used to make judgments should be known and made explicit.
• Factual evidence cited to support a person’s judgment should be accurate, relevant,
and complete.
• Ethical standards used in reasoning should be consistent. When inconsistencies are
discovered in a person’s ethical standards in a decision, one or more of the standards
must be modified (Weiss, 2014).

MORAL RESPONSIBILITY CRITERIA

A major aim of ethical reasoning is to gain a clear focus on problems to facilitate acting
in morally responsible ways. Individuals are morally responsible for the harmful effects of their
actions when

a) they knowingly and freely acted or caused the act to happen and knew that the act was
morally wrong or hurtful to others and
b) they knowingly and freely failed to act or prevent a harmful act, and they knew it would
be morally wrong for a person to do this.

Although there is no universal definition of what sets up a morally wrong act, it is


commonly defined as an act that causes physical or emotional harm to another person
(Weiss, 2014). Two conditions that eliminate a person’s moral responsibility for causing injury
or harm are ignorance and inability (Velasquez, 1998). However, persons who intentionally
prevent themselves from knowing that a harmful action will occur are still responsible.

3
MODULE: VAL02 – ETHICS

ETHICS book
Ruben A. Corpuz, AB English-Philo, LIB, PhD
Brenda B. Corpuz, BSE, MAED, PhD

You might also like