Transcript Moral and Legal Reasoning







What is a moral value judgment?
How is it different from a taste value
judgment?
It is wrong for Senator Kennedy to have
withheld information.
Karl Rove ought to spend more time with his
family.
Senator Kennedy dresses well.
Beowulf has some of the best special effects
of any movie ever made.

According to More and Parker, moral
reasoning principle # 1: If separate cases
aren’t different in any relevant way, then they
should be treated the same way, and if
separate cases are treated the same way, they
should not be different in any relevant way.
◦ AKA the consistency principle.
◦ Principle # 2: If someone appears to be violating
the consistency principle, then the burden of proof
is on that person to show that he or she is in fact
not violating the principle.





1a. Elliott’s father depends on Elliott.
Therefore, Elliot should take care of him.
How would you put this into a valid deductive
argument?
P1. Elliott’s father depends on Elliot.
P2. Adult children should take care of parents
who are dependent on them. 2nd order
enthymeme.
Conclusion: Therefore, Elliot should take care
of his father.
This argument is valid. Is this argument
sound?






Another example:
Homosexuality is unnatural. Therefore, it
ought not to be practiced.
P1: Homosexuality is unnatural.
P2: Whatever is unnatural ought not to be
done. 2nd order enthymeme.
Conclusion: Therefore, homosexuality should
not be practiced.
What is natural?
1. Consequentialism
-
Utilitarianism
Ethical egoism
2. Duty Ethics – deontological ethics
3. Moral Relativism
-
-
What is believed to be right and wrong may differ
from group to group, society to society, or culture
to culture. (Cultural relativism)
What is right and wrong may differ from group to
group, society to society, culture to culture.
(ethical relativism)
Religious relativism, religious absolutism

Virtue ethics
◦ Boy scout pledge – to be loyal, helpful, friendly, and
so forth.
◦ Aristotle – develop virtues by using our capacity to
reason to moderate our impulses and appetites.
◦ Exercises 12.6 on page 452.



Legal precedent – often argument from analogy.
Justifying laws – four perspectives
1) Legal Moralism – the law should make illegal
anything that is immoral.
◦ Do we have legal moralism in this country?
2) Harm principle – the only legitimate basis for forbidding
x is that doing x causes harm to others.
Prostitution? Drug use?
3) Legal paternalism – the view that laws can be justified if
they are for a person’s own good.
4) Offense principle – something should be illegal if other
people are greatly offended by it.
Exercise 12-13, page 459