Theories of Moral Theories of Moral Reasoning and Reasoning and

Justice ApproachesJustice Approaches

Presented By :Presented By :

Group 6Group 6

Flow of the PresentationFlow of the Presentation

Moral ReasoningMoral ReasoningTwo Essential Components of Moral ReasoningTwo Essential Components of Moral ReasoningImportance of Moral ReasoningImportance of Moral ReasoningKohlberg's Theory of Moral ReasoningKohlberg's Theory of Moral ReasoningHeinz dilemmaHeinz dilemmaTheories of Justice ApproachesTheories of Justice ApproachesJusticeJusticeTheories of Distributive Justice, Retributive Justice Theories of Distributive Justice, Retributive Justice and Compensatory Justice.and Compensatory Justice.

Moral ReasoningMoral ReasoningIt refers to the reasoning process by whichIt refers to the reasoning process by which

human behaviors, institutions, or policieshuman behaviors, institutions, or policies

are Judged to be in accordance with or inare Judged to be in accordance with or in

violation of moral standards.violation of moral standards.

It is thus, a thinking process with theIt is thus, a thinking process with the

objective of making appropriate use ofobjective of making appropriate use of

facts and opinions to determining whetherfacts and opinions to determining whether

an idea is right or wrong .an idea is right or wrong .

Two Essential Components of Two Essential Components of Moral ReasoningMoral Reasoning

An understanding of what reasonable An understanding of what reasonable moral standards require, prohibit, value, or moral standards require, prohibit, value, or condemn, and ;condemn, and ;

Evidence or Information that shows that a Evidence or Information that shows that a particular person, policy or institution, or particular person, policy or institution, or behavior has the kinds of features that behavior has the kinds of features that these moral standards require, prohibit, these moral standards require, prohibit, value, or condemn.value, or condemn.

Importance of Moral ReasoningImportance of Moral ReasoningOur actions stem from our thoughts, and such actions Our actions stem from our thoughts, and such actions influence the lives of others. Unfortunately, human beings influence the lives of others. Unfortunately, human beings are not born with a "code of conduct". One approach to are not born with a "code of conduct". One approach to determine how one should live, is to seek the knowledge of determine how one should live, is to seek the knowledge of religious leaders. Alternatively, one could engage in moral religious leaders. Alternatively, one could engage in moral reasoning to determine whether ones actions are right or reasoning to determine whether ones actions are right or wrong.wrong.

Even in making the choice to seek the knowledge of Even in making the choice to seek the knowledge of religious leaders, or to choose a philosophy or religion, one religious leaders, or to choose a philosophy or religion, one is making a decision regarding right action - e.g. "Is this is making a decision regarding right action - e.g. "Is this religion, leader, or philosophy the correct one to turn my life religion, leader, or philosophy the correct one to turn my life over to?"over to?"

Importance of Moral Reasoning cont…Importance of Moral Reasoning cont…The ability to choose the "right" religion or to discard The ability to choose the "right" religion or to discard religion in favor of one's own philosophy, or any other religion in favor of one's own philosophy, or any other similar choice, will benefit from the application of moral similar choice, will benefit from the application of moral reasoning.reasoning.The ability to make a choice, and to make a good choice, The ability to make a choice, and to make a good choice, has powerful consequences thereafter. Our lives, and our has powerful consequences thereafter. Our lives, and our effect on others, are governed by the decisions we make, effect on others, are governed by the decisions we make, and the consequences of our decisions are likely to be and the consequences of our decisions are likely to be governed by the quality of the decisions we make.governed by the quality of the decisions we make.The ability to make good decisions will impact our lives, The ability to make good decisions will impact our lives, how we treat others, how we are treated in return. The how we treat others, how we are treated in return. The ability to have a good framework for making our own ability to have a good framework for making our own decisions will allow us to make better decisions, which can decisions will allow us to make better decisions, which can be obtained by moral reasoning.be obtained by moral reasoning.

An ExampleAn Example

An Independent Author is offering reasons forAn Independent Author is offering reasons for

claiming that American social institutions areclaiming that American social institutions are

unjust. Many Non white people live in theunjust. Many Non white people live in the

American society, fight for it in disproportionateAmerican society, fight for it in disproportionate

numbers, contribute cheap labor for thenumbers, contribute cheap labor for the

economic growth etc. But, these people do noteconomic growth etc. But, these people do not

enjoy the same benefits as their counterparts.enjoy the same benefits as their counterparts.

41% of Negroes fall below the poverty Line as41% of Negroes fall below the poverty Line as

compared to 12% of whites. compared to 12% of whites.

Example cont…Example cont…Infant mortality rate is 3 times as high amongInfant mortality rate is 3 times as high among

nonwhite babies as among whites. Negroes makenonwhite babies as among whites. Negroes make

up 11% of the nation’s workforce, but they haveup 11% of the nation’s workforce, but they have

only 6% of the nation’s technical andonly 6% of the nation’s technical and

professional jobs, 3% of the managerial jobs, andprofessional jobs, 3% of the managerial jobs, and

6% of jobs in skilled trades. 6% of jobs in skilled trades. The author in theThe author in the

example has in mind a moral standardexample has in mind a moral standard::

Discrimination that prevents people from gettingDiscrimination that prevents people from getting

benefits out of their society in which they havebenefits out of their society in which they have

made a significant contribution, is unjustified. made a significant contribution, is unjustified.

Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Reasoning Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Reasoning

Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) was a well-known Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) was a well-known theorist in the field of moral development. He posed moral theorist in the field of moral development. He posed moral dilemmas (e.g., Heinz Dilemma) to his subjects and then dilemmas (e.g., Heinz Dilemma) to his subjects and then asked questions to probe their reasons for recommending asked questions to probe their reasons for recommending a specific course of action.a specific course of action.Kohlberg's theory of moral reasoning is a stage theory. Kohlberg's theory of moral reasoning is a stage theory. This means that everyone goes through the stages This means that everyone goes through the stages sequentially without skipping any stage. However, sequentially without skipping any stage. However, movement through these stages are not natural, that is movement through these stages are not natural, that is people do not automatically move from one stage to the people do not automatically move from one stage to the next as they mature. In stage development, movement is next as they mature. In stage development, movement is effected when cognitive dissonance occurs ... that is when effected when cognitive dissonance occurs ... that is when a person notices inadequacies in his or her present way of a person notices inadequacies in his or her present way of coping with a given moral dilemmacoping with a given moral dilemma

Stages of Moral ReasoningStages of Moral Reasoning

Level One : Pre-conventional StagesLevel One : Pre-conventional Stages

Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation-Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation- TheThepre- conventional level of moral reasoning is especiallypre- conventional level of moral reasoning is especiallycommon in children, although adults can also exhibit thiscommon in children, although adults can also exhibit thislevel of reasoning. Individuals focuses on the directlevel of reasoning. Individuals focuses on the directconsequences that their actions will have for themselves.consequences that their actions will have for themselves.

The worse the punishment for the act is, the more 'bad‘The worse the punishment for the act is, the more 'bad‘the act is perceived to be. In addition, there is nothe act is perceived to be. In addition, there is norecognition that others' points of view are any differentrecognition that others' points of view are any differentfrom one's own view. This stage may be viewed as a from one's own view. This stage may be viewed as a kind of authoritarianism. kind of authoritarianism.

Stage 2 : Instrument and Relativity Stage 2 : Instrument and Relativity OrientationOrientation

This stage is self-interest driven. It espouses theThis stage is self-interest driven. It espouses thewhat's in it for me position, the right behaviorwhat's in it for me position, the right behaviorbeing defined by what is in one's own bestbeing defined by what is in one's own bestinterest. interest. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest inStage two reasoning shows a limited interest inthe needs of others, but only to a point where itthe needs of others, but only to a point where itmight further one's own interests, such as youmight further one's own interests, such as youscratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. In stagescratch my back, and I'll scratch yours. In stagetwo, concern for others is not based on loyalty ortwo, concern for others is not based on loyalty orintrinsic respect but the perspective of the worldintrinsic respect but the perspective of the worldis often seen as morally relative.is often seen as morally relative.

Level Two : Conventional Stages Level Two : Conventional Stages Persons who reason in a conventional way judge thePersons who reason in a conventional way judge themorality of actions by comparing these actions to societal views andmorality of actions by comparing these actions to societal views and

expectationsexpectations..

Stage 3 : Interpersonal Concordance Orientation-Stage 3 : Interpersonal Concordance Orientation- Individuals enters the society by filling social roles andIndividuals enters the society by filling social roles andare receptive of approval or disapproval from other peopleare receptive of approval or disapproval from other peopleas it reflects society's accordance with the perceived role.as it reflects society's accordance with the perceived role.They try to be a They try to be a good boygood boy or or good girlgood girl to live up to these to live up to theseexpectations, having learned that there is inherent value inexpectations, having learned that there is inherent value indoing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality ofdoing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality ofan action by evaluating its consequences in terms of aan action by evaluating its consequences in terms of aperson's relationships, which now begin to include thingsperson's relationships, which now begin to include thingslike respect, gratitude in the society.like respect, gratitude in the society.

Stage 4 : Law and Order OrientationStage 4 : Law and Order Orientation – –

The individual realizes that it is important to obeyThe individual realizes that it is important to obeylaws, dictums and social conventions because oflaws, dictums and social conventions because oftheir importance in maintaining the smooththeir importance in maintaining the smoothfunctioning of a society. A central ideal or idealsfunctioning of a society. A central ideal or idealsoften prescribe what is right and wrong If oneoften prescribe what is right and wrong If oneperson violates a law, perhaps everyone would, person violates a law, perhaps everyone would, thus there is an obligation and a duty to upholdthus there is an obligation and a duty to upholdlaws and rules. When someone does violate a law,laws and rules. When someone does violate a law,it is morally wrong; culpability is thus ait is morally wrong; culpability is thus asignificant factor in this stage as it separates thesignificant factor in this stage as it separates thebad domains from the good ones.bad domains from the good ones.

Level Three : Post conventional, Autonomous Level Three : Post conventional, Autonomous or Principled Stagesor Principled Stages

Realization that individuals are separate entities fromRealization that individuals are separate entities fromsociety now becomes salient. One's own perspectivesociety now becomes salient. One's own perspectiveshould be viewed before the society's.should be viewed before the society's.Stage Five : Social Contract Orientation-Stage Five : Social Contract Orientation- Individuals Individualsare viewed as holding different opinions and values.are viewed as holding different opinions and values.Along a similar vein, laws are regarded as social contractsAlong a similar vein, laws are regarded as social contractsrather than rigid dictums. Those that do not promote therather than rigid dictums. Those that do not promote thegeneral welfare should be changed when necessary togeneral welfare should be changed when necessary tomeet meet the greatest good for the greatest number of peoplethe greatest good for the greatest number of people..This is attained through majority decision, and inevitablyThis is attained through majority decision, and inevitablycompromise. In this way democratic government iscompromise. In this way democratic government isostensibly based on stage five reasoning .ostensibly based on stage five reasoning .

Stage Six : Universal Ethical Principles Stage Six : Universal Ethical Principles OrientationOrientation

At this final stage, right action comes to be defined inAt this final stage, right action comes to be defined interms of moral principles chosen because of their logicalterms of moral principles chosen because of their logicalcomprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. Thesecomprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. Theseethical principles are not concrete like the 10ethical principles are not concrete like the 10commandments, but abstract general principles dealingcommandments, but abstract general principles dealingwith justice, society’s welfare, the equality of humanwith justice, society’s welfare, the equality of humanRights, respect for the dignity of individual human beings.Rights, respect for the dignity of individual human beings.Decisions are not met hypothetically in a conditional wayDecisions are not met hypothetically in a conditional waybut rather categorically in an absolute way. This can bebut rather categorically in an absolute way. This can bedone by imagining what one would do being in some one done by imagining what one would do being in some one else’s shoes, who imagined what anyone would doelse’s shoes, who imagined what anyone would dothinking the same.thinking the same.

Heinz dilemma : Heinz dilemma : A dilemma that Kohlberg A dilemma that Kohlberg used in his original research. The druggist's dilemma : used in his original research. The druggist's dilemma :

Heinz Steals the Drug In EuropeHeinz Steals the Drug In EuropeA woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There wasA woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There wasone drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form ofone drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form ofradium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered.radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered.The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging tenThe drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging tentimes what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for thetimes what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for theradium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sickradium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sickwoman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow thewoman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow themoney, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is halfmoney, but he could only get together about $ 1,000, which is halfof what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying andof what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying andasked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggistasked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggistsaid, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money fromsaid, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money fromit." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to stealit." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to stealthe drug for his wife. the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into theShould Heinz have broken into theLaboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why notLaboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not??

Stage one (punishment-Stage one (punishment-obedienceobedience): Heinz should not ): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person or Heinz should prison which will mean he is a bad person or Heinz should steal the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not steal the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.

Stage two (Stage two (self-interestself-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine ): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Or: Heinz if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would probably languish over a jail cell place, and he would probably languish over a jail cell more than his wife's death.more than his wife's death.

Stage three (Stage three (conformityconformity): Heinz should steal the medicine ): Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband. because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband. Or: Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad Or: Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he tried to do everything he could and he is not a criminal; he tried to do everything he could without breaking the law, you cannot blame himwithout breaking the law, you cannot blame him

Stage four (Stage four (law-and-orderlaw-and-order): Heinz should not steal the ): Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal or Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the or Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.without regard for the law; actions have consequences.

Stage five (Stage five (human rightshuman rights): Heinz should steal the ): Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. Or Heinz should not steal the regardless of the law. Or Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right.his actions right.

Stage six (Stage six (universal human ethicsuniversal human ethics): Heinz should ): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or Heinz should not steal the medicine, another person. Or Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.and their lives are equally significant.

Theories of Theories of

Justice ApproachesJustice Approaches

JusticeJustice1.The quality of being just; conformity to the principles 1.The quality of being just; conformity to the principles

of righteousness and rectitude in all things; strict of righteousness and rectitude in all things; strict performance of moral obligations; practical performance of moral obligations; practical conformity to human or divine law; integrity in the conformity to human or divine law; integrity in the dealings of men with each other; rectitude; equity; dealings of men with each other; rectitude; equity; uprightness. uprightness.

2.Conformity to truth and reality in expressing opinions 2.Conformity to truth and reality in expressing opinions and in conduct; fair representation of facts respecting and in conduct; fair representation of facts respecting merit or demerit; honesty, impartiality of a judgment.merit or demerit; honesty, impartiality of a judgment.

Three main categories of Three main categories of JusticeJustice

1)1) Distributive justiceDistributive justice : : It is concerned with the It is concerned with the proper allocation of good things - wealth, proper allocation of good things - wealth, power reward, respect - between different power reward, respect - between different people. people.

2)2) Retributive justiceRetributive justice : : It refers to the just It refers to the just imposition of punishments and penalties on imposition of punishments and penalties on those who do wrong.those who do wrong.

3)3) Compensatory justiceCompensatory justice : : It concerns the just It concerns the just way of compensating people for what they way of compensating people for what they have lost when they were wronged by others.have lost when they were wronged by others.

Theories of Distributive JusticeTheories of Distributive JusticeTheories of distributive justice try to answer threeTheories of distributive justice try to answer three

questions :questions :

What goodsWhat goods are to be distributed are to be distributed? Is it to be ? Is it to be wealth, power, respect, or a combination of wealth, power, respect, or a combination of these things? these things?

Between what entitiesBetween what entities are they to be are they to be distributeddistributed? Humans (dead, living, future), ? Humans (dead, living, future), sentient beings, the members of a single society, sentient beings, the members of a single society, nations? nations?

What is the What is the properproper distribution distribution? Equal, ? Equal, meritocratic, according to social status, according meritocratic, according to social status, according to need? to need?

Theories of Distributive Justice Theories of Distributive Justice cont…cont…

1)1) EgalitarianismEgalitarianism : : This holds that the proper This holds that the proper distribution of wealth (and perhaps other distribution of wealth (and perhaps other goods like respect, opportunity) should be an goods like respect, opportunity) should be an equal one: no individual in the relevant equal one: no individual in the relevant group should have more or less than any group should have more or less than any other individual in that group (individuals, other individual in that group (individuals, families, nations, races, species). families, nations, races, species). Commonly-held egalitarian positions include Commonly-held egalitarian positions include demands for equality of opportunity and for demands for equality of opportunity and for equality of outcome. equality of outcome.

2) 2) Meritocratic TheoryMeritocratic Theory : According to this : According to this theory, goods, especially wealth and theory, goods, especially wealth and social status, should be distributed to social status, should be distributed to match individual match individual meritmerit, which is usually , which is usually understood as some combination of talent understood as some combination of talent and hard work.and hard work.

3) 3) Needs-based theoriesNeeds-based theories : According to : According to this theory, goods, especially such basic this theory, goods, especially such basic goods as food, shelter and medical care, goods as food, shelter and medical care, should be distributed to meet individuals’ should be distributed to meet individuals’ basic needs for them.basic needs for them.

Rawls’s two principles of justice :Rawls’s two principles of justice :1.1. Each person is to have an equal right to the Each person is to have an equal right to the

most extensive total system of equal basic most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all. liberty for all.

2.2. Social and economic inequalities are to be Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged in such a way, that they are both :arranged in such a way, that they are both :

a)a) to the greatest benefit of the least to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings advantaged, consistent with the just savings principle, andprinciple, and

b)b) attached to offices and positions open to all attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.opportunity.

UtilitarianismUtilitarianism : : According to it, justice According to it, justice requires the maximization of the total or requires the maximization of the total or average welfare across all relevant individuals. average welfare across all relevant individuals. This may require sacrifice of some for the This may require sacrifice of some for the good of others, so long as everyone’s good is good of others, so long as everyone’s good is taken impartially into account. taken impartially into account.

Utilitarianism, in general, argues that the Utilitarianism, in general, argues that the standard of justification for actions, standard of justification for actions, institutions, or the whole world, is institutions, or the whole world, is impartial impartial welfare consequentialismwelfare consequentialism, and only indirectly, , and only indirectly, if at all, to do with rights, property, need, or if at all, to do with rights, property, need, or any other non-utilitarian criterion. any other non-utilitarian criterion.

Theory of Retributive JusticeTheory of Retributive JusticeTheories of retributive justice areTheories of retributive justice are

concerned with punishment forconcerned with punishment for

wrongdoing, and try to answer threewrongdoing, and try to answer three

questions:questions:

WhyWhy punish? punish?

WhoWho should be punished? should be punished?

What punishmentWhat punishment should they should should they should receive?receive?

RetributivismRetributivism It lays down 3 main conditions that areIt lays down 3 main conditions that arenecessary for retributive justice :necessary for retributive justice :

1) Ignorance and In Ability1) Ignorance and In Ability : If people do not : If people do not Know about the consequences of the ActionsKnow about the consequences of the Actionswhich they have chosen freely, or are Innocently which they have chosen freely, or are Innocently ignorant, then they cannot justly be punished orignorant, then they cannot justly be punished orblamed for it. blamed for it. Eg : A Cotton Mills Owner producing a product that Eg : A Cotton Mills Owner producing a product that

Results in emission of harmful gases and causing Results in emission of harmful gases and causing Brown lung disease.Brown lung disease.

2) 2) The second condition of just punishmentsThe second condition of just punishmentsIs certitude that the person being punished Is certitude that the person being punished has actually done something wrong i.e. has actually done something wrong i.e. There is sufficient evidence or proof.There is sufficient evidence or proof.Eg Eg : Penalizing an employee on the basis of: Penalizing an employee on the basis offlimsy or incomplete/incorrect Evidence isflimsy or incomplete/incorrect Evidence isinjustice.injustice.3) 3) The third condition of just punishments is The third condition of just punishments is that they must be consistent andthat they must be consistent andProportioned to the wrong. Punishment is Proportioned to the wrong. Punishment is Consistent only when everyone is given the same Consistent only when everyone is given the same Penalty for the same wrongdoing.Penalty for the same wrongdoing.

Theory of Compensatory Theory of Compensatory JusticeJustice

A person has a moral obligation to compensateA person has a moral obligation to compensatean injured party only if 3 conditions arean injured party only if 3 conditions arepresent :present :1)The action that inflicted the injury was wrong1)The action that inflicted the injury was wrongor negligent. or negligent.

2) The person’s action was the real cause of the 2) The person’s action was the real cause of the Injury.Injury.

3) The person inflicted the injury voluntarily3) The person inflicted the injury voluntarily..

ThankThank YouYou