Types Of Moral Reasoning Research Articles

Moral reasoning and support for punitive violence after crime

In contexts marked by high violence and widespread impunity, how do citizens articulate and justify their preferences about crime and punishment? What kind of moral logic and reasoning do they employ when discussing punishments? Does support for punitive punishment derive from moralistic and deontological concerns that perpetrators need to be punished because it is right and proper? Or do people support punitive punishments because they feel they are effective? To address this question, we document and analyze stated preferences for punishment in response to crime from 62 in-depth qualitative interviews with individuals affected by violence in the Mexican state of Michoacán. We conduct a quantitative analysis of how different forms of moral justifications are related to preferred punishments for specific crime events, and a qualitative content analysis to investigate possible mechanisms. We find that two types of moral reasoning are more likely to be used to justify punitive violence: (1) consequentialist reasoning which involves weighing the costs and benefits of an action; (2) and reasoning that dehumanizes accused criminals. Deontological justifications about the right or just action, while extremely common, are used fairly equally across arguments for and against punitive violence. Our study sheds light on the diverse moral frames employed to justify the endorsement of punitive violence.

The role of managerial hierarchy in the moral reasoning of local government managers

AbstractFalling public trust in Australia's institutions warrants revisiting how public sector managers approach ethical decision‐making. This study presents the findings of in‐depth interviews with 35 local government managers in Australia and seeks to understand how managerial hierarchy influences the moral reasoning of managers. Through the lens of social learning and moral development theoretical perspectives, the findings indicate that local government managers do engage in different types of moral reasoning when presented with hypothetical ethical dilemmas, and their managerial status plays a pronounced role in shaping the content of that reasoning. We also find support for differences in moral reasoning across gender, which appear more evident at lower levels of management. Through providing an in‐depth analysis of managerial hierarchy and ethical decision‐making, the findings from this study can be used to guide organisational and individual managers’ ethics training and development.Points for practitioners The declining public trust in public administrators warrants regular risk management audits of internal and external environments of public sector organisations to identify potential or existing ethical challenges that require a response. Moral reasoning and ethical decision‐making are context specific and include the ethical climate of the organisation. We find support for the importance of organisational leadership visibly ‘walking the talk’ when it comes to ethics. While management hierarchy is seen to influence moral reasoning, or the deliberations when arriving at a decision, there is widespread acceptance of the basic tenets of abiding by the law and being truthful. Therefore, organisational ethical policies and codes of conduct should clearly articulate the legal implications, and consequences of any breaches. A one‐size‐fits‐all approach to ethics training is not advised. We find that moral reasoning differs with managerial experience. A case is made to account for training tailored at different managerial levels, along with scenario‐based training and mentoring from higher levels of management.

2019冠狀病毒病疫情下的道德議題的初步哲學探索

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.在2019冠狀病毒疫情之下，至少有兩個公共術生政策的道德議題變得異常重要。第一，現時有不少爭議是關於這些抗疫政策與個人自由的衡突。這是很典型的公共善與個人自由衡突的道德爭論，但疫情令這樣的衡突成為直接而迫切的顧慮。第 二，這個世界在疫情之前已有很多嚴重的不平等問題，但現在有些防疫政策令社會的不平等變得更為嚴重。儘管本文不會為這兩個道德議題給予肯定的解答，但會集中探究在討論這些道德議題的跨學科辯論中，應該用到甚麽道德推論和基礎，並會 詳細解釋以下幾個重要理念。第一，作者會論證，衛生道德人權的理念並不能充分地成為解決這些問題的道德基礎。第二， 不純粹用到權利進路的話，作者會論證應該用到阿馬蒂亞.森的後果評價和能力進路作為道德推論和基礎。第三，這兩個由森提出的理念可以把不同的道德理論和傳統與公共衛生議題連繫起來。作者會以儒家為道德傳統的例子，論證如何以後果 評價、能力進路和儒家當中的一些理念與價值，以此提出一些可能方向，去處理上述兩個道德議題。At least two moral issues of some public health policies have become significant in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, it is arguable that some policies to address the present pandemic conflict with individual freedom. This is a typical moral debate between public good and individual freedom, but the COVID-19 pandemic has made this conflict a more immediate and urgent concern. Second, the world had serious inequality problems prior to the pandemic, and some of the new public health policies have caused more severe social inequalities. Instead of providing definitive answers to these two moral issues, this paper focuses on what types of moral reasoning and foundation should be used in the interdisciplinary debates around these problems. Several ideas are discussed in detail. First, the author argues that the idea of moral human rights to health is not a sufficient moral foundation to solve these problems. Second, the author argues that in addition to the right talk, we should use Amartya Sen’s consequential evaluation and the capability approach as the foundation and moral reasoning. Third, the author argues that these two ideas from Sen can connect different moral traditions with public health issues. The author uses Confucianism as an example of a moral tradition, and argues for possible directions to address the moral issues using ideas and values from consequential evaluation, the capability approach, and Confucianism.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 60 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.

Television Stories and the Cultivation of Moral Reasoning: The Role of Genre Exposure and Narrative Engageability

ABSTRACTThis study explores the potential of television genres to cultivate different types of moral reasoning. In a prolonged exposure experiment, participants (N = 121) were exposed to video material from 1 of 3 genres (crime, medical drama, comedy) over the course of 4 weeks. Using the Neo-Kohlbergian approach (Rest et al., 1999a), the study measured effects of genre exposure on the strength of personal interest reasoning, maintaining norms reasoning, and postconventional reasoning, taking into account individuals’ predisposition to become engaged in narratives (narrative engageability). Although exposure to crime drama had no influence, medical drama raised maintaining norms reasoning and lowered postconventional reasoning. Exposure to comedy raised postconventional reasoning. Narrative engageability emerged as a strong predictor, showing that the propensity to become engaged in narratives is positively related to postconventional reasoning and negatively related to maintaining norms reasoning.

Process, outcomes, virtues: the normative strategies of responsible research and innovation and the challenge of moral pluralism

ABSTRACTThe paper analyses the normative foundations of responsibility in the recent literature on responsible research and innovation (RRI). Firstly, it finds that RRI approaches invoke three main types of moral reasoning to define responsibility corresponding to key philosophical traditions: proceduralism, consequentialism and virtue ethics. The paper analyses how RRI approaches differ in the kind of elements they borrow from these three traditions. Secondly, the paper shows that this analytical reflection about the normative strategies followed by RRI approaches helps to better understand the tension existing between, on the one hand, the modern requirement of pluralism in democratic societies to allow for various value systems to influence the decision-making process and, on the other, the applicability of normative theories that demands specific and practical norms to be identified. The paper aims to show how each type of moral reasoning strategy used by most RRI approaches deals with this tension and how each attempts to resolve it.

The Dual Track Theory of Moral Decision-Making: a Critique of the Neuroimaging Evidence

The dual-track theory of moral reasoning has received considerable attention due to the neuroimaging work of Greene et al. Greene et al. claimed that certain kinds of moral dilemmas activated brain regions specific to emotional responses, while others activated areas specific to cognition. This appears to indicate a dissociation between different types of moral reasoning. I re-evaluate these claims of specificity in light of subsequent empirical work. I argue that none of the cortical areas identified by Greene et al. are functionally specific: each is active in a wide variety of both cognitive and emotional tasks. I further argue that distinct activation across conditions is not strong evidence for dissociation. This undermines support for the dual-track hypothesis. I further argue that moral decision-making appears to activate a common network that underlies self-projection: the ability to imagine oneself from a variety of viewpoints in a variety of situations. I argue that the utilization of self-projection indicates a continuity between moral decision-making and other kinds of complex social deliberation. This may have normative consequences, but teasing them out will require careful attention to both empirical and philosophical concerns.

Kohlberg and Gilligan: duet or duel?

Most moral psychologists have come to accept two types of moral reasoning: Kohlberg's justice and Gilligan's care, but there still seem to be some unresolved issues. By analysing and comparing Kohlberg's statement on some theoretical issues with some of Gilligan's statements in an interview in April 2003, I will look at some key issues in the so‐called ‘Kohlberg–Gilligan conflict’. Some of the questions raised in this paper are: (1) Does Gilligan reject the idea of developmental morality? (2) Does Gilligan support Kohlberg's stage theory and his claim of universality? (3) Did Kohlberg reject Gilligan's proposal to expand his understanding of moral reasoning? (4) Was Gilligan's theory a critique of or an expansion to Kohlberg's theory? The findings of this analysis suggest that the first question be answered negatively, the second positively, the third negatively and the fourth that Gilligan's theory is an expansion rather than a critique.

Moral Reasoning, Moral Pluralism, and the Classroom

In this essay I focus on a fundamental aspect of moral reasoning — the application and revision of a comprehensive moral framework. This is not the only type of moral reasoning nor, perhaps, the most important. It is, however, the most general and pervasive, marking the broad contours within which other types of moral reasoning are employed. After characterizing this kind of reasoning, I turn to moral pluralism. So long as individuals and groups enjoy a certain amount of freedom to think and act for themselves, there will be conflicts between good and important moral values and principles that cannot be resolved by reason. This is a fact, the fact of reasonable moral pluralism, that must be incorporated into the application and revision of our comprehensive moral frameworks. I conclude by discussing the implications of my accounts of moral reasoning and moral pluralism for the classroom.

Moral Reasoning Among Public Administrators: Does One Size Fit All?

The purposes of this study are to establish a baseline measurement of public administrators’ moral reasoning, to examine differences in reasoning among them, and to compare their moral judgments with those of other professional groups. Nearly 275 public administrators completed usable responses on the Defining Issues Test to assess preferences for three types of moral reasoning: personal interest, maintaining norms, and postconventional. As a group, the subjects used more postconventional moral reasoning than maintaining norms reasoning. Although 85 percent of the sample held a graduate degree, administrators did not use more postconventional moral reasoning than adults in general or college students. The group scored significantly lower in postconventional reasoning than similarly educated groups: physicians, staff nurses, and law students. Females used a significantly higher percentage of postconventional thinking (mean P% = 45.23) than males. The discussion delineates possible implications of these patterns in ethical thinking for policy, education, and practice.

Moral orientation of elderly persons: considering ethical dilemmas in health care.

Knowledge about moral development and elderly persons is very limited. A hermeneutical interpretative study was conducted with healthy elderly persons (n = 20) in order to explore and describe their moral orientation based on the paradigms of justice (Kohlberg) and care (Gilligan). The types of moral reasoning, dominance, alignment and orientation were determined. All but one participant included both types of reasoning when discussing an ethical conflict. None of the men's moral reasoning was dominated by caring, but justice dominated the reasoning of four women. The implications for ethical decision-making and future research are discussed.

Moral Orientation of Elderly Persons:: considering ethical dilemmas in health care

Knowledge about moral development and elderly persons is very limited. A hermeneutical interpretative study was conducted with healthy elderly persons (n = 20) in order to explore and describe their moral orientation based on the paradigms of justice (Kohlberg) and care (Gilligan). The types of moral reasoning, dominance, alignment and orientation were determined. All but one participant included both types of reasoning when discussing an ethical conflict. None of the men’s moral reasoning was dominated by caring, but justice dominated the reasoning of four women. The implications for ethical decision-making and future research are discussed.

JUSTICE AND CARE REASONING IN MORALLY AMBIGUOUS SITUATIONS - EXAMPLES FROM VIETNAM AND THE INTIFADA

The following paper analyzes two types of moral reasoning presented by two moral figures from the My Lai massacre and in an extreme morally conflicting situation during the first phase of the Intifada. The socio-moral and political forces that shape the state of min d of the acting soldiers are delineated. The work of Kohlberg (1984) and Gilligan (1987) serve as the theoretical framework for this inquiry.

Young adults' moral reasoning about prohibitive and prosocial dilemmas

One hundred and five high school and college students were given tasks of social sensitivity, perspective taking, prosocial moral reasoning, and prohibitive moral reasoning. Social sensitivity and perspective taking were positively related to both types of moral reasoning, but only for females. For both males and females, level of principled moral reasoning was greater for the prosocial dilemmas than for the prohibitive dilemmas. Findings are generally viewed as being supportive of Piaget's and Kohlberg's conceptualizations of the nature of moral judgment. Differences between the two types of unrelated moral reasoning are discussed in terms of the relation between an individually constructed set of ethics and a more general social code of ethics.