Moral reasoning is individual or collective practical reasoning about what, morally, one ought to do. For present purpose, we may understand issues about what is right or wrong, virtuous or vicious, as raising moral question. When we are faced with moral questions in daily life, just as when we are faced with child-rearing questions, sometimes we act impulsively or instinctively and sometimes we pause to reason about what we ought to do. Much of our reasoning comes about through are position on an issue and how are principle effects that issue.
I did not choose one particular company for this paper, rather I chose to compile my experiences with military moral issues (my experiences in combat), fatherhood, and life. Reasoning, so understood is an intrinsically normative concept. An important implication of this is that any empirical data that shows that we consistently think in a given odd way about morality can be taken in one or two contrasting lights: it can be taken to show that, since 'this is what we do' this is how our moral reasoning is.
Alternatively, it can be taken to show that, in the relevant range of cases, we fail to think responsibly, and hence fail to engage in moral reasoning. And empirical data does not settle this kind of normative question for us.
Therefore does morality require each person to reason in the same way, on the basis of the same fundamental considerations?In an ideal world, people would do the right thing simply because it is right. In the world in which we live, morality is more complex. People often disagree about what is right. Even when a consensus on moral values is reached, many find that they do not consistently live up to a moral standard. One reason for this is that...