Moral
Reasoning

"A
man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hope of reward after death."

- Albert Einstein

    Now
let us discuss the rational thinking regarding moral reasoning.
First we have a consequential view that puts morality into the
consequences of an action. Most popular view of this is Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism which says the right
action is what produces the most pleasure and least pain for the
greater number of people called the “happiness principle”. This
would say for example that if you had the choice in your actions to
save five people versus one person that obviously you should pick
the five people because it would cause the least pain to the
majority, each person despite race, religious views, sex, etc each
having an equal right to live and be happy. The consequences
furthermore dictate that even if you were to have to murder one
person to save the lives of others that the killing is justified. Of
course killing is an extreme case, but as a scenario if the
consequences for it result in the greater happiness and lesser pain
including the quality of happiness plus number of people weighed
against the quality and pain of a number of pain then that is the
correct action to take. Utilitarianism may not be the only or best
'rational' way to look at things. I'm in the process of watching
class lectures on video on Justice to find any ways that
Utilitarianism may fail as a philosophy. So far it is only the best
that I have came across, there is also for one the Libertarian view
point that I am in the process of researching. Who knows at the end
of this book I may have found a better method and need to rewrite
this. As our knowledge grows so does our world and better our
perspective of it.

    Now on to
the second, we have a categorical way of determining morality by
following certain duties and rights. An extreme example again would
be that killing even one person to save the lives of 5 is wrong to
do. It is murder and no matter what the circumstances that it is
wrong to do this. Another example might be to not to lie, even when
the lie may well indeed be best for everyone, of course we all know
that killing and lying is usually going to end in bad
consequences.
    However if we were to follow this all the time
without thought to the consequence would a lie be better than to
tell someone the truth that may end up in some very bad
consequences. This has been
programmed into us to follow lets say
the ten commandments of the
bible or by the the law of your
country that has been made. But
what if we followed the ten
commandments precisely in every action
we take and not consider
the consequences of it?

    Why
don't we look at the ten commandments at a closer view, here I'll be
using the list from NIV. First
four here relate to god nothing to do with ethics... only about
putting god first and a silly one about keeping sabbath holy, what
about the rest of the week? Why is that day any different to be
held to a different standard just to worship god more?

• I. "You
  shall have no other gods before me.

• II.
  "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of
  anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters
  below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the
  LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin
  of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate
  me, but showing love to a thousand [generations] of those who love
  me and keep my commandments.

• III.
  "You
  shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will
  not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

• IV.
  "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you
  shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh
  day
  is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work,
  neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or
  maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For
  in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and
  all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the
  LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

    Next
we have to “honour” our mother and father, well that's great to
teach your kids to listen as children but as you grow older they
should be teaching you to think for yourself. That is a parent's
role to teach their children to think for themselves and be able to
make good decisions and a good member of society as they grow older.
This isn't much of a ethical rule if you ask me.

• V.
  "Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long
  in the land the LORD your God is giving you.

    Now
we have the next four that I'll address and say that in general are
good rules, to not murder, commit adultery, steal and lie. There are
exceptions to rules of course but these are good guidelines I
believe.

• VI.
  "You shall not murder.

• VII.
  "You shall not commit adultery.

• VIII.
  "You shall not steal.

• IX.
  "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

    Now
to 'covet' your neighbor's things is suppose to be 'sinful'? And is
this a ethical guideline or just a piece of good advice? Personally
I agree with the advice that you shouldn't envy your neighbor's
things. As Pliny the Younger said “Caeca invidia est.” i.e. envy
is blind. However I don't find it to be an ethical rule to live by
as I do the four former commandments.

• X.
  "You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet
  your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or
  donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

    So
that leaves us with don't murder, commit adultery, steal or lie.
All good things in general to go by but could also be summed up by
"Love
your neighbor as yourself." (Galatians 5:14)

    How
about our laws, are they infallible especially in certain cases.
Justice here I think you'll find is not done by following a
commandment or the law but by following what we best can determine
the consequences will be. Determining the results of your actions is
the most logical way to make decisions from day to day. Yet how many
of you would do the rational thing given special circumstances?
Would you make the rational decision lets say Harry S. Truman's
decision to drop the atom bombs on Japan knowing that it would
stop the war and save thousands of lives by the result? Or would
you find it wrong to simply kill because that has been taught to
you that killing is wrong no matter what despite the thousands
that could be saved by dropping that bomb. To have to kill
thousands in what I feel are
needless wars itself is a hard
decision for a president to make.
And I'm sure Harry S. Truman
had a hard time deciding but I believe
he did make the right
choice, but you need to decide for yourself.
Which is more
rational here to do the former based on consequences
of your
actions and to think for yourself if you will or to follow
what
one believes their duty is according to a holy text, the law or
some
other reasoning. Not advocating breaking the law nor do
I believe
that the ten commandments for example are not good
guidelines of
how to behave. But personally I believe they should
be
'guidelines' not an absolute in all case scenarios. In general
these
things such as the Ten Commandments of the bible, Buddhist's
five
concepts, and our countries laws help teach moral concepts that
good
actions generally result in good consequences. And of course
that
bad actions usually result in bad consequences, but my point
here
is that to be a rational thinker one must think first about
the
consequences of an action before acting on them. Not simply
follow
a strict code of rules. Virtue
is not based solely on following rules and making a habit of them
but also having the wisdom of knowing what will bring the most
happiness to those around them. I believe it is compassionate
wisdom that we are looking for in all our decision making and
behaviors.