Are Reason and Emotion Equally Necessary in Justifying a Moral Decision - Essay Example

Are reason and Emotion equally necessary in justifying a moral decision? The concepts of reason and emotion had been brought together in relation to moral decisions by every philosopher who has dealt with Moral Philosophy or Ethics. Metaethics deals with the basic demarcations of reason and emotion in the conceptual level of moral decisions. This is eventually linked to the other divisions, namely normative ethics and applied ethics, where the practical significance of reason and emotion are regulated and applied. The philosophical significance given to reason and emotion by moral philosophers like David Hume and Immanuel Kant has made it an unavoidable topic for debate even by the British utilitarian philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Miller. According to the 18th century British philosopher David Hume, moral assessment is based purely on our emotions. It may be possible to collect as much objective information regarding a topic and to apply reasoning to it, but that may not necessarily facilitate a moral pronouncement. One has to be emotionally provoked so as to get involved in a moral issue and to take a decision. The 20th century philosopher A.J Ayer has demonstrated that moral assessments are not factual descriptions. Hume’s contemporary Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher did contest this view and asserted that moral decisions are always to be informed and influenced by reason. According to Kant, even emotional factors influence our thought processes, a true moral decision can emerge only when our assessment is free of emotions and desires and fully motivated by reason. Moral decisions in the contemporary world posit a challenge to all who are responsible for them. It is not easy to assume that either reason or emotion is the sole basis for moral decision in issues which call for careful analysis and comprehension. While debating over the significance of reason and emotion in moral decision, one has to take into account the controversial issues of the contemporary world, ranging from political issues like War for Peace and harboring Nuclear weapons to social issues like the legalization of abortion and prostitution, racism and religious fundamentalism to personal issues like sexual orientation and freedom of expression. In the changing world order, what one considers reasoning based on factual data could be seen by another as a gross error guided by prejudices. In the political sphere, the implementation of government decisions have to make use of not just reason, but proper emotional appeal as well. The U.S and British joint-decision to invade Iraq, notwithstanding its moral aspects, had been based on the reasoning that Iraq supposedly hosted nuclear weapons. Even though this was in fact a hoax, the soldiers who were sent to Iraq were clearly under the impression that the governments’ claim was right. This was the way in which the political leaders manipulated reasoning with a substantial amount of public emotion. It is a well known fact that political leaders have had immense appeal to the masses through emotional persuasion. A very good example of this could found in the speeches of Winston Churchill and Roosevelt, who did count on public emotions to a great extent, even as they presented factual evidence and reasoning for their arguments. In social issues, those who affiliate themselves to abolitionist standpoints believe that they are guided by pure reason. But in all such cases, prejudices against certain communities are what form the strong emotional basis for such standpoints. For example, someone who disapproves of prostitution and thinks that it has to be abolished could be revealed to have harbored many prejudices against the profession and those who practice it. Proper reasoning would include the pragmatic analysis of the situation where prostitution exists, how it has originated, who are the ones involved in it, and whether abolishing prostitution will make any difference. This would also involve an emotional involvement in the issue, quite contrary to the antagonistic emotional involvement that the abolitionists have. The crucial questions regarding the issues would lead to the psychological and social aspects that lead to prostitution and the power structure that exists in cases of prostitution. This would lead to an informed, more tolerant approach to the topic that would address one by one the many issues related to it. The best decision would not be to penalize or execute all those involved in prostitution, but to acknowledge how widespread a practice it is and start systematic work addressing health and moral issues. Another controversial social issue that calls for a judicious blend of reason and emotion is abortion. Despite the myopic idea that abortion is a sin that has to be abolished, a similar tolerant approach towards the issue would reveal that one has to combine both reason and emotion to tackle it. In personal matters, one has to acknowledge the overpowering role of emotions over reason. If one leads a life based purely on reasoning, the simple pleasures of life will be lost forever. For instance, it is simply impossible to fall in love with someone if the pros and cons are meticulously analyzed, with the help of reason. Personal decisions are quite often based on intuitions and passions rather than reasoning. However, this does not mean that one has to get rid of reasoning in personal lives altogether. For anyone who cares for the quality of life on personal terms, the acquired knowledge and respect regarding moral issues will also form a substantial part in decision taking. This explains the social etiquette followed by even those who are madly in love or are overpowered by passion for something. If all human beings relied solely on emotions and intuitions there would be utter chaos and peaceful social life would be impossible in such a circumstance. Even in the most impulsive decisions taken by individuals, respect for others and the social structure can be reflected, which explains the part played by reason in their decisions. In a moral issue regarding a delicate issue like socially unaccepted sexual orientation, a personal moral decision may not be possible to rely solely on either reason or emotion. In a society where homosexuality is not approved, a moral decision would necessitate personal and social conflicts. If one follows pure reason, it may be wise to discard one’s personal sexual needs and to take a conformist attitude. One could try to act ‘normal’ in such a situation by imitating the socially acceptable sexuality. However, this would only lead to future problems, since the pleasure-pain elements involved in the decision will not tally. By being a conformist, a person with homosexual orientation will have to suppress her/his natural instincts. This would be a violation of individual freedom and equality in society. Pure reasoning would only lead to disastrous outcomes in such a case, because a repressed, unhappy individual cannot be expected to think well for other individuals. This may even lead to domestic and child abuse. On the other hand, if someone follows merely the emotional aspect in moral decision making and disregard the societal norms altogether, it may upset the life of her/him and of the people who are associated with him. An ideal moral decision would be based on reason and emotion. Social negotiations may be possible if the decision is made in this way. In some cases, it may be better to leave the social structure that curbs one’s personal freedom. But in any case, one has to make sure that one does not lose control over either the emotional or rational aspects of decision making. In the political, social and individual spheres, moral decisions are to be informed and influenced by both emotion and reason. The philosophical precepts of moral philosophy elaborate on the varying significance of emotion and reason. They have explained the concepts of reason and emotion in the best way possible for the sake of their respective arguments. If one cares genuinely for the quality of life the decisive element in moral decisions in individual and social levels should be a judicious blend of reason and emotion. References Fieser, James. “Ethics” in http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/ethics.htm, February 19, 2008 http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/80130/part1/sect4/modern.html, February 19, 2008 Read More