Are Emotion and Reason Equally Necessary in Justifying Moral Decisions Essay Example for Free

Are Emotion and Reason Equally Necessary in Justifying Moral Decisions EssayIn analyzing humankind behavior and human thought outgrowthes it can be say that drive and sensations ar always present in each major decision. in that respect is no human being, pull down the most honourableisticly upright or the most unbiased referr can lease crucial honourable decisions without having to have felt the power of case and the every bit powerful emotions in his soul and body. If Emotion and Reason are taken together and if the prop wholenessnt of this paper lead not be given the freedom to choose one from the other then the answer to the query is no. There is no require to have the combined benefit of emotion and reason to justify a moral decision. But if allowed a free hand one should insist that Reason is necessary in justifying moral decisions. This paper will look into the implications of utilise Emotion and Reason in matters regarding moral decisions. This will be do ne by finding out what is the meaning of emotions and reason in the world of epistemology. But fifty-fifty before that there is a need to have a review of epistemology the theories on how human beings gravel knowledge.Background Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that deals with how man attains knowledge. For many the acquiring of knowledge from reading, observing the external environment and by doing experiments can be taken for granted. But for philosophers it is not simply about getting data and then having the ability to describe what was observed and inferred afterwards. Philosophers are persistent that man knows the ex scrap process and if there is none then one should suspect if there is actual learning that occurred after all.With this in mind it is time to introduce two diverging schools of thought when it comes to epistemology and how man exactly acquires knowledge. The first grouping of philosophers believes that human beings can get knowledge using pure reason. I t is the use of the rationale mind, to think using logic to deduce and infer from what can be observed. It is easy to say reason still it is effortful to explain the actual processes of how man looks at the different pieces of the puzzle and then be able to slang the whole picture and finds a pattern or connection.Reason is the mans secret branch and allows him to reign supreme in this planet. There is no other creature that can use the dominate the awesome power of reason in the same way as a human being. A good display case is on how man can deduce that certain plants are edible spell others are lethal. It is common knowledge that man learns to distinguish between a tasty snack and a vine of poison by observing animals around him. This is probably the same technique used to discover that the seeds unfathomable behind the coffee pod are not only edible but in addition a source of one heavenly drink.Without the ability to reason it would have been impossible for man to reali ze that there is something in that coffee pod after observing the goat or maybe birds taking a liking for the sweet fruit. other example of reason is in finding a pattern and amity in natural occurrences such as typhoons, fruiting seasons, gestation period etc. Using reason man was able to build a system where he can begin to tame genius and en experience her benefits. He can plant and channel harvest. He can build shelter and expect to be protected by an upcoming storm.Man can also reproduce his kind and even multiply his flocks knowing pretty well that there are certain laws in nature that he can rely upon and all these are possible by unleashing the power of reason. Diverging Stream Another school of thought when it comes to the acquirement of knowledge is called empiricism. The empiricists believe that it gaining knowledge through reason alone is suspect. They solicit that reason can be influenced by many factors and they conclude that biases and prejudices can interfere in the process.This is perceivable because for thousands of years man has postulated about something and made predictions about the future only to be made a fool at the end. This is because reason has its limits. It is at this point that that man is advised not to jump to conclusions. Empiricists will assert that accurate knowledge is only possible if man avails of his senses. The eyes to use to see and taproom the hands used to grasp and determine shape the ears to hear and determine sound the nose for find out smells and the tongue for taste.Emotions are feelings and better yet it is a reaction that a person can observe after the body and the mind or the heart is exposed to certain external factors. For example, a aim sees her baby crying because she had not eaten the whole mean solar day. The mother has no money to buy milk and she as well as begins to cry. Her emotion can be labeled as sadness tells her that her mind and body does not touch to the image that she saw whi ch is her poor baby experiencing acute hunger. There is another view of emotions which can be very helpful in this study.There are those who assert that emotions are not only act as messengers that tell a person whether something good or bad has occurred but they can be feelings that propels a person to do what is right even when faced with great odds. Jaggar remarked that, it is appropriate to feel joy when we are developing or exercising our creative powers, and it is appropriate to feel anger and perhaps repel in those situations where humans are denied their full creativity or freedom (1996, p. 82). A good example of such an occurrence was again given by Jaggar who wrote, Certain emotions may be twain morally appropriate and epistemologically advantageous in approaching nonhuman and even the inanimate world Jane Goodalls scientific contribution to our understanding of chimpanzee behavior seems to have been made possible only by her abominable empathy with or even love for th ese animals (1996, p. 182).To those who are familiar with Goodalls case will admire her fortitude and determination considering that she had to travel to Africa and be removed from the comforts and security of Western society and be immersed in a hostile environment, not with humans but with wild animals. It is a good instance of how emotions head someone to do something heroic. It is easy to understand what emotions can do to lift ordinary humans to stress for things that exceed his grasp. Emotions can fire-up a person and allow him to go where no one has gone before.The tarradiddle of the United States is replete with examples where tinder moral decisions were justified with the cry for freedom and equality. But there is also a counter-argument that emotions are not need to do justify moral decisions. Reason alone should be enough to move a person to do what is right. This is because emotions can be subjective. And there is no need to furnish volumes of scientific material t o prove that point. Emotions can even be counter-productive when used to analyze tough moral decisions as evidenced from the results of a new study published in Newsweek.According to Wray Herbert make-up for Newsweek (2008) A large and growing number of psychologists now argue that a welter of prejudices are stewing just below the surface of society prejudices against many ethnic groups, against women, gays, the elderly, and outsiders like the homeless and drug addicts. The bounteous question is whether these unconscious animosities are potent enough to actually shape our actions, to make us do things we ourselves find shameful.A new study suggests that, unhappily, the answer is yes. Conclusion The question whether emotion and reason are equally necessary to justify moral decisions is a double-headed query that should have been simplified by separating emotion and reason rephrasing it in two separate questions 1) Is emotion necessary to justify moral decisions and 2) Is reason n ecessary to justify moral decisions. If this is possible then the proponent of this study will say no to the first and then say yes to the second question.But since the main topic used the phrase equally necessary then the answer is no meaning there is no need to bring both emotion and reason to the process of analysis of the problem and ultimately giving the justification for a moral decision. To clarify what is meant by using emotion in the decision process, one has to revisit the example of Jane Goodall and his control with endangered species, it was her strong feelings of emotions, specifically empathy that allowed her to do so much.Using this understanding of emotion the proponent button up cannot endorse the use of emotion to judge a moral case because even with strong emotions one can still be mistaken. An excellent example would be the events that transpired in Germany in World fight II. The residents of this nation enthusiastically embraced the idea given by Hitler that Jews deserve nothing but cobblers last and suffering.The legal age agreed or at least the Nazis agreed that this is fact, even truth and they are responsible for the death of 6 million Jews. If one will go to Germany today and present the same ideas to present day Germans they will surely not react with the same fervor as they did in the time of Hitler but they will recoil in horror. This is a clear example of the subjectivity of emotions and therefore not needed to analyze tough moral issues.