Abstract
Some approaches to the assessment of moral intuitions are discussed. The controlled ethical trial isolates a moral issue from confounding factors and thereby clarifies what a person's intuition actually is. Casuistic reasoning from situations, where intuitions are clear, suggests or modifies principles, which can then help to make decisions in situations where intuitions are unclear. When intuitions are defended by a supporting principle, that principle can be tested by finding extreme cases, in which it is counterintuitive to follow the principle. An approach to the resolution of conflict between valid moral principles, specifically the utilitarian and justice principles, is considered. It is argued that even those who justify intuitions by a priori principles are often obliged to modify or support their principles by resort to the consideration of consequences.
Key Words: Intuitions • principles • consequences • utilitarianism
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (70.5 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Kellett J. M. Suspension of nurse who gave drug on consultant's instructions. Consultant is grateful for readers' support. BMJ. 1997 Apr 5;314(7086):1043–1043. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7086.1043a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Savulescu Julian. Consequentialism, reasons, value and justice. Bioethics. 1998 Jul;12(3):212–235. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]