Logical Reasoning
Reasoning in philosophy resembles reasoning in other areas. We often reason about
things like who committed the murder, what car to buy, whether there's a greatest
prime number, or how to cure cancer.
As we approach these issues, we clarify the question and gather background
information. We review what others have said.
We consider alternative views and objections to them. We make distinctions and
weigh pros and cons. We sometimes do experiments.
The climax of the process is when we take a stand and try to justify it. We explain
that the answer must be such and such, and we point to other facts to justify our
answer. This is logical reasoning, where we go from premises to a conclusion.
To reason logically is to conclude something from something else. For example, we
conclude that the butler committed the murder from the beliefs that (1) either the
butler or the maid did it, and (2) the maid didn't do it. If we put reasoning into
words, we get an argument—a set of statements consisting of premises and a
conclusion:
• It's either the butler or the maid did it.
• The maid didn't do it.
• Therefore, the butler did it.
This argument is valid, which means that the conclusion follows logically from the
premises. If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. So if we can be
confident of the premises, then we can be confident that the butler did it.
Calling an argument valid claims that the conclusion follows from the premises; it
doesn’t say that the premises are true. To prove something, we also need true
premises. If we give clearly true premises from which our conclusion logically
follows, then we’ve proved our conclusion.
To do moral philosophy (or ethics) is to reason about the ultimate questions of
morality. The following questions are central to moral philosophy:
Metaethics:
What is the nature and methodology of moral judgments?
Normative Ethics:
What principles ought we to live by?
Moral philosophy accordingly has two main branches.
Metaethics studies the nature and methodology of moral judgments. It asks
questions like: What do "good" and "ought" mean? Are there moral truths?
How can we justify or rationally defend beliefs about right and wrong?
A metaethical view often has two parts. One part is about the nature of moral
judgments; this is often a definition of "good." The other part is about
methodology; this tells how to select moral principles. For example, cultural
relativism has two parts:
• "Good" means "socially approved."
• Pick your moral principles by following what your society approves of.
Cultural relativism bases morality on social conventions. Other views may
base it on personal feelings, God's will, or self-evident truths.
Normative ethics studies principles about how we ought to live. It asks
questions like: What are the basic principles of right and wrong? What things
in life are ultimately worthwhile? What would a just society be like? What
makes someone a good (virtuous) person? What are the basic virtues and
rights? Is abortion right or wrong?
Metaethics is the more fundamental branch of moral philosophy, since it
studies how to select moral principles and thus how to do normative ethics.