Acting Right or Wrong Way Moral Choices

Moral Choices
Introduction
Moral choice is a commitment to acting in a way considered to be either right or wrong. As a result, an ethical decision is concerned with less of what an individual knows and more about such an individual defiling what he/she considered her/himself to be. As a result, in moral choice-making, an individual will opt for the choice that promotes who they consider themself to be. There are, therefore, several ways to describe moral decisions; critical thinking, the divine command theory, relativism, and emotivism (Overberg, 2018). This paper is focused on critical thinking and, in particular, deductive and inductive reasoning to present my thoughts on the criticism of critical thinking, and offer criticisms on the idea that the best choices can be figured out through deductive and inductive reasoning.
Thoughts on criticism of critical thinking
I think that the criticisms of critical thinking are good general reasons as to why arguments should not be too critical of reasoning, and should not try to abridge the scope of reasoning. However, I acknowledge that doubts remain. Situations, experiences, and reasons are not dynamic. Thus, the dynamism of events and prevailing conditions does, in a major way, affect critical thinking, as critical reasoning is only as good as the understanding of the prevailing conditions. Also, indeed, we can not entirely comprehend the prevailing conditions. Down the ages of philosophy, philosophers have continually questioned whether we have full understanding and knowledge of the external world. In recent times, the question has been whether we can know or understand the internal experiences and thought processes of individual persons (Wheeler?Bell, 2019). I, therefore, think that the criticisms of critical thinking do fit into this schema. Also, some of the specific criticisms are peculiar to specific issues, and these are in line with the need for individual attention in dealing with critical thinking.
Criticism of deductive and inductive reasoning as best for choices
Deductive reasoning is an opponent of the either, in that, while deductive reasoning begins with the premise and ends with the theory, inductive reasoning begins with the theory then works to establish the premise. The deductive and inductive reasoning approach is a useful method for decision making, especially in research. Still, the argument that it is the method for making the best choice is a little farfetched.
First, deductive and inductive reasoning are only true to the extent of the truth of the premises and the terms defining the observation. This criticism of this method is particularly more relevant in the event of describing general phenomena (Jin, 2016). For example, a hailstorm destroyed my father’s car, my mother’s car, my Uncle’s car, and my neighbor’s car. Therefore, while it can be concluded that the hailstorm destroyed cars in the neighborhood, it is not true to conclude that hailstorm destroyed cars or hailstorms destroy cars. In this example, the observation is only limited in my immediate neighborhood, and thus, the hailstorm destroying cars is determined by various conditions, e.g., are the cars in shelters? This limitation, therefore, means that deductive and inductive reasoning does not qualify for best decision making.
Second, decision making is not only limited to the observable. Various factors determine how a decision is made and the final decision that is opted for. Among these factors include personal convictions, emotions, and preconceived information (Jin, 2016). These three factors may, therefore, counter the available premise, especially in practical, real-life decision making. For example, understanding that the available presenting premises are corrupted or controlled to appear so will allow the decision-maker to reject them completely. Thus, the conclusion will not be founded on these premises, and as such, the best decision will have been made, but not simply on the available premise.
Conclusion
Moral decision making is affected by and numerous factors that range from divine convictions, preconceptions, and terms and conditions specific to an event. It is therefore argued that the best decision for each event and person is not the best for all persons and each similar situation and at different times. Based on this argument, it would, therefore, be concluded that deductive and inductive reasoning – though used in this argument – is a very resourceful approach in figuring out the best decision, but it has some major shortcomings. These shortcomings include being limited to specific terms and conditions and that they do not consider unobservable premises, especially in real-life moral choices.
References
Jin, D. (2016). The Limits of the Knowledge Generation Systems. In The Great Knowledge Transcendence (pp. 69-82). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Overberg, K. R. (2018). Conscience in conflict: how to make moral choices. Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Wheeler?Bell, Q. (2019). An Immanent Critique of Critical Pedagogy. Educational Theory, 69(3), 265-281.