Question

Warren claims that the fact that we feel emotional repulsion toward the idea of late-term abortion (especially for what we might call trivial reasons, such as postponing a trip, wanting your baby to be born in Spring instead of winter, etc.) cannot take the place of moral reasoning.

Do you agree with the claim that emotional repulsion toward some action is always trumped by moral reasoning (if moral reasoning says it is okay)? Why or why not?

More generally, if an ethical theory generates a distasteful solution or result (and you may think this applies to Singer's theory as well!), is that reason to say that theory is wrong? Or that that part of the theory is wrong?

Should ethical theories produce results that are in agreement with our moral intuitions? Where do our moral intuitions come from?

Answer 1

No i do not think that emotional repulsion toward some action is always trumped by moral reasoning. The reason being the fact that emotions can be biased, but we have to choose something which is ethically correct and has a firm logic. If we are driven by emotions all the time, there is a possibility that we may not take the right decision. The ethical theory just gives us the right direction to take a decision or follow a process based on the ethical considerations in life. It surly does not guarantee the fact that it will always be correct. Exceptions are always there, in such cases we have to take the decision which does not bring any harm to anyone and is the best fit during that situation. The ethical theories should align with our moral virtues and all the ethical obligations in life. They should be such that we can rely on them and be content in the heart for taking the right decision.