Thanks for the A2A. I think there are several approaches to answering this question, which can be separated into two broad categories:
A) Weighing your actions and their results according to your own values.
1. Assessing them based on your intentions for each act having integrity with your values.
2. Assessing them based on measurable outcomes of each act having integrity with your values.
3. Assessing them based on your awareness of a cumulative outcome as it is being shaped over time, and your adjustments in response to that awareness, in accordance with your values.
B) Weighing your actions and their results according to widely held moral framework (conventional social mores, the rule of law, religious dogma, traditional values, etc.).
1. Assessing them based on the consistency of your intentions aligning with that moral framework.
2. Assessing them based on the quality of outcomes resulting from your actions over time as viewed within that framework.
3. Assessing them based on your awareness of a cumulative outcome and demonstrated effort to align that outcome with what is "moral" in that framework.
In reality, we all involve a little of everything listed here in our moral judgements. So the real question, in my view, is which approaches you are choosing to emphasize, and whether you are really doing so consciously and persistently. Depending on which approaches you choose, the answer to your question could be a confident "yes," or "no," or a more tentative "possibly yes and possibly no."
This is how we might navigate our conclusions about a parent who has allowed a close relative to abuse their child. Let's say that, from all accounts (including their own), that parent appeared to be loving, kind, and moral in their parenting...but they were not able to react to the signs that their child was at risk and remedy the situation accordingly. Did they ignore the signs out of fear? Did they not recognize the signs? Did they recognize the signs, but not believe what they were seeing out of a blind affection for the abusive relative? Did they not have sufficient power in the situation to protect their child? How did they weigh what they perceived against the well-being of the child? And what impact did the abuse actually have on the child? What were the intentions and awareness of the abusive relative? And so on. Depending on which combination of approaches are used to evaluate the parent's actions, they might be exonerated as being moral, or accused of being immoral, or be viewed as having done their best at being moral...but failing.
My 2 cents.
TrackbacksTrackback specific URI for this entry
This link is not meant to be clicked. It contains the trackback URI for this entry. You can use this URI to send ping- & trackbacks from your own blog to this entry. To copy the link, right click and select "Copy Shortcut" in Internet Explorer or "Copy Link Location" in Mozilla.
The author does not allow comments to this entry