1. Megan Fernandes

2. Moral principles are beliefs that are commonly agreed on and considered to be morally correct Moral principles form the basis for how we reach value judgments Justifying and supporting value judgments is how people are expected to morally reason

3. When we take an action and then appeal to a moral principle, we are trying to show how that action falls under that principle Comparing fact with principle allows you to make a value judgment regarding the action Example  Moral principle: Lying is wrong. Fact: Peter lied to his mother. Value judgment: What Peter did was wrong.

4. When we argue about ethical questions, we look at two things Consistency If Peter was wrong to lie to his mother, it must be wrong for Janet and Seth to lie too. Impartiality: If Peter, Janet, and Seth all lie to their mother, their punishment should all be the same. Facts Sometimes arguments revolve around factual evidence and not a difference in values If all the facts are agreed upon, different value judgments can still be made based on differences of opinion

5. This model is effective if everyone shares the same moral principles But what if people’s moral principles are different? How, if at all, can you convince someone that they are wrong? Are you right in trying to do so? Perhaps our values have no ultimate justification.

6. Modern Example: North Korea Obviously, the issue of North Korea is much deeper than right/wrong, but this is to illustrate the model Moral principles Locals believe in “juche”: self reliance. Some foreigners believe in helping others. Facts People are starving and in intense poverty. Daily total energy consumption is less than ½ that of a medium-sized South Korean town. Main exports are weapons and drugs. Country under strict dictatorship. Value judgments North Korea is still right in maintaining their strong traditional beliefs and rejecting globalization. North Korea is wrong in denying aid from foreign countries.