Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Proportionalism - Hoose (Background (Originated amongst catholic scholars…
Proportionalism - Hoose
Background
Originated amongst catholic scholars in 1960s who argued that Judeo-Christian Ethics was too deontologically rigid.
Richard McCormick - Religious ethics '...disowned an excessively casuistic approach to the moral life'
Pope John Paul II - Veritatis Splendor - Proportionalism is wrong as it denies that any action can in and of itself be intrinsically evil.
Proportionalist approach is visible within the writings of Aquinas who considered that it may be permissible for a starving man to break the second precept of stealing, in order to save his life. However, Aquinas also stated that all situations are possible of violating deontological moral laws.
'If the need be so urgent... then it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another's property' - Aquinas
Modern Proportionalists - If it is acceptable to steal to save yourself from starvation, it makes little sense to prohibit lying in order to save someone's life (Why one rule for one and one rule for another)
Hoose - 'What the proportionalists have done is point out the inconsistency and invalidity of such thinking (Natural Law)'
Hybrid of Deontology (Has moral rules, derived by Natural Law, that should always be followed) & Teleology (A Deontological rule can be broken if there is proportionate reason)
Proportionate Reason
There are certain moral rules (such as those derived via Natural Law) that it can never be right to go against; unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it
Deontological moral laws provide firm moral guidelines which should never be ignored, unless it is absolutely clear that, in the particular unique situation, this is justified by proportionate reason.
Hoose - 'It is never right to go against a moral principle unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it'
Proportionate reason should be based on the unique individual situation of the moral agent, including the intention of the agent. However, the situation of the moral agent must be sufficiently unusual and of sufficient magnitude to provide a reason which would overturn what would otherwise be a firm deontological rule.
To decide if an action is moral or immoral, the intention and situation of the moral agent has to be considered, if you ignore the intention of the moral agent, then you can only determine the ontic/pre-moral/physical rightness or wrongness of an act, not its morality
Right Act - An action that follows the moral deontological rules.
Good Act - An action that may violate a right act however proportionally creates more good that evil.
-
Many see Proportionalism as another form of Fletcher's Situation Ethics as Proportionalism takes a teleological view in the same way Situation Ethics does and a proportionalist can consider agapéistic consequences of the ontic action, as part of the value/disvalue of the unique moral situation.
Situation Ethics - Monist approach (only considers agapé for its value/disvalue calculation) VS Proportionalism - considers a wide variety of factors when considering the value/disvalue of a certain oral action