Good and bad? (morality)?

Question

Im looking for objections to the following statement...

"Reason tells us what's right and wrong"

(posed in objection to Kantian ethics)

Answer 1

I don't think that reason will always be on the side of morals and ethics.
For example, it can be reasoned that some people are a waste of space, steal valuable oxygen and should be done away with.
But is that the "right" thing to do?
We have a political leader who reasoned us into a war. regardless whether his politics were right or wrong, is the death of somewhere around one hundred thousand human beings right?
One can reason for an abortion, while another can reason to blow up an abortion clinic, or shoot the doctor. Who's right?

Maybe it's the point that reason is subject to interpretation that's the sticking point.

Answer 2

I can't say that I can disagree with the statement but............what "reason" is to one is not always going to be the same as the next persons. Each persons reasoning of right and wrong is based on their values the learn as they grow up. A very good example of this is the difference in cultures between the moslems and ourselves. Where they see because of religious beliefs that it is "right" to cut off an infidels head, we tend to look at it as being very wrong. There are things that we Americans as free people do that the moslems also see as being wrong. We can only reason with the knowledge we have accumulated in our years on the Earth.

Answer 3

Reason may be the prime tool we use to cipher known or knowable issues of right and wrong but it is the wisdom of intuitive insight that reveals the truth.

For example, by reason Einsteins theory is valid but given a different set of circumstances Quantum Machenics is valid which shows that reason is elementary and limited. So by intuitive insight physics is now probing String Theory, which even if given certian validity will again only prove to be a short term constructed reflection of the always so. Not the thing in itself!

Answer 4

I object to the statement because reason can be used to support unethical arguments such as forced euthinasia.. the greater good arguement. Our countries constitution was written to protect the minority from being overwhelmed by what seems reasonable to the majority. I think reason alone does not tell us right and wrong because our reason is subject to falibility.

Answer 5

Humans often aren't reasonable!

And if we presume that most humans are, how are we to determine who is the MOST reasonable? If we are going to use reason to detemine laws based on what is right and what is wrong, then it follows we would have to find the most reasonable person in the world - and how are we to judge who that person is, since we would necessarily have a degree of reason inferior to that person anyway?

In addition, humans are rarely reasonable. Pure reason requires a total absence of interfering emotions, and you can't find many people who don't have any of those.

Answer 6

The statement "Reason tells us what's right and wrong" is true if you were raised in an environment who has a clear definition of what right or wrong is. Otherwise, its false. Theres no such thing as innate idea of morality.

Answer 7

Reason is subjective and shaped by experience. Right and wrong, in the pure context, is immutable and constant (hence the ability to have a categorical imperative). Granted, that imperative based on the very subjectivity mentioned above.

Answer 8

Laws aren't always reasonable but they are an expression of the community's ethics. Take chopping off a hand for stealing...

Answer 9

No, experience, faith, upbringing, and environment helps us determine what is right or wrong to us as an individual. Everyone has different ideas of right and wrong.

Answer 10

I don't see why anyone would object.
We all have reasons why we see things as wrong and right.