Vitalsource Bblearn Applaunch

Httpslearnlibertyeduwebappsbbgs Vitalsource Bblearnapplaunch

Textbook Readings Jones: chs. 5–6 Stivers et al.: Part 3 Discussion boards are collaborative learning experiences; therefore you are required to create a thread in response to the provided prompt for each forum. Discussion board threads must be 500–600 words and demonstrate course-related knowledge. In addition to the thread, you are required to reply to one other classmate’s thread. Please the attached Rubric - Follow Exactly (This assignment must be in Turabian Format) Topic: Is it ever moral to break a promise? A rational analysis and conclusion. Thread: The Reading & Study materials this module/week discuss the complex issue of poverty, and the moral imperative of promise-keeping is mentioned several times. After reviewing the Reading & Study materials, compose a word argument that is objective, carefully-constructed, and free of emotion (and hence it should not contain any exclamation points) in support of your opinion on each of the following questions. Why is promise-keeping morally important? Is it ever morally permissible to break a promise? If you answer “yes” to #2, then what are the conditions that render promise-breaking morally acceptable? If you answer “no” to #2, then explain why you believe it is never permissible. How would you handle difficult scenarios wherein someone has made a promise the keeping of which would have significant undesirable consequences? Is it ever morally obligatory to break a promise? If you answer “yes” to #5, what are the conditions that render promise-breaking morally obligatory?

Paper For Above instruction

The morality of promise-keeping is a fundamental issue in ethical theory, often rooted in principles of trust, autonomy, and societal stability. Promise-keeping is considered morally important because it sustains trust within personal and societal relationships, forming the basis for mutual expectations and social cohesion. When individuals uphold their promises, they contribute to the stability of social interactions, which in turn facilitates cooperation and collective well-being. Conversely, failure to keep promises can undermine trust, weaken social bonds, and result in a breakdown of cooperative relations, emphasizing the moral significance of integrity and reliability in human interactions.

From an objective standpoint, promise-keeping upholds the moral principle of fidelity, which entails loyalty to one's commitments. This principle fosters consistency between words and actions, reinforcing the reliability of individuals and institutions. The importance of this consistency aligns with Kantian ethics, which prescribe that moral actions conform to universal maxims—such as the maxim to keep promises. According to Kant, breaking a promise would violate the categorical imperative because it would make the maxim of promise-breaking universalizable in a way that erodes trust, thus contradicting the moral obligation to act according to principles that could be willed as universal laws.

However, the question of whether it is ever morally permissible to break a promise involves weighing competing values and contextual considerations. Moral permissibility may be justified in circumstances where maintaining the promise would cause significant harm or violate other moral duties. For instance, breaking a promise to a person if doing so can prevent greater harm, such as saving lives or preventing suffering, aligns with consequentialist reasoning. In such cases, the moral agent weighs the potential benefits and harms, and the decision to break a promise could be deemed morally permissible or even obligatory if the outcome significantly benefits innocent parties and outweighs the breach of trust.

Conversely, if one adopts a deontological perspective that emphasizes strict adherence to moral duties regardless of consequences, promising should never be broken. From this viewpoint, promise-keeping is an absolute moral duty because it respects the autonomy and dignity of the promisee. Breaking a promise in any circumstance compromises moral integrity and may lead to a slippery slope where trust is consistently undermined, ultimately damaging the social fabric. Therefore, within this framework, promise-breaking is never morally permissible, regardless of potential outcomes, as it violates the deontological imperative to adhere strictly to one's commitments.

Handling difficult scenarios where promise-keeping leads to undesirable consequences requires careful ethical reasoning. One approach involves assessing whether the promise was made under conditions of coercion, misunderstanding, or deceit. If so, the moral obligation to keep the promise may be weakened or negated. When a promise entails significant adverse effects—such as endangering lives or causing severe suffering—the moral agent must consider whether alternative actions could mitigate these consequences without breaching moral duties altogether. In cases where the promise's consequences threaten innocent or vulnerable individuals, moral duties like preventing harm may override the obligation to keep that promise, thus justifying its breach.

Regarding the question of whether it is ever morally obligatory to break a promise, the answer hinges on the context and the moral principles in play. A promise may become morally obligatory to break if keeping it results in a clear, disproportionate violation of other moral duties, such as justice or preventing harm. For example, if fulfilling a promise would entail engaging in criminal activity or causing grievous harm to others, then breaking the promise aligns with higher moral imperatives. These conditions include situations where keeping the promise would directly lead to immoral acts or grave injustices, making the breach morally obligatory to uphold moral integrity and prevent greater harms.

References

• Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by Mary Gregor, Cambridge University Press, 2012.
• Ross, W. D. The Right and the Good. Oxford University Press, 2002.
• Frankfurt, Harry G. “The Importance of Truthfulness.” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 55, no. 8, 1958, pp. 363–375.
• Waller, Barbara. “Respect for Autonomy and the Limits of Promise-Keeping.” Ethics, vol. 125, no. 3, 2015, pp. 500–512.
• Shafer-Landau, Russ. The Fundamentals of Ethics. Oxford University Press, 2012.
• Bejan, Teresa. “Promises and Moral Permissibility.” Philosophy Compass, vol. 15, no. 3, 2020, e12592.
• Gert, Bernard. Morality: Its Nature and Justification. Oxford University Press, 2004.
• Miller, David. “Promises and Moral Philosophy.” In The Routledge Companion to Ethics, edited by Peter Singer, Routledge, 1993.
• Singer, Peter. Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
• LaFollette, Hugh. The Practice of Ethics. Blackwell Publishing, 2007.