In this example two distinctly different perspectives are presented and show that reason and emotion do not play an equal role in justifying moral decisions but both reason and emotion both justify each person's action. But if the perspective is blurred by different accounts of the situation, for example that of a third party's, reason is used. In this example, if presented to a judge, the judge, although maybe not agreeing morally with the decision, must rule in favour of store owner as a law has been broken. Here we see that sometimes people are not given the opportunity to act based on emotion and reason must be used to warrant a decision.
Similarly, in the natural and human sciences reason greatly out does emotion when rationalizing discoveries and when performing operations and even simple examinations. A doctor today has many responsibilities, one of them to try and apply, to the best of their ability, their knowledge and understanding of human life and the many forms of infections, diseases, viruses and injuries. But if presented with performing an emergency procedure on a loved one, does emotion cloud judgment and should only reason be used in justifying the actions taken to aid in such a situation and later be the only necessary mean to which to judge the decision by?
If a doctor was presented with such a situation where a life saving operation must be performed within 10 minutes on a loved one, but the drive to the hospital could be anywhere from 8-15 minutes. In this moral dilemma should the doctor go forward with the procedure even if their knowledge and understanding is not great? In this case as the person is a loved one the immediate reaction may be solely based on emotion because any person's instinct tells them to take care of and watch out for a loved one. If they were to act based on emotion and something was to go wrong and a life was lost, emotion would not justify the decision. Most likely when reflected upon everything in the doctor's mind would tell him that he made the wrong decision and should have rushed to the hospital. But if the choice to go to the hospital was made, and the loved one did not live, reason would be blamed for the death and again would not justify the action. So simply when presented with a situation that has a negative ending both reason and emotion cannot justify a moral decision. In such a case there is no proper way to act and everything is based entirely on the doctor's judgment and their belief in themselves. One may argue that reason is necessary to vindicate such a choice because of the possible complications but here emotion is the primary tool used to make, and later justify the decision as it is the doctor who will have to live with consequence for the rest of their life and this would be much easier knowing that they did all that they could in their power to help.
However if the decision made, either based on emotion or reason had a positive outcome and the life of the person was saved, it would not matter. To justify a moral decision when it turns out to be the wrong one is very hard. There will always be questions of “What if...?” and what could have been done differently. Ultimately in such a situation the difference lies totally in the person as there is a fine line between whether the doctor chooses to perform the operation or to speed away to the hospital. In natural and human sciences there is no concrete answer to whether emotion or reason is the correct way to make a decision and they surely not equally necessary in justifying a moral decision.
Through the course of history emotion has been the catalyst of many decisions and has led to many wars, the largest being possibly WWII. Adolph Hitler had a strong belief that the ideal person was white with blonde hair and blue eyes and was disgusted with jews as he believed they were the cancer of the Earth. These strong emotions he felt guided him in the direction of parliament and to becoming the Chancellor of Germany. Later as we know, he and Germany invaded Poland and WWII began and millions of people died because of his emotions. During the war Hitler had to live with the burden of killing countless amounts of people. In his case emotion was the sole justifiable mean which, he felt, excused him of his actions as no amount of reason can tell a person to kill millions of people and that a good may come of it. A reason why we may never understand what Hitler fully believed and felt and what led him to do what he did is that we cannot relate to his situation and will never fully understand the maginitude of the all the deaths. “ The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is simply a statistic”- Stalin.
Emotion may be used to explain decisions when a relationship can be made, but when there is no way to associate oneself to the situation, it is impossible to judge a decision that has been based on emotion. This may be the reason why two people react differently to the same situation. In history, as in WWII, both reason and emotion are not equal when it comes to justifying moral decisions and similarly as in natural and human sciences one is specifically visible at the beginning but when the outcome is negative one morally feels responsible and that makes it very difficult to justify.
As reason and emotion are used to justify moral decisions dilemmas are created that can not be explained by either. If one is tangled in a situation where they feel responsible for a negative outcome they may never find the means in which to explain why they made their decision and never find a reason to put themselves to peace. Both reason and emotion may be related to a situation with a negative outcome to provide different persepectives and approaches to it but ultimately, whether approved of by a third party or not, it is the individual that must live with the decision he or she make and therefore take both reason and emotion, during the situation, into account when reasoning their moral decision. We seak to justify our moral choices usually because they turn out to be the wrong one. We learn from these mistakes and in the future approach situations from different view points and with a different understanding. However when the correct choice is made we do not question why and do not wonder if emotion and reason were equally necessary to account for moral decision and perhaps we should infact reflect on certain decisions as they may not only effect us and our families and friends but strangers and coincidentally the world as a whole.
