Bernard Hoose and Proportionalism
- ‘’It is never right to go against a principle unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify
it’’ - unless there is a proportionate reason, the morally good action is to follow the deontological
rule
- It lies between teleological and deontological
- Teleological means that right and wrong should be judged by the end outcome
- Deontological theories say that actions are either intrinsically right or intrinsically wrong
- Proportionalism holds that there are certain moral values that it can never be right to go against,
unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it
- The proportionate reason should be based on the unique individual situation of the moral agent
- Hoose believes there are exceptions to absolute rules e.g. if a pregnancy will kill both the foetus and
the mother, it seems obvious that you should break the rules and abort the foetus
-In NL, certain acts are intrinsically evil – BUT the intention is important
- Considering the NL, if the foetus is growing in the fallopian tube, you cannot kill the foetus to save
the mother, but you can remove the fallopian tube to save the mother, even if it leads to the foetus
dying (double effect)
- Hoose believes that in this case the act of killing the foetus would be an ‘ontic evil’, not a ‘moral
evil’ – if killing the foetus will save the mother, and the mother can still have children, it does not
make sense to remove the fallopian tube instead
Distinction between an immoral act and pre-moral/ontic evil
1. Pre-moral Evil
- An act that is seen as objectively evil
- It does not consider the intention, the situation or the consequences of the action
- Proportionalists would object to the concept of pre-moral evil because there will sometimes be an
exception, a proportionate reason why this act may not be evil
- For example, if a surgeon, carrying out a surgery, cuts open human flesh with a knife, you would not
say, ‘that cut was morally evil’ – it depends on the surgeon’s intention or the consequences in doing
the cut
- Pre-moral evil is a physical wrong action (an action that breaks a theological deontological rule) but,
due to the nature of the fallen world we live in (ontic evil), it is not necessarily an immoral act
- The situation/intention/consequences need to be considered to ascertain if the pre-moral action
has a proportionate justification
- ‘’It is never right to go against a principle unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify
it’’ - unless there is a proportionate reason, the morally good action is to follow the deontological
rule
- It lies between teleological and deontological
- Teleological means that right and wrong should be judged by the end outcome
- Deontological theories say that actions are either intrinsically right or intrinsically wrong
- Proportionalism holds that there are certain moral values that it can never be right to go against,
unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it
- The proportionate reason should be based on the unique individual situation of the moral agent
- Hoose believes there are exceptions to absolute rules e.g. if a pregnancy will kill both the foetus and
the mother, it seems obvious that you should break the rules and abort the foetus
-In NL, certain acts are intrinsically evil – BUT the intention is important
- Considering the NL, if the foetus is growing in the fallopian tube, you cannot kill the foetus to save
the mother, but you can remove the fallopian tube to save the mother, even if it leads to the foetus
dying (double effect)
- Hoose believes that in this case the act of killing the foetus would be an ‘ontic evil’, not a ‘moral
evil’ – if killing the foetus will save the mother, and the mother can still have children, it does not
make sense to remove the fallopian tube instead
Distinction between an immoral act and pre-moral/ontic evil
1. Pre-moral Evil
- An act that is seen as objectively evil
- It does not consider the intention, the situation or the consequences of the action
- Proportionalists would object to the concept of pre-moral evil because there will sometimes be an
exception, a proportionate reason why this act may not be evil
- For example, if a surgeon, carrying out a surgery, cuts open human flesh with a knife, you would not
say, ‘that cut was morally evil’ – it depends on the surgeon’s intention or the consequences in doing
the cut
- Pre-moral evil is a physical wrong action (an action that breaks a theological deontological rule) but,
due to the nature of the fallen world we live in (ontic evil), it is not necessarily an immoral act
- The situation/intention/consequences need to be considered to ascertain if the pre-moral action
has a proportionate justification
