Moral Acquaintanceships as a Means of Conflict Resolution
The preceding chapters have discussed three different attempts to determine and justify actions to be taken to resolve potentially morally problematic cases. Recall from Chapter 1 that the definition of “resolving” difficult cases is presenting and defending a particular action as the right one to take in a potentially morally difficult circumstance, and justifying that decision as correct to others in a way that those others can (or should be able to) recognize as a valid justification. Note that this does not require that each person actually agree that each other person’s justification is adequate to justify the action to themselves, but each person must be able to recognize the justification as a valid form of justification, one which could possibly serve as a justification for the decision for another person with a different moral understanding. A reasonable justification, then, is a justification that is at least a well-formed justification, grounded in moral claims, which one recognizes as a valid form of moral justification.