A supporting Argument for Rachel's Minimum Conception of Morality For centuries, philosophers have grappled with the puzzling question of what it means to act in a moral way – that is, to conduct oneself as a moral agent. While no simple answer exists to this question, two common themes are often found in the works of great moral philosophers. According to author James Rachels, these themes can be expressed as two minimal conditions of a viable moral theory – the requirements of sound reason and impartial consideration for an individual’s interests (Rachels, 1999, p. 14). The following discussion explains, in more detail, the meaning of these conditions, how they relate to each other, and why Rachel’s argument is correct. Rachel’s two...The end:
..... to virtually any supposed moral dilemma. In short, this is due to the fact that Rachel’s two minimal conditions are linked inextricably by the understanding that discovery and consideration of truth is essential for a moral outcome. No situation, that is, can be evaluated on moral grounds without sound reasoning based in facts and respect for the values, beliefs, and interests of the individual or people involved. In the final analysis, this insight represents the true foundation of social justice and thus becomes the reason why Rachel’s argument concerning the two minimal conditions of a viable moral theory demands the utmost of respect and recognition. REFERENCES Rachels, J. (1999). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw- Hill College.