In keeping my promise I act in accord with duty; and if I keep it because it is my duty, I also act morally (according to Kant) because I am acting for the sake of duty.
By having legitimated their actions as necessary and brought on by the target, through a process of cognitive dissonance the "guards" had come to believe they acted morally and appropriately.
So in ordinary cases, if you act morally, you are perceived as acting morally, and if you act immorally, you are perceived as acting immorally.
What is the connection between morality, moral judgments, and being motivated to act morally?
But we have to distinguish between the moral sensibility the capacity to perceive and feel moral emotions and the capacity to act morally.
But he claims that empathy may not be necessary for morality, as autistic individuals who lack empathy can still act morally because of their strict adherence to moral rules.
Critics say that companies do not act morally but only try to use moral for marketing purposes [16].
Why would having an opportunity to act morally in one setting influence your level of moral outrage in another — especially when your identity is secret the entire time?
More specifically, it concerns how we see or fail to see moral issues, why we act or fail to act morally, and whether and to what extent we are responsible for our actions.
A related argument is from conscience; John Henry Newman argued that the conscience supports the claim that objective moral truths exist because it drives people to act morally even when it is not in their own interest.
What is being supposed here is that rationality, vis-a-vis morality, is very demanding: moral requirements just are rational requirements, so that a failure to act morally is a failure to act rationally.
