The phrase "a decision of principle" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to a decision that is based on fundamental beliefs or values rather than practical considerations.
Example: "The board made a decision of principle to uphold the company's commitment to sustainability, even if it meant higher costs."
Alternatives: "a principled decision" or "a decision based on values".
The veil of ignorance is a representation of the kinds of reasons and information that are relevant to a decision on principles of justice for the basic structure of a society of free and equal moral persons (TJ 17/16).
During the trial, the judge emphasised that the ruling was not a decision of basic principle but specific to Berghain.
Knowledge of the moral powers and their essential role in social cooperation, along with knowledge of other general facts, is all that is morally relevant, Rawls believes, to a decision on principles of justice that are to reflect people's status as free and equal moral persons.
The Court's majority judgment states it is a fundamental principle that "a decision of a judicial body should be final and binding and should not be capable of being overturned by a member of the executive".
As a result, providing leadership had become a delicate balancing act, which did not lend itself to ex ante decisions of principle.
(TJ 120/104, 587/514) A related criticism of Rawls's "thick" veil of ignorance is that even if the parties can make certain rational decisions in their interest without knowledge of their final ends, still they cannot come to a decision about principles of justice.
His paper "Universalisability" (1954/5) stressed one's personal responsibility in making decisions that are also decisions of principle.
It resembles what ethicist R. M. Hare calls "decisions of principle" (that establish the principles for subsequent decisions but are themselves unprincipled) and what Kierkegaard would describe as "conversion".
The PCC chairman, Lord Hunt, told Sky News at the end of February that a decision in principle to move to a new body had been taken.
How should a rational agent proceed, granting that a decision principle should take account of information that an option provides?
