‘Ethical Intuitism’ is a philosophical view that basic moral truths are self-evident and accessible by immediate ‘intuition’ rather than complex reasoning.

In ‘The Right and the Good’ (1930), the Scottish Philosopher W.D. Ross, argued that ‘moral principles’ are ‘self-evident truths’ that we come to know through ‘intuition’, rather than through ‘calculation’ or ’emotion’.

The twin pillars of his theory of ‘Ethical Intuitism’ (‘EI’) are:

(i) ‘Prima Facie Duties’ – We have several distinct moral obligations, e.g. keeping promises, gratitude, and justice, that are binding ‘at first sight.’

(ii) ‘Pluralism’ – Unlike ‘Utilitarianism’, which focuses only on pleasure, or ‘Kantianism’, which focuses on an single universal law, Ross believed there is no ‘absolute’ single master principle.

When duties conflict, we must therefore use our ‘practical judgement’ to decide which prevails in a specific situation.

By integrating these concepts, Mediators can move beyond rigid rule-following toward a more ‘responsive’ practice.

EI allows Mediators to make ‘immediate judgments’.

This is crucial when navigating ambiguous situations in which standard procedures or ethical codes may conflict, or are inadequate.

Rather than applying ‘general principles’, EI focuses on the unique, specific needs of the participants at a ‘particular moment’.

This ‘relational intuition’ helps Mediators safeguard ‘fairness’ and ‘autonomy’ more authentically than abstract rules can.

Mediators can use their intuitive ‘moral perception’ to detect when an agreement feels more like ‘resignation’ than genuine ‘consent’.

This helps them decide when to probe deeper for informed consent without overstepping their neutral role.

What often feels like a ‘gut feeling’ is actually a highly developed capacity to synthesise years of theory and experience into instant, skilful interventions.

EI provides the ‘philosophical framework’ to value this ‘expert intuition’ as a legitimate form of moral knowledge.

In complex interpersonal dynamics, EI serves as a guide for delicate moves, e.g. in facilitating constructive dialogue or in determining how to deliver evaluative messages without alienating the participants.

Using EI to shift the focus from ‘Mediating the Problem’ to ‘Mediating the Moment,’ allows for more creative and innovative settlement options.

Trust is built when participants feel that the Mediator is truly ‘attuned’ to their circumstances and needs.

EI encourages Mediators to be ‘totally present,’ which can create a safe space for breakthrough resolutions.

EI also helps Mediators quickly identify subtle deceptions or manipulative negotiation tactics e.g. ‘white lies’/ ‘fake role play’, which might otherwise disrupt the process.

This is a Mediator Tool I will discuss in the context of ‘Ethics’ in my forthcoming book – the ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’
‘ is a philosophical view that basic moral truths are self-evident and accessible by immediate ‘intuition’ rather than complex reasoning.

In ‘The Right and the Good’ (1930), the Scottish Philosopher W.D. Ross, argued that ‘moral principles’ are ‘self-evident truths’ that we come to know through ‘intuition’, rather than through ‘calculation’ or ’emotion’.

The twin pillars of his theory of ‘Ethical Intuitionism’ (‘EI’) are:

(i) ‘Prima Facie Duties’ – We have several distinct moral obligations, e.g. keeping promises, gratitude, and justice, that are binding ‘at first sight.’

(ii) ‘Pluralism’ – Unlike ‘Utilitarianism’, which focuses only on pleasure, or ‘Kantianism’, which focuses on an single universal law, Ross believed there is no ‘absolute’ single master principle.

When duties conflict, we must therefore use our ‘practical judgement’ to decide which prevails in a specific situation.

By integrating these concepts, Mediators can move beyond rigid rule-following toward a more ‘responsive’ practice.

EI allows Mediators to make ‘immediate judgments’.

This is crucial when navigating ambiguous situations in which standard procedures or ethical codes may conflict, or are inadequate.

Rather than applying ‘general principles’, EI focuses on the unique, specific needs of the participants at a ‘particular moment’.

This ‘relational intuition’ helps Mediators safeguard ‘fairness’ and ‘autonomy’ more authentically than abstract rules can.

Mediators can use their intuitive ‘moral perception’ to detect when an agreement feels more like ‘resignation’ than genuine ‘consent’.

This helps them decide when to probe deeper for informed consent without overstepping their neutral role.

What often feels like a ‘gut feeling’ is actually a highly developed capacity to synthesise years of theory and experience into instant, skilful interventions.

EI provides the ‘philosophical framework’ to value this ‘expert intuition’ as a legitimate form of moral knowledge.

In complex interpersonal dynamics, EI serves as a guide for delicate moves, e.g. in facilitating constructive dialogue or in determining how to deliver evaluative messages without alienating the participants.

Using EI to shift the focus from ‘Mediating the Problem’ to ‘Mediating the Moment,’ allows for more creative and innovative settlement options.

Trust is built when participants feel that the Mediator is truly ‘attuned’ to their circumstances and needs.

EI encourages Mediators to be ‘totally present,’ which can create a safe space for breakthrough resolutions.

EI also helps Mediators quickly identify subtle deceptions or manipulative negotiation tactics e.g. ‘white lies’/ ‘fake role play’, which might otherwise disrupt the process.

This is a Mediator Tool I will discuss in the context of ‘Ethics’ in my forthcoming book – the ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’

See www.carlislam.co.uk.