Final answer:
Relying only on "common sense" for ethical issues overlooks the complexity of morality and dismisses the value of ethical theories and critical thinking. Philosophers advocate for a more analytical approach that considers emotions, acknowledges reason's limitations, and recognizes biases in conventional theories.
Step-by-step explanation:
The idea that people should rely solely on "common sense" in ethical issues, without resorting to ethical theories or critical thinking, oversimplifies the complexity of moral problems. Philosophers such as the Existentialists, the Pragmatists, and the Feminist theorists have argued for more nuanced approaches that take into account emotions, the limitations of human reason, and the biases in traditional theories, respectively.
The discussion on common sense versus critical thinking in philosophy indicates that relying on intuition alone is not sufficient when addressing ethical issues where there is no consensus on what is considered to be true or good.
To develop a more objective stance, one should engage in considering alternative viewpoints, identifying counterexamples, and understanding the historical contexts of philosophical works. This approach fosters critical thinking and helps avoid the pitfalls of accepting simplified dichotomies in moral reasoning, such as the false dilemma between moral absolutism and cultural relativism.
By scrutinizing and questioning our beliefs and those popular within our social groups, we can cultivate the ability to think critically about ethical issues and make well-informed decisions.