Responsible Suspension: A Multi-Level Framework for Decision-Making under Uncertainty

The problem of moral paralysis and the question concerning the legitimacy of suspending judgment under conditions of deep uncertainty, conflicting values, and pressure to act constitute the central problem of this article. In moral philosophy, suspension is often regarded either as moral weakness or is implicitly overlooked. This article introduces the concept of "responsible suspension": an ethically justified, time-bound, and publicly accountable suspension in which the moral agent temporarily withholds judgment while maintaining commitment to others. The proposed framework, by introducing the "limited moral subject" and substituting "moral sufficiency" for ideal perfectionism, organizes suspension across five interconnected levels: the subjective level (cognitive and psychological limitations), the intersubjective level (dialogue and reasonable rejectability), the institutional level (procedural accountability), the epistemic level (reduction of ignorance and transparency), and the macro-normative level (ethical integrity). The conditions for the initiation, continuation, and termination of suspension, as well as the criteria for moral sufficiency in post-suspension action, are systematically formulated. Drawing on contractarian traditions, discourse ethics, and hermeneutics, this model offers a practical approach to ethical decision-making in domains such as clinical ethics, public policy, and technology, transforming suspension from passive inaction into an ethical, accountable, and actionable mechanism.