Responds to the comments by Pomerantz and Sisti and Baum-Baicker on the current authors' original article, "Nonrational processes in ethical decision making". Pomerantz (2012) further explicated one interpersonal and contextual factor--the perceived characteristics of the recipient of any act. He cited evidence that these characteristics affect ethical decisions, and he raised the important question of whether they should. Sisti and Baum-Baicker (2012) questioned whether "rational, neoliberal" (p. 325) decision-making models are sufficient. They offered instead a theory based on virtues and clinical wisdom, which they called a "rational-intuitive skill" (p. 325) that cannot be reflected adequately in a flowchart or set of guidelines. These two comments demonstrate some of the nuance and complexity that we discussed in our article (Rogerson et al., 2011). First, there is often a tension between the way people do behave (descriptive models) and the way they should behave (normative models). Second, there is a need for practical guidance in making decisions, but explicit steps, processes, and guidelines often fail to account for the complex factors that influence difficult ethical decisions.