ETHICS
PREFACE
This module is designed to provide an understanding and deeper insights in ethics
and appreciate its applicability in students’ personal life challenges and future career
goals.
Every chapter and lesson introspects on concepts and principles of ethics on a
personal level. Activities are provided to give emphasis on the critical and creative
thinking in moral reasoning. In addition, different analytical theories are highlighted
to give comprehension on the topic.
Thus, we believe that our holistic educational learning system will give the students
all the necessary information to understand the subject matter and later develop set
of virtues and ethical standards necessary for their careers in the future.
The Authors
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
9
The importance of rules to social changes
Moral vs. Non-moral dilemma
Dilemma vs. Moral Dilemma
Three levels of Moral Dilemma
Only human beings can be ethical
Freedom as a Foundation of Morality
Minimum requirement for Morality: Reason and Impartiality
CHAPTER 2: CULTURE IN MORAL BEHAVIOR
18
Culture
Culture’s role in moral behavior
Moral standards as social convention and the social conditioning theory
Cultural relativism in ethics
Asian moral understanding
Filipino moral character
Universal values
CHAPTER 3: MORAL AGENT
Moral character and virtues
The circular relation of acts and character
26
Moral characters as dispositions
Six stages of moral development
Getting to the highest level, conscience-based moral decisions
Problem’s with Kohlberg’s Theory
CHAPTER 4: FEELINGS AND MORAL DECISION-MAKING
32
Feelings as instinctive response to moral dilemmas
Feelings as obstacles to making the right decisions
Feelings can help in making the right decisions
CHAPTER 5: REASON AND IMPARTIALITY AS MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT FOR MORALITY
35
Reason and impartiality defined
The seven-step moral reasoning model
CHAPTER 6: MORAL COURAGE
39
The importance of will and courageDeveloping will and moral courage CHAPTER 7: BASIC
THEORIES AS FRAMEWORKS IN ETHICS
43
Meta-ethics
Normative ethics
Applied ethics
CHAPTER 8: VIRTUE ETHICS
46
Virtue ethics defined
Socrates and Plato’s moral philosophy
Aristotle’s ethics
An evaluation of the Greek philosopher’s ethical theories
Thomas Aquinas ethics
Analysis of Thomistic ethics
CHAPTER 9: KANTIAN RIGHTS THEORY
56
Kantian Ethics
An analysis of Kantian ethics
Rights theory
Legal versus moral rights
CHAPTER 10: UTILITARIANISM
Utilitarianism explained
Origins and nature of the theory
An analysis of Utilitarianism
Business fascination with utilitarianism
59
CHAPTER 1
ORIENTATION AND COURSE OVERVIEW
Aim:
After the students orientation conducted by the school, this module allotted the
first
week of the semester to allow the students be more familiar with the CvSU
Vision, Mission, College Goals and Program Objectives RA 7877 (An act Declaring
Sexual Harassment unlawful in the Employment, Education or Training Environment
and for other purposes) and course overview and Requirements.
(1st)
Learning Objectives:
After the completion of the chapter, students should be able to:
1. Introduce oneself to the class via the google classroom
2. List down expectations for the course
3. Remember course requirements and regulations in the new normal of modulebased learning.
CvSU AT GLACE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4bQ1Z9gUuA&t=49s
LESSON ORIENTATION AND COURSE
OVERVIEW
CHAPTER 2
INTRODUCTION: KEY CONCEPTS IN ETHICS
Aim:
This chapter consisting of seven (7) lessons will allow students to
become reflective and critical thinkers who understand the rightness or wrongness of
human conduct. Further, this will be discussed during the 2nd to 3rd week of the course
per se.
Learning Objectives:
After the completion of the chapter, the students shall be able to:
1. Familiarize the key concepts in ethics
2. Differentiate the various aspects of ethics
3. Apply the concepts of ethics in real life situations
LECTURETTE
INTRODUCTION
Today, students are challenged daily to make decisions in an environment
fraught with tension and uncertainty. They are faced with social, economic,
psychological, and culture issues resulting to doubts, fear and confusion on their
moral values.
As such, this chapter will help the students enlighten their choices in life to
come up with proactive decisions in nurturing their potentials. In addition, this chapter
will give the students with the basic foundation and concepts of ethics necessary for
growth and become successful learners.
It is inETHICS
this regard
that
ethicsofreminds
everyone
the relevance
of the
doing what is
is the
branch
philosophy
that studies
morality or
right, strengthening our morality and become a person of values.
rightness or wrongness of human conduct
MORALITY speaks of a code or system of behavior in regards
to standards of right or wrong behavior.
What is the good?
Who is a moral person?
What are the virtues of a human being?
What makes an act right?
What duties do we have each other?
1. THE IMPORTANCE OF RULES TO SOCIAL BEINGS
Definition of rules
● Rules refer to explicit or understood regulations or principles governing
conduct within a specific activity or sphere.
● Rules tell us what is or is not is allowed in a particular context or situation.
● In many ways, rules serve as a foundation for any healthy society. Without
rules, society would like to fall into anarchy.
Rules benefit social being in various manners
a. Rules protect social beings by regulating behavior.
b. Rules help to guarantee each person certain rights in freedom.
c. Rules produce a sense of justice among social beings.
d. Rules are essential for a healthy economic system.
In short, society could not soundly function without rules and regulations. Rules
are necessary to protect the greater good. Even the freest societies ought to have
rules in order to avoid exploitation and tyranny while upholding the common welfare.
2. MORAL VS NON-MORAL STANDARD
“Not all rules are moral rules. That is, not all standards are moral standards”
● Morality may refer to the standards that a person or a group has about what is
right and wrong, or good and evil.
● Accordingly, moral standards are those concerned with or relating to human
behavior, especially the distinction between good and bad(or right and wrong)
behavior.
Moral Standards and Non-moral standards defined:
➢ Moral standards involve the rules about the kinds of actions they believe are
morally right and wrong, as well as the values they place on the kinds of objects
they believe are morally good and morally bad.
➢ Non-moral standards refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical
considerations. Either these standards are not necessarily linked to morality or
by nature lack ethical sense.
The following characteristics of moral standards further differentiate them from nonmoral standards:
a. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits.
b. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values.
c. Moral standards are not established by authority figures.
d. Moral standards have the trait of universalizability.
e. Moral standards are based on impartial considerations.
f. Moral standards are associated with special emotions and vocabulary.
3. DILEMMA AND MORAL DILEMMA
The term dilemma refers to a situation in which a tough choice has to be made
between two or more options, especially more or less equally desirable ones. Moral
dilemmas are situations in which a difficult choice has to be made between two
courses of action, either of which entails transgressing a moral principle.
4. THREE LEVELS OF MORAL DILEMMA
a. Personal dilemmas. This is experienced and resolved on a personal level.
Since many ethical decisions are personally made, many, if not most of, moral
dilemmas fall under, or boil down to, this level.
b. Organizational Dilemmas. These dilemmas refer to ethical cases
encountered and resolved by social organizations. This category includes
moral dilemmas in business, medical field, and public sector.
c. Structural Dilemmas. It refers to cases involving a network of institutions and
operative theoretical paradigms. As they usually encompass multi-sectoral
institutions and organizations, they may be larger in scope and extent than
organizational dilemmas.
5. ONLY HUMAN BEINGS CAN BE ETHICAL
● Only human beings are rational, autonomous, and self-conscious
● Only human beings can act morally or immorally.
● Only human beings are part of the moral community.
6. FREEDOM AS FOUNDATION OF MORALITY
Morality is a question of choice. It is choosing ethical codes, values, or
standards to guide us in our daily lives. Philosophically choosing is impossible without
freedom.
Morality requires and allows choice, which means the right to choose to give
to charities, donate time and money to schools, mentor children, open businesses, or
protest against animal cruelty.
7. MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR MORALITY: REASON AND IMPARTIALITY
The reason as a requirement for morality entails that human feelings may be
important in ethical decisions, but they ought to be guided by reason. Sound
reasoning helps us to evaluate whether our feelings and institutions about moral
cases are correct and defensible.
Impartiality, on the other hand, involves the idea that each individual's interests and
points of view are equally important.
For further readings:
Please see Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City
Assessment:
Case Analysis (20 points)
Name of Student:
Date:
.
Year level and Section:
Time:
.
Direction: Identify the dilemmas in the cases that are given below and make
a one-page reflection on it.
Modern Technology and Ethical Dilemmas
Introduction:
One effect of ethical theories is to go beyond emotions and intuitions. As a
result, they can have a substantial position in the business world. It is critical that a
person in the business community has professional ethics because entry into the
workforce leads a person to a place where an individual is in some relations, which
involve rights and duties. The professional relationships include associations with the
clients, employer, co-professionals, society, and the environment itself including the
technology at the employee’s disposal. Comprehending the rules and ethics applying
to these relationships is critical. One relationship, in particular, is the connection with
technology in the modern world. Modern day technology overall has a positive
influence on a person’s moral development within the business.
Case study:
David Barker is an IT consultant working at Quins Private, a private
investigation firm. He is 33 years old, and has previously worked for a terrorist
countering organization, but was fired, and remained unemployed for a long time
before his employer Jack O’Brien employed him. The reason for his removal from the
force was a suspicion that he was collaborating with terrorists and using his profound
knowledge of information technology and communication systems to sell secrets to
terrorists. David had a hard time finding employment until Jack gave him a position
with the promise of being honest. He pledged to avoid an instance where his loyalty
was in question in the private investigation firm. His work involved collaboration with
many secrets and information that others would pay huge amounts for, but David
would have to fight the temptation to commit a federal crime in any of his actions. In
his line of work, he is in situations where he faces ethical decisions that could destroy
his career, and the lives of many if he chooses poorly. He faces the dilemma that
many find, as they exist in a computerized society since he has to act morally
concerning technology. Technology in the business world creates a high level of
accountability because it is possible to trace the chain of responsibility for actions and
decisions in the workplace (Gini and Marcoux 67). Ethics is important in his line of
work and his life because of the power that he, as a professional, affects the physical
and social environment.
David has to be mindful of five areas as he works with technology. He must be
conscious, integrity, responsibility at work, competence, and advancing human
welfare. These areas are imperative to the ethical theories. If David upholds all these
areas in the everyday instructions, he may confidently work and say he acts in a
morally responsible way. Ideas and concepts are an essential basis for the daily
actions, and they should assist David if he chooses right in tackling the difficult ethical
decisions with zeal and confidence. He invites Jack to play close attention to this work
in his time at Quins Private until he earns trust, or exclusively if he pleases, an act of
good faith from David.
Hypothetical Dilemmas:
Surveillance technology and virtues ethics; a sense of accountability
The surveillance cameras in all areas of the workplace, including private
sanitation areas and balcony’s, influence David to retain a stable virtual character in
response to virtue ethics, when he receives a threat against his life, of he does not
assist criminals to access the personnel files at a particular bank. David receives an
anonymous email that indicates the sender was currently watching him in the office
and is aware of his movements. The email directs him to perform some actions that
are not in line with the character he has embraced since beginning to work for Jack.
The anonymous senders threaten to kill him if he does not access the bank records
for a bank and send them to them through an undisclosed channel. The bank is not
within his locality and is in fact in another state. This fact alone potentially makes the
action relatively easy since he knows the route to take, and he can use some of his
prior experience and knowledge of banking information technology infrastructure to
gain the information and send it, protecting his life. He faces the dilemma, and David
has a time limit to take action.
On the one hand, technology makes it easy for him to breach ethics, and avail
this information, protecting his life. After all, he has the technique, the experience, and
the motive. However, there are surveillance cameras and devices to monitor the work
of every server in the workplace. Even though he knows he can perform the action,
he knows that the intensity of the situation could cause him to leave a mark.
Additionally, he does not want to tarnish the virtues character he has developed in his
time there. He chooses to alert his colleagues on the matter, and on notifying Jack,
the resources of the firm redirect to finding the anonymous senders and protecting his
life while performing a virtuous act. In this case, technology, and the knowledge of the
same has a positive influence on David’s moral development. Firms should have a
policy that allows surveillance of the work of employees to ensure no person is
carrying out illegal activity.
According to virtue ethics, the character of an individual is the key element in
ethical decision making, as opposed to the rules about the acts (Harris, Wijesinghe,
and McKenzie 76). If it was about the rules, David has broken them before, and it
would be easy to make the same decision again. However, the knowledge that he
requested for surveillance through different forms of technology, he is aware that his
actions will come out to the light. He does not desire to tarnish the character he is
struggling to build and earn the trust of his colleagues. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street
reforms and consumers protection are one of the acts that provide guidance for the
oversight and supervision of financial institutions, and it makes the action David would
have taken an illegal one. However, within the organization, Jack had strictly
prohibited unmanned hacking for personal gain, and breach of this security policy
would have seen David lose his job.
Self-sacrifice scenario and utilitarian ethics; using technology for good
David used the utilitarian ethics to evaluate the action with aggregate welfare
benefits and acted accordingly after finding information using technology, which could
have harmed the organization if it went unrevealed. Jack had made it illegal to hack
for personal gain, as indicated previously. The company enrolled a new employee on
contract to work on a case. David had to work with the new employee, but noticed a
few behaviors that were awkward. For instance, he liked to work in private, and when
questioned about this behavior, he shrugged it off and said he enjoys working
privately. James, having worked in the law enforcement, David had training on
behaviorism. He was able to identify suspicious behavior and decided to do something
about it. David hacked the personnel files, found a few clues, and decided to look
deeper into the employee’s past using technology from his past at the government
counter-terrorist organization. He revealed that the contract employee had some ties
with an international criminal organization, and wondered if Jack was aware. He knew
if he kept the information to himself, there is a chance that the reputation of the firm
would stand a high-security risk.
Utilitarian ethics consider the action that would have the highest benefit
(Mizzoni 91). A utilitarian perspective reveals the different benefits that would come
with any option he would choose. He contemplated keeping the information to himself
to protect his position of employment since hacking is illegal according to the policies
of the organization. However, that would only benefit himself. If he revealed the
information, it would help all the members of the firm. He decided to take the action
that would benefit the highest number of people and forward the information to Jack.
He decided to talk to Jack and explain that his training and the software allowed him
to come to this truth. Jack understood and responded appropriately. In this scenario,
technology motivated the right decision and provided information that was critical. The
organization and the government have a counter-terrorism policy, and the use of
technology helped mold David’s decision to choose the action that has the most
benefit. Businesses should run their employees through a security screening
procedure, and use technology to their advantage, ensuring they do not hire criminals
and endanger stakeholders.
Care ethics and using technology for organizational and national protection
When faced with the same situation that cost him his job previously, the difficult
decision, and the interaction with the technology in the firm, David used care ethics to
come to a decision. The technology that in the company monitored the work of all his
employees, including David Barker and made it easier for him to make this decision.
The people whom he sold information to the first time contacted him again and asked
him to find some more information about them. The pay this time was four times the
first pay, and the temptation was present. However, aware of the terms of his
employment and the role of technology in monitoring his work molded his decision at
this time.
In care ethics, the individual has to have positive partial relationships along
with appropriate domestic virtues (Hamington and Sander-Staudt 90). He acted in a
manner that was sensitive to the relationship he had created by Jack upon
employment. Additionally, he took responsibility for his actions and decided to act in
a responsible manner. His choice guided by care ethics was in line with the policies
of the organization and the government since he chose the legal action, and did not
sell the information, which would be unethical. The government should implant a
surveillance body that protects the nation’s secrets from criminals who trade huge
sums of money for delicate information
Conclusion:
Technology has a positive effect on an individual’s moral development and the
responsiveness of a person to an ethical decision in business. When faced with
different ethical dilemmas, David focused on the teachings of ethics, chose the right
one, responded accordingly, all of which were guided by technology. The role of
technology in making these decisions is clear from the evidence above. An explicit
collaboration between technology, integrity, and ethics is clear from his actions.
RUBRIC FOR THE EVALUATION OF YOUR ANSWERS
Criteria
0 point
1-4 points
5-6 points
7-8 points
9-10 points
Coherence
and
Relevance
of Answer
No
answer
and any
explanati
on to the
given
question.
The
answer is
wrong. The
ideas and
justification
were
poorly
discussed.
The answer is
correct but was
not clearly
justified. The
ideas and
justification
were fairly
discussed in a
correct manner.
The answer is
correct and was
somehow justified.
The ideas and
justification
somehow support
the answer and
were logically
discussed with
clarity.
The answer is
correct and was
clearly justified.
The ideas and
justification support
the answer and
were excellently
discussed with
clarity, coherent,
and relevant.
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University
General Trias City
Write your reflection here:
CHAPTER 1
CULTURE IN MORAL BEHAVIOR
Aim:
This chapter consisting of seven (7) lessons will give the students a glimpse of
their outlook, attitude, values, goals and practices shared by a group, organization or
society. It also aims at strengthening Filipino values system. Moreover, the target
timeline of this lesson will be on the 4th and 5th week of the semester.
Learning Objectives:
After the completion of the chapter, the students shall be able to:
1. Familiarize oneself with the role of culture in human moral behavior
2. Identify the challenges of cultural relativistic perspective in ethics
3. Discuss the Filipino moral character based on their experiences and
perspectives.
LECTURETTE
INTRODUCTION
Whenever we travel and see new places, the first thing we ask is their culture
which we learn of cultural diversity, social and other practices. You may have known
a law which may or may not be applicable from other countries. Why? Because every
country governs different culture that comprises their laws.
Culture reflects the moral and ethical beliefs and standards that speak to how
people should behave and interact with others. As a system of meaning and shared
beliefs, culture provides a framework for our behavioral and affective norms.
Countless studies in cultural psychology have examined the effect of culture on all
aspects of our behavior, cognition, and emotion, delineating both differences and
similarities across populations.
Culture and morality are closely intertwined. We might even say they are
inseparable. While culture is important and necessary to the way in which we
understand and explain moral behavior; culture provides us with a powerful and
persuasive explanatory power on why we do the things we do. It is not however the
only sole factor or explanation. Thus, culture may be important and necessary but it
is insufficient to fully explain why people do the things they do. Hence, we will discuss
further the broad ranges of culture in moral behavior.
CULTURE is commonly said that it is all around us. Practically,
culture appears to be an actual part of social life as well as our
personality. For some, culture is a quality that some people have
more than others.
1. CULTURE
 The term culture is so complex that it is not easy to define. In one sense,
culture is used to denote that which is related to the arts and humanities. But
in a broader sense, culture denotes the practices, beliefs and perception of a
given society.

It is in this sense that culture is often opposed with savagery,’ that is, being
‘cultured’ is seen as a product of a certain involvement from a natural state
2. CULTURE’S ROLE IN MORAL BEHAVIOR
 Culture refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs,
values, attitudes, meanings, hierarchies, religion, notions of time, roles, spatial
relations, concepts of the universe, and material objects and possessions
acquired by a group of people in the course of generations through individual
and group striving.

Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired
and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement of human
groups, including their embodiment in artifacts; the essential core of culture
consists of traditional ideas and especially their attached values, culture
systems may, on the one hand be considered as products of action, on the
other hand, as conditioning influences upon further action.
3. MORAL STANDARDS AS SOCIAL CONVENTION AND THE SOCIAL
CONDITIONING THEORY
Theories explained:
 The things we regard as moral laws (moral standards or rules), some
purport, are nothing but just social convention. They mean those things
agreed upon by people, like through their authorities.
Theories analyzed:
 However, just because something is learned at homes or school does
not necessarily mean that it is a social convention.
 Mathematical operations, geographical facts, and scientific laws are
also taught in those institutions, yet they are never considered as mere
human fabrications. Meaning, whether or not people know and like
them, they are as they are.
The philosopher C.S Lewis offers two reasons for saying that morality belongs
to the same class as mathematics:
a. Although there are differences between the moral ideas of one time or country
and those of another, the differences are not really very great.
b. We affirm that the morality of one people is better or worse than that of another,
which means that there is a moral standard or rule by which we measure both
moralities and that standard for real.
Social conditioning theory:
 Concerning social conditioning theory,’ it can be observed that when
one says that a particular action ought or ought not to be done, he/she
is not simply echoing social approval or disapproval.
4. CULTURAL RELATIVISM IN ETHICS
Cultural relativism
 is perhaps the most famous form of moral relativism, a theory in ethics
which holds that ethical judgments have their origins either in individual
or cultural standards.
Moral Relativism
 fundamentally believes that no act is good or bad objectively, and there
is no single objective universal standard through which we can evaluate
the truth of moral judgments.
Cultural relativism an Analysis:
 Valuable lessons from ethical relativism. In proposing that there is no
independent standard in ethics, moral relativism does encourage
tolerance. Without a doubt, tolerance is necessary for people of different
cultural origins to co-exist and live peacefully in society.
The theory’s ethical faults:
 Cultural relativism discourages analytical thinking and independent
decision making in Ethics as it requires unsuspecting compliance and
subscription to social norms.

Logically, cultural relativism is inconsistent in promoting tolerance while
teaching that no culture is morally superior or more progressive than
others.
Rachels’ evaluation of cultural relativism
The Cultural Differences Argument
 He explains that the cultural relativists’ approach is to argue from facts
about the difference between cultural outlooks to a conclusion about
the status of morality.

Different cultures have different moral codes. Therefore, there is no
“objective truth” in morality. Right and wrong are only matters of
opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.
The bad consequences of cultural relativism
a. We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior
to our own.
b. We could decide whether actions are right or wrong just by consulting the
standards of our society.
c. The idea of moral progress is called into doubt.
5. ASIAN MORAL UNDERSTANDING
 Because culture has a major impact on morality, people from the different
cultures appear to have seemingly, but not essentially, different sets of ethics.



This particularly apparent in ethics of groups of people from the Eastern or
Asian culture as compared to those from the Western culture.
Some say that one of the differences between eastern (ASIAN)and western
ethics is the fact that Western Ethics is basically about finding truth, whereas
Eastern Ethics is very much about the protocol and showing of respect. Asian
ethics is said to be much more about doing what is right in terms of what is
expected to some by his family ,society and culture.
On the other hand, Western Ethics is claimed to have more of a stress on self
of what is rationally or logically true. Moreover, Western ethics is seen to place
more emphasis on law and justice while Eastern Ethics seems to hold on must
do what is right and expected and him and the universe (or a metaphysical
force) will take care of the rest.
SUMMARY OF PERCEIVED DIFFERENCES
IN WESTERN AND EASTERN ETHICS
WESTERN ETHICS
EASTERN ETHICS
Focus
Finding truth
Protocol and Respect
Basic
Rational thought
Religious Teachings
Logic, cause and effect
Respect Towards Family
Athens, Rome and
Judeo-Christianity
Hinduism, Buddhism,
Confucianism and Taoism
Rational
Holistic and Cultural
Good must triumph over
evil
Good and Bad,
Light and Dark all exist
and equilibrium.
Emphasis
Roots
Approach
Conflict and Harmony
As indicated in the table, the basis of Asian or Eastern Ethics is religion,
specifically Easter religions or philosophies. Confucianism for instance, focuses on
the cultivation of virtue and maintenance of morality, the most basic of which are an
obligation of altruism and humaneness for other individuals, the upholding of
righteousness and the moral disposition to do good and a system of norms and
propriety the determines how a person should properly act in every life.
6. FILIPINO MORAL CHARACTER
•
Filipino cultural morality, especially that which concern social ethics center on
ideally having a ‘smooth interpersonal relationship ‘(SIR) with others. The
definitional of ‘smooth interpersonal relationship’ in the Philippines culture is
principally supported by an anchored on at least six basic Filipino values.
FILIPINO VALUES
1.PAKIKISAMA
• having and maintaining ‘good public relations,’ This public usually being practiced to avoid
clash with other people or a certain group. It characterizes both a value and a goal that
involves keeping good feelings in all personal interactions and getting along with others,
oftentimes, at all costs
2.HIYA
• is described as a feeling of lowliness,shame or embarrassment, and inhibition or shyness
which is experienced as somewhat distressing. Integrally, ’HIYA’ is related to the concept
of ‘face’ and a concern with how one appears in the eyes of others
3.AMOR PROPIO
• is derived from the concept of ‘face.’ Although commonly translated as ‘self-respect’ or
‘self-esteem,’ ‘AMOR PROPIO’ has ‘been characterized as the high degree of sensitivity
that makes a person intolerant to criticism and causes him to have an easily wounded
pride”
4.UTANG NA LOOB
• is likewise a fundamental aspect of upholding group harmony and relationships that
demands the balancing of obligations and debts. This involves the concepts’reciprocity’ or
returning the received favor.The inability to repay “utang na loob” (debt of gratitude)
usually makes a person “walang utang na loob” or “walang hiya.” To avoid being dubbed
as “walang utang na loob” some Filipinos sometimes do thing that may be bad (like voting
for unworthy candidate)
5.FILIPINO HOSPITALITY
• refers to the innate ability and trait of Filipinos to be courteous and entertaining to their
guests. Generally speaking,Filipinos are hospitable as they are internationally known to be
warm, welcoming, and accommodating.This trait, However, makes Filipinos prone to being
abused or maltreated.
6.RESPECT FOR ELDERS
• We, Filipinos, are not only respectful to elders, but also have unique ways to expressing
this respect to elders. These include the use of ‘opo’ when talking to elders and
‘pagmamano’ or the putting of the elder’s hand on one’s forehead. When excessive,
nonetheless, respect to elders make one dependent or irrationally obedient to parents or
elders.
7. UNIVERSAL VALUES
 By universal values, we mean those values generally shared by cultures.
The existence of the so-called universal values is a strong proof that cultural
relativism is wrong. If certain values exist in Western and Eastern cultures
(including Filipino culture) despite the distance, the cultural relativism’s
claim that cultures’ moralities radically differ from each other is mistaken.


Going back to the contention that Eskimos are also protective of their
children, Rachels submits the following sound arguments (1999, p.29):
Human infants are helpless and cannot survive if they are not given
extensive care for a period of years. Therefore, if the group did not care for
its young, the young would not survive and the older members of the group
would not be replaced after a while, the group would die out. Therefore, any
cultural group that continues to exist must care for its young. Infants that
are not cared for must be the exception rather than the rule.

The same form of argument could be used reasonably show that other
values must be generally shared by many cultures. Giving value on (1)
TRUTH TELLING, for instance is indispensable in the existence of a society
for without it there would be no reason to pay attention to what anyone
communicates with anyone. And because complex societies cannot exist
without communication among their members, the very existence of this
societies proves that truthfulness is valued in those cultures.

The very few situations in which it is thought to be permissible to lie are
more of “exceptions to the rule” (1999, p.30). The “general theoretical point”
here, Rachels concludes, is that “there are some moral rules that all
societies will have in common, because those rules are necessary for
society to exist. Cultures may differ in what they regard as legitimate
exceptions to the rules, but this disagreement exists against a background
of agreement on the larger issues’ Therefore, ‘it is a mistake to overestimate
the amount of difference between cultures’ (1999, p.30). In fact, not every
moral rule can vary from society to Society. This definitely files in the face
of Cultural Relativism.

Rachels also mentions of the case of (2) valuing or respecting life which
necessitates the prohibition on murder. In a society where no one thought
there was anything wrong with killing others at will, everyone would have to
be constantly on guard. Avoiding people would become a mechanism for
survival and large-scale. Societies would therefore be improbable.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University-General Trias City
Assessment:
Direction: The following questions are based on your personal experiences. Please
answer all questions completely, but concisely. Write your answers in a piece of
yellow paper and submit it next week.
1. What is the role of culture in our moral behavior? (5 points)
2. From the 6 Filipino values, rank from highest to lowest which for you is the most
important in instilling Ethics to the next generation. Explain your answers by citing
relevant experiences pertaining to the topic. (20 points)
3. For 15 points, how do you show respect to cultural diversity in terms of:
Religion
Social Norms
Laws
In your answer, explain by adding current events.
RUBRIC FOR THE EVALUATION OF YOUR ANSWERS
Criteria
0 point
No
Coherence
and
answer
Relevance and any
of Answer explanati
on to the
given
question.
1-4 points
5-6 points
7-8 points
9-10 points
The answer
is wrong.
The ideas
and
justification
were poorly
discussed.
The answer is
correct but was
not clearly
justified. The
ideas and
justification
were fairly
discussed in a
correct
manner.
The answer is
correct and was
somehow justified.
The ideas and
justification
somehow support
the answer and
were logically
discussed with
clarity.
The answer is
correct and was
clearly justified.
The ideas and
justification
support the
answer and were
excellently
discussed with
clarity, coherent,
and relevant.
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University
General Trias City
Learning Module in Ethics
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 4, Week 6 and 7
Topic
: Moral Agent
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a) Comprehend the role of human beings as moral agents;
b) Know the six stages of moral development;
c) Appreciate the role of Kohlberg’s Theory in the
development of human ethics.
MORAL CHARACTER AND VIRTUES
Moral Character
Virtue/s
 Refers to the existence or lack of  For humans, it refer to habitual,
excellent traits that are
virtues such as integrity, courage,
intentionally developed
fortitude, honesty, and loyalty. To
throughout one’s life
say that a certain person has a
good moral character means that  Virtues are called “arête” in
he/she is a good person citizen
Greek which, since the time of
with a sound moral compass.
Aristotle and Plato, has referred
to excellences in regard to
 The term “character” is derived
persons or objects being the
from the Greek word “charakter”
best that they can be in
which was initially used as a
accordance with their purpose.
mark impressed upon a coin. The
word “character” later came to
mean a distinct mark by which
one thing was distinguish from
others, and then chiefly one
person from another. This stress
on distinctiveness or individuality
tends to merge “character” with
“personality” in modern usage.
 The use in ethics of the word “character” however, has a different
linguistic history. At the beginning of book II of the Nicomachean Ethics,
the Greek philosopher Aristotle tells us that there are two distinct human
excellences, “the excellences of thought and excellences of character.”
His phrase for excellences of moral character is often translated as moral
virtues.
 “Moral Character” therefor, in philosophical sense, refers to having or
lacking moral virtue. If one lacks virtue, he/she may have any of the moral
vices, or maybe marked by a condition somewhere in between virtue and
vice, such as continence or incontinence.
 Moreover, philosophers usually think that moral character traits, unlike
other personality or psychological traits have an irreducibly evaluative
dimension that is they involve a normative judgement. The agent is
morally responsible for having the moral character trait itself or for the
outcome of that trait. Hence, a certain moral character trait s a trait for
which the agent is morally responsible.
THE CIRCULAR RELATION OF ACTS AND CHARACTER
 In the process of moral development, there is the circular relation between
acts that build character and moral character itself. Not all acts help to
build moral character, but those acts which emanate from moral character
certainly matter in moral development. Hence, there appears the apparent
circular relationship between individual acts and moral character. A
person’s actions determine his/her moral character, but moral character
itself generates acts that help in developing either virtues or vices.
 This goes to show that moral development should also be understood in
the sense of human flourishing. This flourishing is attained by the habitual
practice of moral and intellectual excellence or virtues in the context of
developing morally which also brings about self-realization and happiness,
acting in line with virtues is acting in accordance with reason. Indeed
philosophers like Aristotle hold that the function of human being consists
in activities which manifest the best states of his rational aspect that is the
virtues.
 Virtuous traits of character ought to be stable and enduring and are not
mere product of fortune but of learning, constant practice, and cultivation.
In this sense the Greek moralists believe virtuous acts complete or perfect
human life.
 Nonetheless, the Greek philosophers think that it takes someone of good
moral character to determine with regularity and reliability what individual
acts are appropriate and reasonable in certain situations, and that it takes
someone of good moral character to decide with regularity how and when
to secure goods and resources for himself and others.
MORAL CHARACTERS AS DISPOSITIONS
 Moral character traits that constitute a person’s moral character are
characteristically understood as behavioral and affective disposition.
Generally speaking, dispositions are particular kind of properties or
characteristics that objects can possess.
 Among human beings moral characters traits, either virtues or vices, are
also considered as dispositions. Moral character traits are those
disposition of character for which it is suitable to hold agents morally
responsible. On the other hand, a vice is a moral character trait for which
the agent is deserving of a negative reactive attitude such as resentment
or blame.
SIX STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT (by Lawrence Kohlberg)
LEVEL 1
PRECONVENTIONAL
MORALITY
LEVEL 2
CONVENTIONAL
MORALITY
LEVEL 3
POSTCONVENTIONAL
MORALITY
Stage 1
Stage 3
Stage 5
Obedience and
Punishment Orientation
Children obey because
adults tell them to obey.
People base their moral
decisions on fear of
punishment.
Good Interpersonal
Relationships
Individuals value trust,
caring, and loyalty to
others as a basis for moral
judgments.
Stage 2
Stage 4
Stage 6
Maintaining Social
Order
Moral judgments are
based on understanding of
the social order, law,
justice, and duty.
Universal Principles
The person has developed
moral judgments that are
based on universal human
rights (e.g. golden rule).
When faced with a
dilemma between law and
conscience, a personal,
individualized conscience
is followed.
Individualism and
Exchange
Individuals pursue their
own interests but let others
do the same. What is right
involves equal exchange.
Social Contract and
Individual Rights
Individuals reason that
values, rights, and
principles undergird or
transcend the law.
Case Sample: The Heinz Dilemma
In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one
drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist
in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the
druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for
the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's
husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only
get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his
wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist
said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got
desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife.
Should Heinz have done that? Was it right or wrong? Is your decision that it is right
(or wrong) objectively right, is it morally universal, or is it your personal opinion?
 Below are some of the possible arguments applying Kohlberg’s stages:
STAGE ONE (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will
consequently be put in prison. OR: Heinz should steal the medicine because it only
worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to
pay for it and was not stealing anything else besides.
STAGE TWO (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be
much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.
OR: Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he
would probably languish over a jail cell more than his wife's death.
STAGE THREE (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine because he wants to
be a good husband. OR: Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad
and he is not a criminal. He will dishonor himself and his family.
STAGE FOUR (law): Heinz should not steal the medicine because it is against the
law. OR: Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also face the corresponding
consequences of his crime.
STAGE FIVE (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone
has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. OR: Heinz should not steal the
medicine because the druggist has a right to fair compensation.
STAGE SIX (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because
saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another
person. OR: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the
medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.
 Based on social contract, a government is needed for stability.
 Conflict is part in living with groups and the government provides methods
to resolve and/or prevent conflicts.
 A government makes laws, enforcement, and establishes courts.
 Conflict is restricted because the government limits what people can do
(law and order).
GETTING TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL, CONSCIENCE-BASED MORAL
DECISIONS






Stage 1: respect for power and punishment
Stage 2: looking out for # 1
Stage 3: being a “good boy” or a “nice girl”
Stage 4: law and order thinking
Stage 5: justice through democracy
Stage 6: deciding on basic moral principles by which you will live your life
and relate to everyone fairly
PROBLEMS WITH KOHLBERG’S THEORY
 It must be noted nonetheless, that not all ethicists accept Kohlberg’s
theory on moral development. In the Heinz dilemma for instance,
Kohlberg’s research subjects were aged between 10 and 16, and have
never been married and so not credible to answer whether or not Heinz
should steal the drug.
 Some say that Kohlberg’s research is biased because Kohlberg’s theory
is based on an all-male sample and thus, the stages reflect an
androcentric or male definition or morality. It is argued that men’s morality
is basically based on abstract principle of law and justice, whereas
women’s is based on principle of compassion and care.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City.
Kohlberg, Lawrence, Essays on Moral Development, Volume 1 The Philosophy of
Moral Development.
Santrock, John (2011). Educational psychology. MacGraw Hill: New York. Rich,
Karen. Introduction to ethics. Jones & Batlett Learning, LLC.
Electronic Reference:
https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/k/Kohlberg%2527s_stages_of
_moral_development.htm
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University
General Trias City
ACTIVITY:
 One Page Chapter Assessment
RUBRIC FOR CHAPTER ASSESSMENT
Criteria
1-2 points
3-4 points
Insight
(60%)
Did not
demonstrate
awareness of
the lesson/
content.
Demonstrates
little awareness
of the
lesson/content
but did not
explore it.
Personal
Reflection
(30%)
No personal
response is
made to the
issue/concepts
raised in the
lesson.
Grammar
(10%)
Grammatical
errors make the
output difficult
to comprehend.
Shows little
evidence of
personal
response to the
issue/concepts
raised in the
lesson.
Grammatical
errors interfere
with the content
discussion.
5-6 points
7-8 points
9-10 points
Demonstrates
awareness of
the
lesson/content
and makes
minimal
comments/
discussions.
Demonstrates
awareness of the
lesson/content
and attempts to
make an analysis
and/or evaluation
but gives a vague
discussion.
Demonstrates
awareness and
deep
understanding of
the
lesson/content
and makes
coherent
discussion.
Shows some
evidence of
personal response
to the
issue/concepts
raised in the
lesson.
Few grammatical
errors are made.
Shows sufficient
evidence of
personal response
to the
issue/concepts
raised in the
lesson.
Occasional
grammatical errors
are made.
Shows significant
evidence of
personal response
to the
issue/concepts
raised in the
lesson.
Uses correct
grammar and
syntax
consistently.
Learning Module in Ethics
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 5, Week 8
Topic
: Feelings and Moral Decision-Making
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a) Describe the impact of feelings in responding to moral
dilemmas;
b) Determine the disadvantages of feelings in making life
decisions;
c) Balance the role of feelings making correct decisions in
life.
FEELINGS AS INSTINCTIVE RESPONSE TO MORAL DILEMMAS
 Some ethicists believe that ethics is also a matter of emotion.
 Some hold that reason and emotion are not really opposite.
 Ethical judgements are highly emotional as people emotionally express
their strong approval or disapproval of different acts.
 Moral sentiments highlight the need for morality to be based also on
sympathy for other people.
 Many ethicists conclude that being good involves both thinking and
feeling.
FEELINGS AS OBSTACLES TO MAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS
 Feelings and emotions can become obstacles or impediments to
becoming ethical. This is the case especially when feelings are
misinterpreted or exaggerated.
The following are two theories in ethics that give focus on the role of feelings on
morality:
A. Ethical Subjectivism
 This theory utterly runs contrary to the principle that there is
objectivity in morality. It suggests that we are to identify our moral
principles by simply following our feelings.
 Holds that the truth or falsity of ethical propositions is dependent on
the feelings, attitudes, or standards of a person or group of
persons.
 There is no such thing as objective right or wrong. For instance, it
is a fact that some people are homosexual and some are
heterosexual; but it is not a fact that one is good and the other bad.
So when someone says that homosexuality is wrong, it is not
stating a fact about homosexuality. Instead, it is merely saying
something about its feelings toward it.
Analyzing Ethical Subjectivism
 Ethical Subjectivism suggests that we identify our moral principles
by simply following our feelings. It also implies that each of us is
infallible so long as we are honestly expressing our respective
feelings about moral issues.
 Argument: “If Ethical Subjectivism is correct, then each of us is
infallible in our moral judgements as long as we are speaking
sincerely but we are not infallible, we make mistakes even when
we are speaking sincerely. Therefore, Ethical Subjectivism cannot
be correct.”
B. Emotivism
 It can be viewed as the improved version of Subjectivism.
Emotivism begins with the observation that language is used in a
variety of ways.
 Developed chiefly by the American philosopher Charles L.
Stevenson (1908‐1979), Emotivism was one of the most influential
theories of Ethics in the 20th century.
 Purpose of Emotivism:
a. First, it is used as a means of influencing people’s behavior.
(For example, if someone says “Adultery is immoral,” Emotivism
interprets it as an attempt to stop you from doing it. Thus the
utterance is more like a command than a statement of fact; it is
similar to saying, “Don’t do that!”)
b. Second, moral language is used to express (not report) one’s
(speaker’s) attitude. (For instance, saying “Lincoln was a good
man” is not like saying “I like Lincoln,” but it is like saying
“Hurrah for Lincoln!”)
Evaluating Emotivism
 Emotivism provides morality with insufficient explanation. It does
not interpret moral judgments as statements that are true‐or‐false
because commands and expressions of attitude are not true‐or‐
false; people cannot be “infallible” with respect to them.
 Emotivism is against our basic knowledge that it is favorable if
opposing groups would instead judiciously deliberate about their
ethical differences and resort to reasons to resolve them.
FEELINGS CAN HELP IN MAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS
 Experientially, our moral compasses are also strongly influenced by the
feeling forces of disgust, fondness, or fear.
 Nonetheless the feelings or emotions involved in moral thinking should be
anchored on careful consideration of a full range of right goals, including
altruistic ones.
ACTIVITY:
 Two Pages Position Paper on “Feelings or Facts: A guide towards moral
decisions”
RUBRIC FOR POSITION PAPER
Criteria
Support for
Position
(70%)
1-2 points
Evidence (facts,
real life
experience,
examples, etc.) is
not relevant and/or
is not explained.
3-5 points
At least one of the
pieces of evidence
is relevant and has
an explanation that
shows how it
supports the
author's position.
6-8 points
Most of the
evidences are
specific and
relevant.
Explanations are
given that show
how they support
the author's
position.
9-10 points
All of the evidences
are specific and
relevant.
Explanations are
given that show how
each supports the
author's position.
Creativity
(30%)
Shows used ideas of
others.
Shows little original
thinking.
Shows creative
integration.
Shows unique ideas
and fresh perspective.
Grammar
(10%)
Grammatical errors
make the output
difficult to
comprehend.
Few grammatical
errors are made.
Occasional
grammatical errors
are made.
Uses correct grammar
and syntax
consistently.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City.
Rae, Scott (2018). Moral choices: an introduction to ethics. Zondervan: Michigan
Rachels, James (1993). Subjectivism in ethics.
https://web.ics.purdue.edu/~drkelly/RachelsSubjectivismInEthics1993.pdf
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University
General Trias City
Learning Module in Ethics
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 6, Week 10 and 11
Topic
: Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for
Morality
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a) Describe the importance of moral reasoning and
impartiality;
b) Familiarize oneself with the seven-step moral reasoning
model;
c) State examples and real-life scenarios where moral
reasoning and impartiality can be applied.
REASON AND IMPARTIALITY DEFINED
REASON
 It is the basis or motive for an
action, decision, or conviction.
 Reason spells the difference of
moral judgement from mere
expressions of personal
preference.
IMPARTIALITY
 It is the idea that each
individual’s interests and point of
view are equally important.
 Impartiality in morality requires
that we give equal and/or
adequate consideration to the
interests of all concerned parties.
THE SEVEN-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL
i.
Gather the Facts
 Gathering the facts is the indispensable first step prior to an ethical
analysis and reflection on the case.
 In analyzing a case/situation, know the available facts at hand, as well
as any facts presently not known but that need to be determined.
ii. Determine the Ethical Issues
 Ethical issues are stated in terms of legitimate competing interests or
goods. These competing interests are what actually create an ethical
dilemma (ethical dilemma is defined as a conflict between two or more
value/virtue-driven interests.)
 Moral values and virtues must support the competing interests in order
to have a genuine ethical dilemma. If you cannot identify any
underlying virtues/values, then it may have some other kind of
dilemma, not a moral one.
 Issues must be presented in a P vs. Q format In order to reflect the
interests that are colliding in a specific moral dilemma.
iii. Identify the Principles that Have a Bearing on the Case
 In any moral dilemma, there are sure moral values or principles that
are vital to the rival positions being taken. It is critical to identify these
values or principles.
 In some cases, one will need to decide whether some principles are to
be weighted more heavily than others.
iv. Lists of Alternatives
 This involves coming up with various alternative courses of action as
part of the creative thinking, to resolve an ethical dilemma.
 The more alternatives that are listed, the better the chance that your
list will include some high quality ones.
v. Compare the Alternatives with the Principles
 This involves eliminating alternatives according to the moral principle
that have bearing on the case.
 Often, in order to make a clear decision, one must weight one or more
virtues/values more heavily than the others. However, more basis must
be provided for weighting than simple intuitions.
vi. Weigh the Consequences
 If the principles do not yield a clear decision, then the consequences of
the remaining available alternatives must be considered, both positive
and negative.
 Positive consequences are more beneficial than others and negative
consequences are more detrimental than others.
vii. Make a Decision
 It must be realized that one common element to moral dilemmas is
that there are no easy and painless solutions to them. Frequently, the
decision that is made is one that involves the least number of
problems or negative consequences, not one that is entirely devoid of
them.
ACTIVITY:
 Two Pages Paper/Case Analysis (applying the seven-step moral
reasoning model)
Paper/Case Analysis: Direction – Apply the seven-step moral reasoning model in
analyzing the case and resolving the ethical dilemma.
You are a mid-level manager for a company that creates applications for
multiple platforms (PC, tablet, smart phone, etc.) that serve the real estate industry.
Due to a recent downturn in the market, the industry is undergoing one of its
periodic contractions. Business has been decreasing for your company. Since it’s
hard to know how long the downturn will last, the company’s top management has
determined that a reduction in force is necessary. You are aware of who in your
division will be laid off, and you are under a mandate for confidentiality until these
layoffs are formally announced.
One of the people who reports to you in your division, John, has become your
good friend during the time you two have worked together. Your wives have become
friends, and your kids are roughly the same age, play together, and get along well.
You regularly spend time with them socially outside of work. They have recently
bought a house not far from where you live, and they have their third child on the
way. John plays a key role in a major project that is roughly 6–8 weeks from
completion. John is understandably very nervous about the prospect of being laid
off, as he should be, since you know that he is on the list of those to be laid off.
During one of the times when your families are together, he informs you that he’s
been offered another job, but it doesn’t pay quite as well as his current job and
involves a much longer commute, which will take away from his family time in the
evenings. He would rather stay in his current job but also does not want to turn this
job down if he will be laid off from his current one. He is aware that you know who is
on the layoff list. He also knows that you are bound by confidentiality about who will
be laid off. Even if you were not so bound, your company needs John to finish up
this project, and if he took another job, the project would suffer and be significantly
delayed. John has asked you to help him out and give him a “heads up” if he’s on
the layoff list so he can make a wise decision about this other job opportunity. Your
good friend has put you in a very difficult position, having to weigh your obligation to
your company against your friendship with John.
RUBRIC FOR PAPER ANALYSIS
Criteria
Application of
lesson/concepts
(50%)
1-2 points
Paper mentions
lesson/concepts,
but there is little
demonstration of
how the paper
relates to the
lesson/concepts.
3-5 points
Lesson/concepts
are used. Concepts
are left undefined,
or poorly defined.
Little broader
framework is used.
6-8 points
Concepts are
defined, but the
author does not
demonstrate a solid
understanding of
the major themes
of the course
relevant to the
argument.
9-10 points
Demonstrates solid
understanding of the
major themes of the
lesson. Argument is
placed within the
broad discussions
outlined in the lesson.
Originality
(40%)
Argument is weak
and incoherent.
Argument is not
analytical. Concepts
are described, but
dealt with separately
and not explicitly
related to each other.
Argument is strong
and interesting, but
plays it safe.
Concepts are put in
conversation with
each other.
Grammar
(10%)
Grammatical errors
make the output
difficult to
comprehend.
Few grammatical
errors are made.
Occasional
grammatical errors
are made.
Argument is original
and creative. Goes
substantially beyond
points raised in lecture
and readings. Concepts
are related to each
other in interesting and
creative ways.
Uses correct grammar
and syntax consistently.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City.
Rae, Scott (2018). Moral choices: an introduction to ethics. Zondervan: Michigan.
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University
General Trias City
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 7, Week 12
Topic
: Moral Courage
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a. The importance of will and courage
b. Developing will and moral courage
Morally courageous individuals act upon their ethical values to help others
during difficult ethical dilemmas, despite the adversity they may face in doing so. ...
To be morally courageous means standing up for what you believe even when it
means that you do so alone (Murray, 2015)
Developing will and moral courage involves developing self-control. It
includes nurturing the ability to stick to actions, thoughts, and behavior, which lead
to moral improvement and success. It encompasses endowing the inner strength to
focus all the energy on a moral goal and persevere until it is accomplished.
To act out of a "good will" for Kant means to act out of a sense
of moral obligation or "duty". ... Kant answers that we do our moral duty when our
motive is determined by a principle recognized by reason rather than the desire for
any expected consequence or emotional feeling which may cause us to act the way
we do.
The Importance of Moral Courage
This is an excerpt from Ch 14, “Trust: The Key to Combat Leadership” by
Colonel (Retired) Patrick Sweeney, Ph.D., from the book “Leadership Lessons from
West Point”. The chapter delves into the top ten attributes of a leader who can be
trusted in combat as determined by Sweeney’s research on trust and leadership in
an actual combat environment during Operation Iraqi Freedom in May 2003. Those
attributes, in order of importance, are: competent, loyal, honesty/good integrity,
leads by example, self-control (stress management), confident, courageous
(physical and moral), shares information, personal connection with subordinates and
strong sense of duty.
The second dimension of leader courage deals with leaders’ moral strength
to do the right thing in all situations. Moral courage entails a leader’s strength of
character to be willing to incur risk in order to act according to his or her
values and beliefs and stand up to authority to protect his or her soldiers’
welfare or defend his or her decisions. Thus, moral courage enables leaders to
live with integrity, act to uphold the loyalty to their subordinates, and execute their
duties with confidence. Subordinates can trust leaders who have the courage to act
in accordance with their values because they know the directives they issue will be
honest and based on values. Subordinates will not depend on or trust a leader who
possesses good job knowledge, has a good set of values and beliefs, and has
loyalty to subordinates but lacks the moral courage to put these skills, values, and
beliefs into action. Therefore, a leader’s moral courage provides the force of will to
do what is right regardless of the situation and the costs the leader must incur. In
combat, this is critical because leaders’ moral courage and integrity define the moral
and ethical boundaries that subordinates must operate within.
Furthermore, soldiers’ responses indicated they would trust combat leaders
who were not afraid to take a stand for what they believed in, the decisions they
made, or what is the proper way to conduct business. Leaders must have the moral
courage to handle the consequences of taking a stand with the chain of command to
fight for what they believe is right. The following statements illustrate qualities of
moral courage that lead to the development of trust:
“[I place a high value on a leader’s] strength when it comes to standing up to
the company commander, so that fire-support team members were used properly
and not as machine gunners.” – Staff sergeant, infantry company fire support non
commissioned office, Qayyarah West Airbase, northern Iraq
“Courage [is important because] a leader must be able to take risks and not
back down from confrontation.” – Private first class, infantry company forward
observer radio operator, Qayyarah West Airbase, northern Iraq
Moral courage is equally important to leadership in business, nonprofit,
political, or any other type of organization. Group members always expect their
leaders to have the moral courage to act in accordance with their own and the
organization’s values. Thus, leaders’ moral courage provides group members with a
sense of confidence that leaders will behave in a moral and ethical manner and take
action to promote the best interests of the organization and its members. This
confidence that leaders have the strength to act morally and ethically leads to the
development of trust, which increases group members’ willingness to follow.
Enron’s, Tyco’s, and Adelphi’s senior business leaders lacked the moral
courage to act in accordance with their own and their organization’s values. The
consequences of this leadership failure were devastating to the companies, the
employees, retirees, and shareholders. Employees lost their jobs, retirees lost their
pensions and sense of security, shareholders lost their equity, and the public lost
trust in the companies. Whether these senior leaders actively participated in the
fraud or tolerated it by not coming forward, they all lacked moral courage to do the
right thing. Thus, the agency that comes with moral courage helps ensure group
members that leaders do the right thing by the organization and all people
associated with it.
Developing Will and Moral Courage: 5 Tips
The following are some tips or suggestions on how to develop will and moral
courage:
1. Develop and practice self-discipline.
One way to develop moral courage and will is to develop and practice selfdiscipline. The concept self-discipline involves the rejection of instant gratification in
favor of something better. Ethically applied, it may refer to the giving up of instant
pleasure and satisfaction for a higher and better goal such as executing a good
rational moral decision.
Developing will and moral courage involves developing self-control. It
includes nurturing the ability to stick to actions, thoughts, and behavior, which lead
to moral improvement and success. It encompasses endowing the inner strength to
focus all the energy on a moral goal and persevere until it is accomplished.
2. Do mental strength training.
This method is never reserved for a few special people. One of the most
simple and effective methods under this mental strength training involves declining
to satisfy unimportant and unnecessary desires.
Everybody is normally confronted and tempted by an endless stream of
cravings and temptations, many of which are not actually important or desirable. By
practicing to refuse to gratify every one of them, a person gets courageous and
stronger.
Saying no to useless, harmful or unnecessary desires and deeds, and
behaving contrary to one’s (bad) habits, fortify and refine a person’s mindset. By
persistent practice, one’s inner power grows, in the same way working out one’s
muscles at a gym increases one’s physical strength. In both cases, when a person
needs inner power or physical strength, they are available at his/her disposal.
The following are some examples. Some of them are not necessarily ethically
related:
- Don’t open the internet for a day or two.
- Drink water or juice, in spite of your desire to have a beer or liquor.
- Avoid chatting with your gossipy friend.
- For a week, go to sleep one hour earlier than usual.
- Resist the desire to gamble.
Training like these add to the storehouse of one’s inner strength. By following
a methodical method of training, a person can reach far, have more control over
oneself and one’s life, realize ethical goals, improve his/her life, and achieve
satisfaction and peace of mind.
3. Draw inspiration from people of great courage.
People usually admire and respect courageous persons who have won great
success by manifesting self-discipline and will power. These include people in all
walks of life, who with sheer will power and moral courage, overcame difficulties and
hardships, have improved their moral life, advanced on the spiritual or moral path,
and became worthy of imitation.
History is filled with outstanding examples of moral courage whom we
rightly celebrate: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Mahatma Gandhi, Aung San Suu
Kyi, and especially Jesus Christ and His apostles. When we see individuals
put their comfort, safety, security, reputation, or even life on the line for a
cause they believe in, or for an ideal that matters more than personal well
being, we witness moral courage and will in action.
4. Repeatedly do acts that exhibit moral courage and will.
Practice makes perfect. If one wishes to nurture the moral courage and will in
him, he must strive doing the acts that manifest them whenever opportunity allows it.
The following are some examples (Moral Courage)
–
Helping someone push a car (e.g. out of a snow bank), even if it means being
late
–
Standing up to a bully on the playground
–
Picking up litter
–
Doing homework or chores without being reminded
–
Refusing to listen to or repeat gossip
–
Practicing what you preach, even when no-one is looking or knows
–
Turning in a toy or a wallet to the Lost and Found
–
(For teens) calling home for a ride from a party where alcohol is being served
–
(For teachers) giving all students an equal voice regardless of race,
socioeconomic status, religion, gender or sexual orientation
–
Becoming company whistle blower risking job loss, financial cost, and or legal
repercussion
–
Reporting a crime
–
Participating in a peaceful protest
5. Avoid deeds that show lack of moral courage and will.
This involves evading acts that show irresponsibility, cowardice, apathy,
rashness, imprudence, ill will, and wickedness. Here are some examples (“Moral
Courage,” n.d.):
– Walking away from someone in need
– Taking more than your fair share
– Laughing at someone's misfortune or accident
– Grabbing the spotlight from someone who has earned it
– Placing too much reliance on the letter rather than the spirit of the law
– Remaining silent in the face of wrong-doing or injustice
– Rationalizations or justifications for action/lack of action
– Being inconsistent or capricious with rules and standards for one’s children
– Choosing sides after seeing which way the wind is blowing
– Breaking a promise like lying and cheating.
Prepared by:
Efrelhet N. Siarez
Cavite State University – General Trias City
Professor
Lesson 8: Basic theories as frameworks in ethics
Intended Learning Outcomes:
After the completion of the chapter, the students will be able to:
1. Discuss the concepts and context of basic theories as frameworks in
ethics;
2. Differentiate the various theories in ethics;
3. Familiarize the role of different theories in ethics in future career.
What is Framework?
FRAMEWORK
 It is a basic structure values
 A set of assumption, concept, and practices
The Three Main Branches of the Philosophical Study of Ethics
1. META-ETHICS
 Studies the nature of morality
 Explains what goodness and wickedness mean
 Cognitivism vs.
 It talks about the meaning, reference, and truth values of moral
Non-Cognitivism
judgement
 Universalism vs.
 It also explains what goodness and wickedness mean and how we
Relativism
know about them
 Empiricism vs.
 It consists in the attempt to answer the fundamental philosophical
Rationalism vs.
questions about the nature of ethical theory itself.
Intuitionalism
For Examples:
1. Are ethical statements such as “lying is wrong”, or “friendship
is good” true or false?
2. Assuming there are truths of morality, what sorts of facts make
them true?
3. What makes ethical discourse meaningful? Is it different from
what makes other sorts of discourse meaningful?
4. How do the rules of logic apply to ethical arguments and ethical
reasoning? Is it possible to validly infer a moral conclusion based
on non-moral premises?
5. Assuming we have any, what is the source of our knowledge of
moral truths? Is it based on reason, intuition, scientific
experimentation or something else?
6. What is the connection (if any) between morality and religion? If God
exists, is God’s will the basis of morality? Can there be morality if God
doesn’t exist?
Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism
Cognitivism
-The view that moral judgments
are capable of being true or false
-Right and wrong and matters fact
2 famous form of Cognitivism
1. Moral Realism
-Claims that existence of moral
facts and the truth (or falsity) of
moral judgements are
INDEPENDENT
2. Ethical Subjective
Non-Cognitivism
-The view that moral judgments
are not capable of being true or
false (instead they are like
commands or interjections)
-Denies the moral judgements if
true or false
Emotivism
-Submits the moral judgements
are mere expressions of our
emotional and feelings
-Holds that the truth of ethical
propositions are DEPENDENT on
attitude or standard of a person
2. NORMATIVE
ETHICS
 Deontology
 Teleology
 Virtue Ethics
3. APPLIED
ETHICS
 Bioethics
 Environmental
Ethics
 Business Ethics
 Sexual Ethics
 Social Ethics
Universalism Vs. Relativism
Moral Universalism
Moral Relativism
-Theorizes that moral facts
-Submits the different moral
and principles apply to
facts.
everybody in all places.
Empiricism Vs. Rationalism Vs. Intuitionalism
Moral Empiricism
Moral Rationalism
Moral
Intuitionalism
-Is a meta-ethical
-Contends that moral
stance which states facts and principles are -Submits that
that moral facts are knowable, a priori that moral truth are
known through
is, by reason along and knowable by
observation and
without reference to
intuition.
experience.
experience.
 How man ought to act, morally speaking
 It examines ethical norms, that is, those guidelines about what
is right, worthwhile, virtuous or just.
 It is the study of what makes actions right or wrong, what makes
situations or events good or bad and what makes people
virtuous or vicious.
Deontology
 Ethical system that bases morality on independent moral
 Rules or duties
 Obligation
Teleology
 Refers to moral system that determines the moral value of
actions by their outcomes or results
Virtue Ethics
 Moral system, places emphasis on developing good
habits of character, kindness and generosity.
 Avoiding bad character traits, or vices such as greed or
hatred.
 Philosophically examines specific, controversial moral issues.
 It consists in the attempt to answer difficult moral questions
actual people face in their lives.
For example:
1. Is abortion always morally wrong?
2. Is euthanasia always morally wrong?
3. What about the death penalty?
Sex before marriage?
So-called “white lies”
Being gay or lesbian?
Fighting in a war?
Using rough interrogation tactics on criminals?
Eating meat?
Using illegal drugs? ETC.
Bioethics

Concerns ethical issues pertaining to life, biomedical
researches, medicines, health care and medical
profession.
Environmental Ethics
 It deals with moral issues concerning nature, ecosystem,
and it’s human contents
Business Ethics
 It examines moral principles concerning business
environment which involves issues about corporate,
practices, policies, business behavior and the
relationships of individual in the organization.
Sexual Ethics
 Study moral issue about sexuality and human sexual
behavior
Social Ethics
 Deals with what is right for a society to do and how it
should act as a whole.
Reference(s) & Author(s): Gzzingan,L., Porillo, J., Velasco, V., Valdez, S., Bautista, F.,
Dalhag, L., Trinidad, J.L., Palado, D., Nova, R. Understanding the Self. Panday-Lahi
Publishing House, Inc 2018.
Chapter Assessment
Direction:
Give life at least 2 experiences of the three main branches
of the philosophical study of ethics.
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University – General Trias City
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 9, Week 14-15
Topic
: Virtue Ethics
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a. Know the impact of the Greek Triumvirate in the development of virtue ethics today;
b. Appreciate the applicability of virtue ethics in personal life challenges and future
career;
c. Analyze the role of Thomistic ethics.
Socrates (470-399 BC), Plato (427-348 BC), and Aristotle (384-322 BC) are
Greek Philosophers in the ancient period who deeply Western philosophy. Through
having political ambition as a young man, Plato eventually became a student and
disciple of Socrates, the most admired and patronized Greek philosopher at the
time. Aristotle is a philosopher and natural scientist who eventually shared the
distinction of being the most famous of ancient philosophers with Socrates and
Plato, his (Aristotle’s) teacher.
The Contemporary theory in Ethics called Virtue Ethics is said to have started
with these three great philosophers. In the medieval era, the Italian philosopher and
theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) revived, enhanced, and ’Christianized’ the
Greek Virtue Ethics. In this lesson, we will discuss these Greek philosophers and
Aquinas’ ethical theories and attempt to philosophically analyze them.
1. Virtue Ethics Defined
Virtue Ethics is a moral philosophy that teaches that an action is right if it is
an action that a virtuous person would perform in the same situations. According to
the theory, a virtuous person is someone who acts virtuously if they possess and
live the virtue.
Basically, the virtues are the freely chosen, character traits that people praise in
others. People praise them because. (1) They are difficult to develop; (2) they are
corrective of natural deficiencies' (for instance, industriousness is corrective of one’s
tendency to be lazy); (3) they ae beneficial both to self and society.
Virtue Ethics defines a moral person as someone who develops virtues and
unfailingly displays them over time. The ancient Greek list four”cardinal virtues”
namely, wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice.
2. Socrates and Plato’s Moral Philosophy
Since Plato wrote down and essentially adhered to Socrates philosophy, it is
practical for us to treat their ethical theories jointly here. In the dialogue Gorgias
written by Plato, Socrates indicates that pleasure and pain fail to provide an
objective standard for determining moral from immoral since they do not exist apart
from one another, while good and evil do.
In Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro whether something is good because
the gods love it, or whether the gods love it because it is good. Socrates point is that
what is good has a certain Independence from the whims of the gods’ determination
of the rightness of our actions and mores. Socrates therefore believed in the
existence of objective ethical standards though he admitted that it is not that easy to
specify them.
Central to Plato’s philosophy is his theory of Forms— the objectively
existing immaterial entities that are proper object of knowledge. Everything in the
material world is what it is by virtue of its resemblance to, or participation in, this
universal Form or Idea. These unchanging independent forms are like ideal and
stable models of the ordinary observable objects.
Now, since everything in the perceptible realm participates in independent
and perfect forms, there is also a form even for moral predicates, such as justice
and happiness. The highest of all forms is the form of the Good. For Plato those who
comprehend the Good will always do good actions. Bad actions are performed out
of not knowing the Good. To know the Good, nonetheless, requires an austere and
intellectually meticulous way of life.
Virtue therefore is regarded as knowledge and can be taught. Knowledge of
the Good is considered as the source of guidance in. oral decision making that to
know the good, it is argued, is to do the good.
3. Aristotle’s Ethics
At least two of Aristotle’s works specifically concern morality, the Eudemian
Ethics and the Nicomachean Ethics has been regarded as the Ethics of Aristotle
since the beginning of the Christian era.
Three general descriptions, which are interrelated, can be used to depict
Aristotle’s ethics. First, his ethical system may be termed “self- realizationism”. In
his philosophy, when someone acts in line with his nature or end (‘telos’) and thus
realizes his potential, he does moral and will be happy.
Like Plato’s and most of the other ancient philosophers’ ethical theories,
Aristotle’s view is also of a type known as eudaimonistic. As such, it focuses on
happiness (eudaimonia), or the good for man, and how to obtain it.
Finally, his moral philosophy is aretaic, or virtue- based. Whereas actoriented ethics is focused mainly on what we should do, a virtue ethics is interested
basically in what we should be, that is, the character or the sort of person we should
struggle to become.
Aristotle’s ’Telos’. A ’telos’ is an end or purpose. Aristotle
believes that theessence or essential nature of beings including humans,
lay not their cause (or beginning) but their end (’telos’).
Aristotle does not agree with Plato’s belief in a separate realm of Forms.
Aristotle, instead, argues that rational beings can discover the ‘essences’ of things
and that a being’s essence is its potential fulfillment or ‘telos’ (as the essence of an
acorn is to become an oak tree). The essence or ‘telos’ of ’human being’ is rationally
and, thus, a life of contemplation (a.k.a Philosophy) is the best kind of life true
human flourishing.
Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics can be thus summarized in this manner:
“All humans seek happiness (”well being”), but in different ways. True
happiness s tied to the purpose or end (telos) of human life. The essence [‘or telos’]
of human beings (that which separates and distinguishes them as a species) is
reason. Reason employed in achieving happiness (human telos) leads to moral
virtues (e.g., science, art, practical wisdom, theoretical wisdom). (Aristotle,” n.d.)
Happiness and Virtues. Aristotle believes that the ultimate human goal
is self- realization. This entails achieving one’s natural purpose by
functioning or living consistently with human natural. Accomplishing it, in
turn, produces happiness; whereas inability to realize it leads to sadness,
frustration, and ultimately to poor life. It therefore behooves us to act in
accordance with our nature so as to be content and complete. In detail, what
does Aristotle mean by human nature?
He identifies three natures of man: the vegetable or physical, animal or
emotional, and rational or mental. Rational development is thus deemed the most
important, as it is uniquely human. Accordingly, living in accordance with reason
is viewed as vital in self-realization or developing one’s potential.
This self- realization- the awareness of our nature and the development of
our potentials- is the key to human happiness. But what is this happiness in line with
Aristotle’s ethical view?
Ethics, for Aristotle, is the inquiry into the human good. This to say that the
purpose of studying ethics is to make ourselves good. This human good is,
eudaimonia or happiness.
Aristotle observed that wise persons seek an end that is self- sufficient, final,
and attainable over one’s life. This end is happiness which all human beings want.
Aristotle also considers happiness as the summum bonum – the greatest good of
all human life. He adds that it is the only intrinsic good, the good that is pursued for
its own sake. While all other things, such as pleasure, wealth, and honor are merely
means to an end, happiness is man’s ultimate goal as it is an end in itself.
Compared to Plato’s philosophy, it is happiness, not the Form of the Good,
which is the supreme good with which Aristotle’s ethics is concerned. Aristotle
indeed holds that the supreme good in ethics cannot be identified with the idea of
the Good because ethics is a practical science, whereas the immutable Idea of the
Good could only be of theoretical interest. But agreeing with Plato, Aristotle that
there is an essential connection between living happily and living virtuously.
In fact, Aristotle fundamentally connects happiness to virtues, as he explains
happiness in terms of activities manifesting the virtues. Human good, he says, is the
activity of the soul in accordance with excellence or virtue. Aristotle’s happiness,
therefore, is not much of a subjective feeling of well-being, but human well-being
itself, being the human good. Moreover, his account eudaimonia is different from
hedonist and utilitarian account of happiness as pleasure.
Virtue as Habit. Aristotle’s idea of happiness should also understood in
the sense of human flourishing. This flourishing is attained by the habitual
practice ofmoral and intellectual excellences, or ‘virtues’.
Aristotle observed that wise persons seek an end that is self- sufficient, final,
and attainable over one’s life. This end is happiness which all human beings want.
Aristotle also considers happiness as the summum bonum – the greatest good of
all human life. He adds that it is the only intrinsic good, the good that is pursued for
its own sake. While all other things, such as pleasure, wealth, and honor are merely
means to an end, happiness is man’s ultimate goal as it is an end in itself.
Compared to Plato’s philosophy, it is happiness, not the Form of the Good,
which is the supreme good with which Aristotle’s ethics is concerned. Aristotle
indeed holds that the supreme good in ethics cannot be identified with the idea of
the Good because ethics is a practical science, whereas the immutable Idea of the
Good could only be of theoretical interest. But agreeing with Plato, Aristotle that
there is an essential connection between living happily and living virtuously.
In fact, Aristotle fundamentally connects happiness to virtues, as he explains
happiness in terms of activities manifesting the virtues. Human good, he says, is the
activity of the soul in accordance with excellence or virtue. Aristotle’s happiness,
therefore, is not much of a subjective feeling of well being, but human well being
itself, being the human good. Moreover, his account eudaimonia is different from
hedonist and utilitarian account of happiness as pleasure.
Virtue as Habit. Aristotle’s idea of happiness should also understood in
the sense of human flourishing. This flourishing is attained by the habitual
practice ofmoral and intellectual excellences, or ‘virtues’.
Aristotle employs the word ‘hexis’ refer to moral virtue. One denotation of the
term ‘hexis’ is an active state, a condition in which something must actively hold
itself. Virtue, thus, manifests itself in action. More explicitly, an action counts as
virtuous, according to Aristotle, when a person holds oneself in a stable equilibrium
of the soul, in order to select the action knowingly and for its own sake. This stable
equilibrium of the soul is what constitutes character.
Moral virtue, for Aristotle, is the only practical road to effective action. The
virtuous person, who has good character, sees truly, judges rightly, and acts
morally.
Virtues and the Golden Mean. Virtue refers to an excellence of moral
or intellectual character. As mentioned earlier, Aristotle distinguishes two
kinds of virtue: virtues of intellect and moral virtues. The first correspond to
the fully rationalpart of the soul, the intellect; the second pertains to the part
of the ration soul whichcan ‘obey reason’. Moral virtue is an expression of
character, formed by habits reflecting repeated choices, hence is also called
virtue of character.
Acting in a reasonable manner is done when we choose to an indeed act in a
way that neither go to excess nor defect. Excess and defect normally indicate in
vice. Virtue lies neither in the vice or deficiency nor in the vice of excess but in the
middle ground. Thus, moral virtue is the golden mean between the two less
desirable extremes.
Happiness and its opposites play a role in the determination of the golden
mean, since we tend to do actions that bring delight and avoid actions that bring
agony. The virtuous person is brought up to find enjoyment in virtuous actions and
sorrow in vices.
Aristotle mentions four basic virtues: courage, temperance, justice and
prudence. Courage is the golden mean between cowardice (deficiency) and tactless
rashness (excess). The coward has too little bravery, the reckless individual has too
much, and the courageous shows just the proper amount of bravery.
Temperance is the mean between gluttony (excess) and extreme frugality
(deficiency). Both overindulgence and denying oneself of bodily pleasures make one
less happy; whereas practicing temperance makes one virtuous and fulfilled. This
directly exemplifies the connection between being happy and being virtuous.
Justice is the virtue of giving others right what they deserve, neither more nor
less. Now, what help us to know what is just or reasonable in various circumstances,
enabling us to keep away from excess and defect is the moral virtue called
prudence or wisdom.
The question why we should be moral was also answered by Aristotle by his
doctrine of virtues. By simply including justice or morality among of his list of virtues,
he implies that man has to be moral. Additional moral virtues include generosity,
civility, trustworthiness, reliability, sociability, dependability, honesty, sincerity,
gentleness, tolerance, benevolence, cooperativeness, empathy, tact, kindness, and
good temper.
‘Phronesis’ and Practice. In using the golden mean to become
virtuous, we must recognize not only that the mean is neither too much nor
too little but also it is‘relative to us’ moral agents. What constitutes the right
amount of something may differ from person to another.
Aristotle teaches about an intellectual virtue that plays a significant role in
Ethics. The phronesis, the intellectual virtue of practical wisdom, is that kind of
moral knowledge which guides us to what is appropriate in conjunction with moral
virtue. This phronesis or practical wisdom is a grasp of the appropriate way to
respond-to feel and act- In a particular situation.
Once we have learned the proper amount of some kind of action through
moral virtue and practical wisdom, then, we have ’the right prescription’ (orthos
logos). To be virtuous therefore is to act in accordance with the right prescription.
But acting appropriate to the right prescription should be understood in terms
of practice, training, or cultivation. To be virtuous one must perform the actions
that habitually bring virtue. A person must practice and develop the virtue of
generosity, for instance, so that acting generously becomes habitual. Moral
education thus, comprises imitation (say, parents and teachers), internalization, and
practice until it becomes normal.
Aristotle’s complete picture of a moral virtuous man therefore is someone
who constantly and habitually acts according to moral virtue and practical wisdom,
ideally exhibiting a lifetime of rational living and avoidance of vice, thereby forming
an ethical character, achieving self- realization, and thus realizing happiness and
human good. His comprehensive notion of moral virtue is that it is a state of
character manifested in choice and action, resting in the golden mean, resolved by
the prescription that a wise person would determine.
4. An Evaluation of the Greek Philosophers’ Ethical Theories
To begin with, we can say that Socrates and Plato, based on their ethical
theory, advocate a positive view of man. Their philosophy implies that human beings
who behave immorally do so out ignorance of the Good. All vice therefore is the
result of lack of knowledge, and that no person is willingly bad.
Obviously, being moral, virtuous and just is equated with being
knowledgeable of the Good, as it is claimed that those who know the right will act
rightly. In addition, morality is essentially linked to happiness. A just person is said to
have a proper balance among the rational, spirited, and appetitive aspects of his
soul. With such a well- ordered soul, the just person is said to be the truly happy
one—far happier that the wicked, whatever material advantages the unjust person
enjoys, and no matter what difficulties or poor status the moral person suffers. This
therefore answers the question, ”Why should be moral?” the beauty of this ethical
theory is that it inspires people to be moral as it teaches that morality is a recipe to
real happiness.
Against Plato’s form, the usual comment is that there could be no such thing
and that even if there were, it would be of no help in an ethical inquiry into the good
for human beings. Nonetheless, this very nonfigurative theory serves as one of the
pioneers in advocating the widely accepted moral realism or objectivism in metaethics. Among others, it teaches that there are moral truths whose truth is
independent of people’s thoughts and perceptions or society’s belief and customs.
Aristotle’s ethics therefore can be deemed better for it distinguishes ‘doing
right’ from ‘knowing what is right’—moral actions are consequences of having our
moral character properly developed, not of mere grasping the Good. Moreover it
encourages constantly performing moral actions as it considers morality as a lifetime
project.
By teaching to avoid both the excessive and the deficient. Aristotle’s moral
view is more ethically practical, particular and applicable. In a particular social
setting, it identifies the mean which should be adopted, and the extremes which
should be avoided. In self- expression, for instance, it teaches that one should be
truthful (mean) and avoid being boastful (excess) and meek (defect). In social
relations, it promotes being friendly, but not flattering and rude. In spending money,
one must thrifty, but not prodigal and tight.
Aristotle could also better explain accountability and responsibility. He does
not share Socrates’ view of bad deeds as mere ignorance of the Good. Instead, he
believes that when we do something we know how to be wrong, this involves a
temporary suppression of that knowledge. We are thus held responsible for our
actions. Furthermore, mistakes are anticipated in Aristotle’s view and acknowledged
as learning opportunities.
On the negative side, Aristotle’s doctrine of practical wisdom in determining
what is good for someone in a particular instance opens the door to bias, prejudice,
and subjectivism. Giving so much room to individual judgement, the doctrine could
be used to justify one’s every decision, regardless of its effects to other people and
society.
Besides, there is no universal agreement on what is moderate. Aristotle, for
example, considered humility a vice, while Christians deem it as a virtue. Likewise,
virtues can be construed very differently. Fairness, for instance, can hardly be
practically defined without disagreements.
Finally, Aristotle’s prescription on being moral, as it is deal and theoretical,
can be regarded as complex and tough. Being virtuous for him denotes doing what
is right person, at the right moment, in the appropriate amount, in the correct
manner, for the right reason.
5. Thomas Aquinas’ Ethics
Also called the Angelic Doctor and the Prince of Scholastics, Thomas
Aquinas (1225-1274) is an Italian Philosopher and Theologian who ranks among the
most important thinkers of the medieval time period.
In Ethics, Aquinas depends so heavily on Aristotle. Like the Greek
philosopher, Aquinas believes that all actions are directed towards ends and that
happiness is the final end. Aquinas thinks that happiness consists in activities in
accordance with virtue. But like Augustine, Aquinas declares that ultimate happiness
is not attainable in this life, for the happiness in the present life remains imperfect.
True happiness, then, is to be found only in the souls of the blessed in heaven or in
beatitude with God.
The Natural Law. Central also in Aquinas ethics is his typology of
laws. By the term ‘law,’ he means an ordinance of reason for the common
good, promulgated bysomeone who has care of the community. Aquinas’
laws should also be understoodin terms of “rules and measures” for peoples’
conduct and as “rational patterns or forms.” Obedience to the law is thus
viewed also as participating in or being in conformity with the pattern or
form.
For Aquinas, there are four primary types of law—the eternal, natural, human,
and divine.
The (1) eternal law refers to the rational plan of God by which all creation is
ordered. As God is the supreme ruler of everything, the rational pattern or form of
the universe that exist in his mind is the law that directs everything in the universe to
its appointed end. To this eternal law, everything in the universe is subject.
The (2) natural law is that aspect of the eternal law which is accessible to
human reason. Because mankind is part of the eternal order, there is a portion of
the eternal law that relates specifically to human conduct. This is the moral law, the
law or order to which people are subject by their nature ordering them to do good
and avoid evil.
The (3) human law refers to the positive laws. For natural law to be adhered
to, more exact and forceful provisions of human law are helpful. Because the natural
law is too broad to provide particular guidance, the human law precise, positive rules
of behavior are supposed to spell out what the natural law prescribes. Moral virtues
are also reinforced by and cultivated through these human laws. This human law
includes the civil and criminal laws, through only those formulated in the light of
practical reason and moral laws. Human laws that against natural law are not real
laws, and people not obliged to obey those unjust laws.
The (4) divine law serves to complement the other types of law. It is a law of
revelation, disclosed through sacred text or Scriptures and the Church which is also
directed toward man’s eternal end. Through concerned also with external aspects of
conduct, the divine law is more focused on how man can be inwardly holy and
eventually attain salvation.
Obviously, the type of law that is primarily significant in ethics is the natural
law. Part of this natural law is our inherent natural tendency to pursue the behavior
and goals appropriate to us.
According to Aquinas, this natural law is knowable by natural reason. He
enumerates three sets of these inclinations: (1) to survive, (2) to reproduce and
educate offspring, (3) to know the truth about God and to live peacefully in society.
These prescriptions to have families, love God and our neighbors, and pursue
knowledge are but rationally obvious precepts and simply stand to reason.
Grasping the prescriptions of the natural law and using our practical reason
are necessary in determining in which means will direct us to our ultimate end.
Accordingly, this concept helps us in judging some deeds as moral or otherwise.
The principle is simple: the closer an action approaches our end, the more moral it
is; the further it departs, the more immoral. Concerning sexuality, Thomas for
instance argues that its ends involves procreation within the bond of marriage and
unifying the married couple. From this principle, it is not hard to judge fornication
and adultery as immoral as both acts never serve to fulfill the abovementioned
purposes. Using the same principle, homosexual affairs, for Aquinas, would be
obviously unjust as well.
Features of Human
Actions. Aquinas evaluates human actions on the basis not only their
conformity to the natural law but also of their specific features. He
mentions at least three aspects through which the morality of an act can
be determined-–in terms of its (1) species, (2) accidents, (3) end.
The (1) species of an action refers to its kind. It is also called the object of
the action. Human deeds may be divided into kinds, some of which are good (e.g.
improving ones’ own property), some bad (e.g. theft), and some indifferent or neutral
(e.g. walking in the park). Aquinas holds that for an action to be moral, it must be
good or at least not bad in species.
The (2) accidents simple refer to the circumstances surrounding the action.
In ethically evaluating an action, the context in which the action takes place is also
considered because an act might be flawed through its circumstances. For instance,
while Christians are bound to profess one’s belief in God, there are certain situations
in which it is inappropriate or even offensive and distasteful to do so.
The (3) end stands for the agent’s intention. An act might be unjust through
its intention. To intend to direct oneself against a good is clearly immoral. Aquinas
gives murder, lying, and blasphemy as instantiations of this ill will. Correspondingly,
a bad intention can spoil a good act, like giving of alms out of vainglory.
Nonetheless, an intention, no matter how good it may be, cannot redeem a
bad act. For Aquinas, theft is intrinsically bad. Hence, stealing to give to the poor, as
in the case of Robin Hood, is an unjust act. In this view, converting to a particular
religion, say Christianity, merely for material gains is an unjust act.
Aquinas ethical theory states that for an action to be moral, the kind it
belongs to must not be bad, the circumstances must be appropriate, and the
intention must be virtuous.
Happiness, Moral Virtues and Theological Virtues. Aquinas believes
that all actions are directed towards ends and that happiness is the final end.
He also thinksthat happiness is not equated with pleasure, material
possessions, honor, or sensual good, but consists in activities in accordance
with virtue. A person needs moral character cultivated through the habits of
choice to realize real happiness.
Aquinas defines virtue as “a good habit bearing on activity” or a good faculty
habit. Habits are firm dispositions or “hard to eradicate” qualities that dispose us to
act in a particular manner. Notice that all habits are virtue, but only those that incline
us towards our good or end.
Aquinas differentiates between acquired and infused habits. The
autonomous will of a person plays a major role in acquired habits as they involve
consistent deliberate effort to do an act tome and again and despite obstructions.
The infused virtues, on the other hand, are independent of this process as they are
directly instilled by God in our faculties. These virtues are thus divine gifts which
elevate the activities of those who received them.
Aquinas mentions at least two kinds of infused virtue—the (1) moral and the
(2) theological. Moral virtues have as their object not God himself, but activities that
are less virtuous and inferior to the final end. To this kind belong the four basic
virtues—(a) prudence, (b) fortitude, (c) temperance, and (d) justice.
The theological virtues, on the other hand, are concerned directly with God.
They provide us with true knowledge and desire of God and of His will. The virtues
of (1) faith, (2) hope and (3) love serve to attune us to our final end, which is God
Himself. Faith make us recognize and believe in a true God, hope makes us wish to
be with Him, and love makes us desire and adore Him. Unlike Aristotle’s virtues,
Christian virtues are not applications of the golden mean between extremes. We
ought to exercise these virtues according to what God demands of us and according
to our capacity as individuals.
Aquinas also treats the theological virtues in terms of the vices and sins
which respectively conflict with them. The virtue of faith has as its counterpart the
sins of unbelief, heresy, and apostasy; the virtue of hope, the sin of despair and
presumption; and the virtue of charity or love, the sins of hatred, envy, discord, and
sedition.
6. An Analysis of Thomistic Ethics
One of Aquinas’ accomplishments in Ethics is being able to mention, as much
as possible, all of the things as matter in ethical evaluation of actions. He holds that
the goodness or badness of an action lies in the interior act of will, in the external
bodily act, in the very nature of the act, and even in its consequences. Moreover, he
avers that what matters in morality is not only what one actually does but also his
intention in doing the act.
Being relatively complex but generally sensible, Thomistic ethics does not fall
into just one neat contemporary category of moral theory. But not giving emphasis
on the result on actions in his so—called features of actions, we can say that he is
more of a deontologist or Kantian than a utilitarian. Though his basic tenet that
actions must be directed to what is good somehow relates his theory to utilitarianism
and consequentialism in general. By advocating the roles played by virtues in
morality, Aquinas, like Aristotle, is a virtue ethicist.
But while Aquinas is in many ways Aristotlelian, he rejects the belief normally
ascribed to Aristotle that there are no no universally true general principles of
morality. Aquinas’ doctrine of natural law categorically discards wholesale
particularism.
Because of his notion of the natural law, we can say that Aquinas is definitely
against some contemporary moral philosophies. Sure enough, the doctrine is
incompatible with nihilism or the view that denies the existence of values. It is also
irreconcilable with relativism and conventionalism which state that values are
completely relative to one’s culture or determined completely by mere convention.
Because Aquinas believes that some basic principles about morality are in fact
knowable by all, he is thus against absolute skepticism about value.
Thomistic ethics is comparatively applicable. Unsurprisingly, we can find
many similarities between Aquinas’ moral philosophy and that of his co-theologian
Augustine. (To be acquinted with Augustine’s ethical theory, you may read the
Appendix C: Augustine’s Moral Philosophy” of this book.) Though to a large extent,
Aquinas departs from the Augustinian view of the world as sin-laden and disordered.
He instead promotes Aristotle’s positive depictions of the world as rational, humane,
and ordered. Compared to Augustine, Aquinas is more inclined to view earthly
happiness as also desirable, but insofar as those present goods are directed toward
and subordinated to the realization of everlasting ones in heaven.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University – Trece Martires City
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 10, Week 16
Topic
: Kantian Rights Theory
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Kantian Ethics
An analysis of Kantian ethics
Rights theory
Legal versus moral rights
Immanuel Kant
-is a German thinker regarded by many as the most significant philosopher in the
modern era. His major contributions to ethics can be found in his two works: The
foundations of the Methaphysics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason.
1. Kantian Ethics
Kant categorically rejects that ethical judgements are based on feelings. For
him, feelings even serve as obstructions to our discernment of right and wrong. His
ethical theory instead bases moral judgements on reason alone. Reason, for him, is
what deems an action ethical or otherwise.
Good Will
Kant believes that when we wish to determine the moral status of an action,
we consult reason. An act either accords with reason or it does not. If it accords with
reason, we must do it, if not, we must avoid it. For him, it is the Good will which is the
highest good and the condition of all other goods. Kant does not agree with many
ethicists that happiness is the summum bonum or the highest good. Happiness, for
him, can be corrupting and may be worthless or even positively evil when not
combined with a good will.
Inclinations
Refers to the feeling that pushes us to select a particular option or make a
particular decision. It is our liking or tendency to do, favor, or want something. A duty
or obligation on the other hand, is that which we ought to do despite our inclination or
taste’ to do otherwise.
Normally, people perform the act which please them or which they desire to on
a particular circumstances. For Kant, these actions determined by wishes, passions,
appetites, desires, and the like have no oral worth. He believes that we act morally
only when we restrain our feelings and inclinations and do that which we are obliged
to do. Morality, as Kant sees it, is essentially connected with duties and obligations.
Categorical imperative
What we have discussed so far is Kant’s emphasis on the ethical relevance of
goodwill and acting from a sense of duty.
To distinguish ‘actions on impulse’, lets provide some illustrations. Suppose a
man wants to financially help a certain lady who is in need, merely because he likes
her personally, and he might not want to give the same assistance to another woman
in an exactly similar situation because he does not happen to like her. This is acting
on impulse and not done for a reason or on any principle or maxim.
Two classes of Maxim
 Imperative – should be understood as a command or reason.
 Hypothetical – entails being true only under some conditions, and therefore not
universally true or valid.
Universalizability
“Act only on that maxim trough which you can at the same time will that it should
become a universal Law.” In other words, a person ought always to behave as if his
course of conduct were to become a universal code of behavior. Hence, in considering
to act in a particular manner, a person must ask himself, “How would this action
appear if it were to become a universal rule?” Can reason will it become a general
rule for all rational agents to follow?”
End-in-itself
‘So act as to us humanity, both in your own person and in the person of every
other, always at the same time as an end, never simply as means. This rendition
teaches, among other things to respect persons as ends in themselves and not only
as means or instruments to further self-interest. This involves acknowledging the
person as rational being with goals and treating him with dignity.
An Analysis of Kantian Ethics
In general however, Kant contributes much to the study of morality. It affirms
our consciousness of the moral law inherent to our practical reason. Kant defines
human dignity as resting on the attainment of moral character, and thus not on things
like progress and scientific advances.
Rights Theory
In law, Immanuel Kant proposed the principle of rights. He saw a distinctive
correlation, yet difference, between the intent of the law and the enforcement of law.
For Kant, governments were entrusted with the capacity to create laws by the citizens
they governed in exchange for protection, thus, governments have no right to disrupt
that trust by making laws with cruel intent against the freedom that citizens had been
promised.
Right Based Ethics
Is a broad moral theory in which Kant’s principle of rights theory is included.
The concept of rights based ethics is that ‘there are some rights, both positive and
negative, that all humans have based only on the fact that they are human. These
rights can be natural or conventional. That is, natural rights are those that are moral
while conventional are those created by humans and reflect society’s values.
Examples of Right Based Ethic System
 The right to life
 The right to liberty
 The right to pursue happiness
 The right to a jury trial
 The right to a lawyer
 The right to freely practice a religion of choice
 The right to express ideas or opinions with freedom as an individual
 The right of an individuals or organization s to express opinions or share
information freely in written medium.
 The right to come together and meet in order to achieve goals
 The right to be informed of what law has been broken if arrested
 The right to call witnesses to speak on ones behalf if accused of a crime
 The right of a person to be treated with respect and dignity even after been
found guilty of a crime
 The right to freely live and travel within the country
 The right t work
 The right to marry
 The right to bear a children
 The right to free education
 The right to join any peaceful parties or groups of choice
 The right to be free from slavery
 The right not to be tortured
 The right to be treated as equal to others
 The right to be considered to be innocent until proven guilty
 The right to personal privacy
 The right to own property
Legal vs. Moral Rights
What is legal is not always moral. And sometimes, what is moral is not
necessarily legal in a particular way. These principles prove, among other things, that
being moral and being legal may be practically related to but not one and the same.
Legal rights denote all the rights found within existing legal codes. It does not
exist prior to its passing into law and the limits of its validity are set by the jurisdiction
of the body which passed its legislation. An example of a legal right would be the right
of an Englishman’s daughter to receive an adequate education, as enshrined within
the United Kingdom’s Education Act of 1944.
Are rights that ‘exist prior to and independently from their legal counterparts.
The existence and validity of a moral right is not deemed to be dependent upon the
actions of jurists and legislators.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University – Trece Martires City
Chapter/Week No. : Chapter 11, Week 17
Topic
: Utilitarianism
Objective
: After the completion of the chapter, students will be able to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Utilitarianism explained
Origins and nature of the theory
An analysis of Utilitarianism
Business fascination with utilitarianism
Utilitarianism
-Latin term utilis which means useful
Main Proponent of Utilitarianism
-Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
Utilitarianism
-Also known as a Consequentialist Theory
A subclass of Teleological Moral Theory
-Teleological ethical system judges the rightness of an act in terms of external goal or
purpose.
-Consequentialist ethics proposes that actions, rules, or policies should be ethically
measured and evaluated by their consequences, not by the intentions or motives of the
agent.
Principle of Utility
States that an action is right in so far as its
tends to produce the greatest happiness for
the greatest number
 Act Utilitarianism
- Applied directly to every alternative act in a situation of choice.
 Rule Utilitarianism
- Used to decide the validity of rules of conduct.
Origins and Nature of the Theory
 Jeremy Benthem
 Founded the doctrine of utilitarianism
 Proposed the primary form of utilitarianism in his Introduction to the Principles of
Morals and Legislation.
 He explained ‘utility’ means that property in any object, whereby it tends to
produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness or to prevent the
happening of mischief, pain, evil or unhappiness.
Principle of Utility
Jeremy Benthem
Pleasure
Pain
 Pleasure and Pain are two sovereign masters under which nature has placed
mankind
 Four Sanctions or Sources of Pleasure
 Physical, Moral, Religious, Political
He created a detailed method, the ‘hedonic calculus’ to calculate the quantitative
worth of pleasure
7 Criteria that allow one to qualify the amount of pleasure or pain an action brings
about:
1. Intensity
2. Duration
3. Certainty
4. Propinquity
5. Fecundity
6. Purity
7. Extent to which pleasure and pain are shared among the greatest number of
people
In general, utilitarianism determines the moral value of an act by calculating the sum of
pleasure it caused, and the amount of pain generated.
John Stuart Mill
 Most famous proponent of utilitarianism after Bentham.
 He made the doctrine the subject of his philosophical treatise (utilitarianism) published
in 1863.
 He proposed two central aspects.
- He reject the purely quantitative treatment of the principle of utility
- He introduces the so called ‘secondary principle’
 He distinguished between higher and lower pleasures.
 Lower pleasures or those which animals, too, can experience, such as those from
food, drink, and sex.
 Higher pleasures means intellectual, which includes artistic, political and even spiritual
pleasures.
Advantage in subscribing to Utilitarianism
 It presents a strong sense of purpose
 It promotes a world with more happiness
 It articulates the basic human nature feelings
 It helps with making tough decisions
Weaknesses of Utilitarian Theory in ethics
 It is disputable on whether who can decide good or bad
 It prevents us to make speculations about future
 It promotes favouritism
 It can lead to missed opportunities
Consequentialist ethics
⚫ proposes that actions, rules, or policies
should be ethically measured and evaluated
by their consequences, not by the intentions
or motives of the agent.
⚫ Believe that there is no class of actions
which must be ruled out in advance
independent of their consequences.
Absolutist ethical theory
Believe in a natural law or in natural
rights which render some acts as
immoral.
Chapter Reference(s):
De Guzman, Jens Micah (2017). Ethics: principle of ethical behavior in modern
society. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City
Prepared by:
DR. RONNIE B. DE PAZ
Instructor
Cavite State University – General Trias City