Ethics Is a branch of philosophy that studies morality or the rightness or wrongness of human conduct. Ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos which means character, custom, or manners. Ethical questions: • What is the good and the bad? • Who is a moral person? • What are the virtues of a human being? • What makes an act right? • Rules refer to explicit or understood regulations or principles governing conduct within a specific activity or sphere dictates what is allowed or not allowed in a particular situation • What would happen if there are no rules in a specific society? 1. Rules protect social beings by regulating behavior -rules limit behavior by imposing consequences to those who will violate them - to gain acceptance in a society -fear to be ostracize, imprisonment Ethics centers on norms of human conduct e.g. panopticon, cctv. Morality Speaks of a code or system of behavior in regards to standards of right or wrong behavior. Morality and ethics are oftentimes used interchangeably but both carry the concept of moral standards or rules with regard to behavior. Are you a moral person? 2. Rules help to guarantee each person certain rights and freedom -Rules are framework for society -nation of laws Constitution -checks and balance of power between government and its people • Why do you do good things? -grants freedom and protection. • Are humans by nature good or evil? • Are humans really altruistic? 3. Rules produce a sense of justice among social beings …Is being good the end to itself? What influences the concept of morality? • Religion • Culture • Social contract to live in harmony • Evolutionary trait to survive (for social cohesion) • empathy • Others? -prevents exploitation and domination of the strong/privilege Rules provide justice richest and powerful people have limitations that they need to abide like the rest Justice- giving what is due. Importance of rules to human beings 4. Rules are essential for a healthy economic system It ensure product safety, employee safety, and product quality Regulate monopolies and competitiveness • Not all Rules are Moral Rules and not all Standards are Moral Standards (good vs. bad) bodies or persons for they are socially constructed Moral Standards Moral standards cannot be nullified by the decisions of particular authoritative body These are moral values and moral principles that people have for kinds of actions they believe are morally right/acceptable and wrong/unacceptable. Non-moral standards Rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical considerations they are not necessarily linked to morality or lack ethical sense E.g. rules of etiquette, fashion standards, games, house rules Concept of superiority and achieve social reality apart from the individual Moral Standards have the trait of universalizability- everyone should live up to relevantly in the same situation e.g. murder is a criminal offense, stealing is wrong Consistency Religious rules, some traditions, legal statues (laws and ordinances) are technically non-moral though may be ethically relevant depending on the context. Moral Standards are based on impartial consideration- it goes beyond certain personal interests in which each person’s interests are impartially counted as equal and giving equal consideration to the interests of all concerned parties Distinctions Impartiality- free of bias or prejudice A. Moral Standards involve serious wrong or significant benefits E.g. observance of laws-objectivity Example: lying, deception, killing Compared to non-moral standards for example; violating rules in sports does not necessarily affect one’s life or wellbeing. B. Moral Standards ought to be preferred to other values and non-moral standards Moral Standards has hegemonic authority and topmost priority there is the Moral Obligation and should take precedence over aesthetic, prudential, and legal reasons e.g. if laws implemented are immoral, it is the people’s moral duty to exercise civil disobedience Dilemma and moral dilemma Dilemma- refers to a situation in which a tough choice has to be made between two or more options, especially more or less equally undesirable ones, not all dilemmas are moral dilemmas Moral/ Ethical Dilemmas- are situations in which a difficult choice has to be made between 2 courses of action, either of which entails transgressing a moral principle. In short, it involves conflicts between moral requirements. Key Features of moral dilemma E.g. animal testing for makeup, fashion 1. the agent is required to do each of two (or more) actions; Moral Standards are not established by authority figures- moral standards are not invented, formed, or generated by authoritative 2. the agent can do each of the actions; but cannot do both or all the actions Often condemned to a moral failure, no matter what he does, he will do something wrong, or fail to do something that he ought to do. Three levels of moral dilemma These qualities are believed to confer a full and equal moral status to those that possess them as these beings are the only ones capable of achieving certain values and goods. 1. Personal Dilemmas- are those experienced and resolved on the personal level. These qualities are deserve full and equal moral status. In short, these are only exclusive to humans. Since many ethical decisions are personally made, many, if not most of, moral dilemmas fall under, or boil down to this level. E.g. appreciation of art, literature, music that come with deep personal relationships 2. Organizational Dilemmas- refer to ethical cases encountered and resolved by social organizations. This category includes moral dilemmas in business, medical field, and public sector. E.g. healthcare orgs- euthanasia, right to die Business-related dilemmas- employee rights, harassment, misleading advertising, job discrimination, labor unions Public government- accepting gifs, objectivity, transparency, agenda setting Structural Dilemmas- refer to cases involving network of institutions and operative theoretical paradigm. As they usually encompass multisectoral institutions and organizations, they may be large in scope and extent than organizational dilemmas. e.g. prices of medicine in the Philippines (conflict between the buyers and involved researchers) Political dynasties Only human beings can be ethical -Human have the ability to select his actions and is not led by blind instinct - capable of self-respect through empathy b. Only humans can act morally or immorally Only beings that can act morally or immorally can sacrifice their interests for the sake of others Other species do things out of instinct c. Only human beings are part of the moral community The so-called moral community is not defined in terms of the intrinsic properties that beings have, but rather in terms of the essential social relations that exist between or among beings. Distinctively, only human beings can possess or practice values such as love, honor, social relationships, forgiveness, compassion, and altruism. Only human beings can communicate with each other in truly meaningful ways, and can form deep personal relationships with each other (showing concern) One basic tenet in ethics is the belief that only human beings can be truly ethical. Most philosophers hold that unlike animals, human beings possess some traits that make it possible for them to be moral. Only humans has the ability to participate in collective cognition a. Only human being are rational, autonomous, and self-conscious “Moral judgments must be backed by sound reasoning and that morality requires the Minimum requirement for morality: reason and impartiality impartial consideration of all parties involve” (Rachels, 1941) Reason and Impartiality Reason as a requirement for morality entails that human feelings may be important in ethical decisions, but they ought to be guided by reason. It helps us to evaluate our feelings and intuitions Impartiality known as evenhandedness or fairmindedness involves the idea that each individual’s interests and point of view are equally important. Decisions must be based on objective criteria rather than on the basis of bias, prejudice, or preferring the benefit to one person over another for improper reasons
