MODULE IN GEC 106- ETHICS

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this instructional material is to help students live a principled existence in their
daily life and not just about having to know meanings of words. Knowledge and good definitions
are good for better understanding but leading a life based on what is right and acceptable is
another. Hence, this instructional material aims at making students in the general education
program develop a critical attitude and mind-set that would assist them in making rightful
choices and righteous decisions beneficial not only for themselves but equally considerate of
others.

The material is inspired by the book of James Rachels, The Elements of Moral
Philosophy, being the textbook used in the preparation and conceptualization by the Commission
on Higher Education (CHED) program in Ethics as mentioned by Professor Fides Bernardo
Bitanga, the trainer for Ethics teachers of the General Education Program in English or the
Modified CHED Second Generation GE Faculty Training.

This instructional material delves on how to apply ethics in daily life, a few concepts on
which ethics or morality is anchored. It highlights the four most employed ethical frameworks
by most Filipinos according to a survey undertaken by CHED which include the Utilitarianism,
Kant’s Ethics, Virtue Ethics and the Natural Law Ethics. Rawls’s Theory on Justice as Fairness
was added due to its practical contribution and increasing popularity. It is hoped that the students
will be able to acquire a better understanding of these frameworks and how they are applied in
daily life. A critical analysis of the framework will allow also the students to be able to know
their strengths and weaknesses, thereby giving them the opportunity to make use of the more
positive aspects of the different frameworks and avoiding their pitfalls.

Also, the material hopes to develop a critical mind about current issues affecting them.
These include the issues on globalization, taxation, filinnials and religion. These topics are
deemed necessary to help students understand their mechanisms and manage their life better
and live a more fruitful and meaningful life.

As a matter of pedagogical approach, this instructional material provides activities to

allow students more opportunities to share what they know about the different topics and learn
from one another aside from the inputs by their respective teachers. With this method, it provides
also an occasion for teachers to be aware of common student concerns and to address them
whenever possible and necessary.

It must be noted that this instructional material does not delve much on the definition
of terms like what other references in moral philosophy or ethics as they are oftentimes used
interchangeably but each has its specific meaning. The same is also true to other terminologies
relative to the discipline in focus.

The presentation of contents is contextualized among Filipinos as elaborated by Professor

Bitanga during the seminar for teacher in ethics except those cited from other few sources.
UNIT I
TOPIC I: Moral and Non-Moral Problems

Introduction
People encounter various problems every day, some are simple, some are complex. In all
aspects of life, things are not always simple. From the time one wakes up in the morning until
practically bedtime, one may be preoccupied with something to be done or about things that are
undone. Not everything is foreseeable. There are always things that are missing; some others
need immediate fixing, someone else getting a flat tire just before leaving for work and many
more situations of the same type. We are not always ready and we cannot foresee everything.
Something, somewhere, somehow is not alright. There are problems or situations that call for
moral or ethical valuation or judgment. It may be about contemplating whether or not to tell a
teacher about a cheating incident during an examination. As a student, a problem may be about
what to do having known that she is pregnant. Should she reveal to her parents about it? What
could her parents’ reaction be?

Should a student lie to his/her professors for not having been in class very often for no
reason at all? Must one spread rumors using the social media about someone he/she hates since
his/her identity can remain unknown and can inflict more pain and moral damage on the person?
Is suicide a better solution to end all the troubles? There can be other serious problems that
anyone is going through and the question is what to do in these difficult circumstances.

Distinguishing between a moral problem and non- moral problem is the aim of this
topic. When do you say a problem pertains to what is right or wrong or when it is simply a
matter of fact?

Learning Outcomes

1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems

2. Describe what a moral experience is as it happens in different levels of human
experience.

Activating Prior Learning

In a group of 5, list down rules in your school, at home, in your community or
organization. Evaluate the rules by responding to the following questions:

a. Which of the rules do you find constricting (in the sense of restricting)? Why?
 b. Why are rules important to social beings.
Try these:

In school, you may come up with the rules in the school relative to the wearing of school
uniforms, ID’s and many more which you believe are constricting or restricting.

At home, you may come up with rules which you believe curtail your freedom. These
rules may include curfew time imposed by your parents, table manners, requiring evening
prayers, telling the truth, respect for each member of the family, eating together or that the last
one to finish eating will have to fix the table, etc.

In the community, you may discuss rules that may involve anti-littering, segregation of
garbage, leashing pets, curfew time, rules restricting public disturbance and gambling, rules
prohibiting driving without license, etc.

Presentation of Contents

Distinction between Moral and Non-Moral Problems

In the context of the discussion about constricting rules, there are rules that are
formulated by authorities for the common good or for improvement but are not moral precepts.
As such, they are clearer when they are expressed in the imperative mood. They are constricting
rules but are not moral concerns and hence, are classified as non-moral rules.

When does a rule become a moral problem or enter the domain of morality? It can be
stated that a rule becomes a moral rule if it violates certain standards. For instance, a rule may be
stated in the following terms: HIV infected individuals will be treated with disdain and are not
allowed to join any public forum. Such rule violates the inherent human dignity and the right of
an individual to be part of the larger society. This type of rule implies moral valuation. The
rightness or the wrongness of the rule is put into question. Should people who are victims of the
curse of the virus be treated in such a manner? Is isolating them the appropriate way of dealing
with them. Do human dignity and the right of the human person end when one gets contaminated
with the virus? Your response to this can be further clarified by knowing the different
kinds of valuations.

Kinds of Valuations that do not imply Moral Judgment or are not part of Ethics

1. Aesthetic Valuation. Some things are considered good or bad because of their appeal
to the senses. It is possible that one finds the food served by the waiter as good or bad
depending on whether the taste buds approve or disapprove them. Or, one might
consider a painting good because it is pleasing to the eyes when looking at it. Or,
someone could not appreciate a piece of music because it disturbs and is irritating to
one’s tympanic membrane and is therefore judged to be bad. These valuations or
judgments require the sense of approval or disapproval depending on whether or not
 they have good appeal to the senses. But they are not valuations in the realm of ethics.
These are known as aesthetic valuations.
Quite a number of times people use this type of valuation in different situations.
People make judgments but they have nothing to do with morality or ethics. It is
important that people know that they are not making a judgment that has moral
implication but simply a manner of making an appreciation relative to their senses.

Technical Valuations. Some things are considered right or wrong depending on

whether or not the proper manner of doing them has been respected. This type of
valuation is within the realm of technical valuation. When baking a cake, one must
see to it that the right procedure and right amount of ingredients are respected. If they
have been respected, chances are the result of the effort in baking will be good. If not
respected, the cake might taste bad. In the same manner, as a driver, most likely,
passengers will be anxious if the driver does not execute the proper rules of driving.
Driving too fast or sudden stops will make passengers uncomfortable and fear an
eminent danger. We say that the driver is either a good or a bad driver. These
examples are not; however, properly considered within the realm of ethics but are
proper to technical knowledge and skills.

2. Etiquette. People approve or may disapprove about certain ways of doing. For
example, inside a library, I see to it that I do not make noise because people inside
need to concentrate on their studies. Or, I greet my teachers when I happen to meet
them along the school corridor. Knocking at the door before entering an office is
perceived to be the proper manner. These ways of doing are judged to be the proper
observation of certain standards or etiquette but are not judged according to ethical
standards. Individuals who demonstrate the proper etiquettes are appreciated and
those who lack them are not. However, there is a need to properly distinguish what is
in the realm of etiquette and one which is beyond this realm. It is a good
demonstration of a good etiquette when offering a seat to an elderly inside a bus for
the person to feel more comfortable and safer but it would be utterly deplorable if you
push an elderly out of the bus while it is in motion (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018).

3. Acts of Man versus Human Acts. The distinction between acts of man versus
human acts will further help to consider certain activities that absolutely imply no
coloration of ethical concern and one which is clearly within the domain of morality.
The acts of man refers to the involuntary activities that are necessary to sustain
human life, like in the case of breathing, the continuous beating of the heart and
involuntary movements of the intestines and lungs. They are crucial activities that
sustain life and without them, life ceases to exist. Other than that, other natural acts
like speaking, hearing, eating and walking are also natural acts but have no moral
implication as such.

On the other hand, helping someone in need and other gestures that relieve people
from their uncomfortable or disadvantaged experience or from their sufferings,
making people suffer and placing them in difficult situation are human acts.
Understandably, the activities categorized as acts of man carry no ethical valuation.
 But those that fall under the category of human acts call for moral or ethical
considerations.

After the discussion on the different categories and situations that do not enter the
category of moral valuation, let us now consider situations and issues which call for
moral valuation or fall under the realm of morality or ethics. Below are two situations
in which moral valuations are called upon.

Valuations that Involve Moral or Ethical Valuations

1. Moral problems according to Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) “involve valuations that belong to
the sphere of human actions characterized by certain gravity and concern the well-being
or human life itself.” Pre-meditating or making a plan how to kill another is an act that
qualifies under moral problems. Or, deciding whether to allow passive euthanasia to
happen is a decision with gravity and concerns the well-being or human life itself. These
and other acts relative to one’s well-being and the well-being of others involve ethical or
moral valuations. Furthermore, an act may not directly be an affront to human life but its
consequences are clearly indicative of serious threat. Open pit mining is certainly an
activity that is intended to benefit people involved in it. However, it is a system that
seriously damage nature resulting to environmental catastrophe beyond imagination
affecting the lives of people living in the vicinity. In fact, it might even result to more
damages resulting to natural imbalance with greater impact affecting an entire region and
beyond.

2. Something is about moral problem when it violates certain standards. Example, cultural
practices and values are perceived as standards of behaviour. Unrespectful attitudes are
judged as wrong. Among Filipinos, a very strong cultural element is respect to the
elderly. Anyone who treats the elderly with respect is considered a person of excellent
moral upbringing. However, anyone who treats the elderly with disdain is unethical. It is
ethically right to respect the elderly and ethically wrong to disrespect them.

A religious belief may also qualify as a standard of this nature. The religious conviction
that it is a call to assist someone in need is a moral demand and maybe a moral imperative.
Thousands of people and maybe more are deeply motivated by such conviction that it is an
ethical obligation to help others who are in need. People do not hesitate to give their all-out
support and donate whatever they can to victims of devastating natural calamities. Imagine what
happened to Tacloban and other events that triggered so much anguish and loss of lives. People
moved by their compassion and religious commitment offered whatever they could without a
second thought to save lives and ease the effect of almost annihilating circumstances.

In the same vein of ideas, an act is a moral problem if it violates certain moral
standards. The examples below of moral standards will clarify this perspective.

a. “That we should not use people.”

b. “That we should not kill one person to save another.”
c. “That every life is sacred.”
 d. “That it is wrong to discriminate against the handicapped” (Rachels, 2003)
These moral rules or standards imply that these help us live a morally acceptable
fashion. Their violation would be judged as morally or ethically wrong or incorrect. There are
other standards and principles of these kind. They are considered standards by which we pattern
our life and tell us whether we are morally upright or unethical in the way we live. These
standards are particularly valuable and make sense when we experience extreme difficulty and
the easier way out is their violation.

In any culture and as a way of life, most of us agree that honesty is the best policy. It is
expected that in any situation one should always be honest. One’s value of honesty is especially
challenged when one is in a difficult situation like that of deprivation. At this moment, a person
is tempted to give up honesty if it would become a way out of the situation of deprivation. I
might consider stealing as an option knowing that it will relieve me from my discomfort and
respond to certain needs. Before acting however on such alternative, the individual makes a
thorough consideration how the act can possibly affect the people who would be victim or
victims of the act and what it implies to the individual himself or herself. Is the act worth
considering? Are there other alternatives that are better than stealing and will not negatively
affect others or make them suffer? Doing acts that violate moral rules and in broader sense
principles are not easily acted upon because they call for moral judgment and people know they
are violating important principles.

Activity

In the same group, discuss why only human beings can be ethical.

Why only human beings can be ethical?

From St. Thomas Aquinas point of view, the human being is ethical because the human
person has the rational soul. If plants according to him have the vegetative soul and animals have
sentient soul, only human beings have the rational soul, the highest form of soul. Plants may
have the capacity to feel but they are incapable of responding being unable to move and express
their feelings. Animals may have more than what plants possess and are capable of movements
but possess no capacity for understanding. They have limited capacity and cannot exercise
judgement. Rationality which individuals or human beings possess allows them to be aware of
their situation and their environment. Their consciousness and their ability to think make them
capable of making judgment. These capacities allow them to foresee the consequences of their
actions and make a judgment about the rightness or wrongness of their actions. Only human
beings have this capacity. Hence, according to St. Thomas, we can ascribe morality only to
human beings.

Also, the ethical assumptions; namely, free will and reason are important bases that
determine why only human beings can be ethical. Reason or rationality and freedom are
important elements to determine whether actions are within the realm of morality or not. For
without such assumptions no amount or degree of ethical valuation can be ascribed to an act.
Only human beings have them, which make them the only ethical beings. (This will be further
discussed in the topic dealing specifically with the moral assumptions.) We also add the element
of conscience or the inner voice that tells one about the rightness or wrongness of an act. It is an
aspect only true to human beings. Conscience tells us whether or not we did what we ought to do
and whether we have done the right thing or the opposite. It makes one happy or comfortable
when he or she knows the right thing was done and feels guilty or suffers from deep sense of
remorse knowing that what was wrong has been committed. The three; reason, freedom and
conscience altogether determine therefore why only human beings can be ethical.

Another authority explains that human beings have rules, principles, desires (the desire to
do what is good), consciousness, sensitivity to higher order (ability to recognize God) and
AKRASIA (Greek word for courage). AKRASIA or courage is ability. As ability it has a
double meaning. Someone can have the ability to do something unacceptable or otherwise it also
signifies ability to do something acceptable. Doing something moral or ethical, or immoral or
unethical depends on one’s courage to do it. Whether acceptable or unacceptable, it requires the
persistence of doing it. When one insists on doing something, it requires the courage to do it.

What is moral experience and how moral rule is born?

Professor Bitanga explains how moral rule is born. For instance, you found a wallet that
contains 5,000 pesos and an ATM card with the pin number as well! Something inside tells you
to get it but at the same time you remember the prohibition; “Thou shall not steal.” That is a
moral experience and where moral rule is born. It calls for judgment.

Summary

Moral rule constitutes a moral situation that calls for or requires moral judgment to do
good or the opposite. This knowledge of what constitute moral problems as well as the
parameters to identify them is significant so that individuals are guided when they make
decisions. By that, one considers with seriousness their plans before acting, considering their
consequences and the principles that can possibly be violated by the acts. It is important because
individuals whose actions imply moral valuations also imply moral responsibilities. Therefore,
one cannot just ignore actions that carry with them important ethical implications.

It is probably the mistake of many who confuse moral actions with those without. If
people think that whatever actions they do are just any other action, there is a danger of ignoring
their actual responsibility over the action. Without having to make distinction between those
morally loaded and those that carry no moral significance, people make instant decisions and act
instinctively knowing that they have no responsibility over them. If we think in this manner, we
lose the chance to be better individuals and become a “neighbor” to others. With such thinking,
we permit ourselves to make promises without the intention of fulfilling them. Deceiving others
will make no difference at all.
 Assessment

Identify the items below as non-moral (NM) (has nothing to do with morality) or moral
(M). Write your answer on the space before the item.

_______ 1. Changing landmark position in the evening.

_______2. No children below ten years old are allowed.
_______3. Abort fetuses with severe deformation.
_______4. Quarreling children.
_______5. Throwing of garbage in the river.
_______6. Criticizing someone in the social media.
_______7. No leashing of animals.
_______8. Telling someone jokingly that her parents had a serious accident.
_______9. Receiving gifts from your clients.
_______10. Not observing silence inside the library.

Reflection

Do I make decisions and do certain acts without assuming responsibility over them? Do I
make decisions without reflecting first on their possible consequences? Am I not impulsive in
my actions?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_________
TOPIC II: Moral Dilemma
Introduction
It is expected that you have a clear grasp now of what is moral and non-
moral valuation. Also the differences of human acts and acts of man.

Now, the topic on moral dilemma is of significance. People especially the youth are
easily perturbed when they are confronted to make choices in their life. They do not know how
to deal with their problems and make choices to solve them. Their reaction is maybe to ignore a
pressing problem for lack of knowledge or skill to solve it, or that they just allow the problem to
persist which at the end of the day becomes more complicated and therefore more difficult to
solve.

Technology has made life very easy. Our life has been taken over by the invention of
instant technology. You name it; instant food, instant clothing, instant domicile, instant
information and people are getting married instantly without having to know much about their
future partner. This instant thing has psychologically made a deep imprint in the mind and
attitudes of people. People avoid what is complicated and those that demand significant effort
and anything that takes time. In fact, people avoid reading that takes time and thinking requiring
patience and energy on their part. Everybody prefers whatever is easily available and in unison
with the Frenchman they can say: Voila! Or, in Spain, Presto! People want to be like the
magician who makes things appear even in the most unusual and unexpected ways.

The problem; however, with this system is that it doesn’t work all the time. There are
more complicated matters that require deliberation and hard work to deal with them. At this time,
the instant choices or solutions do not apply anymore. The too easy life we live do not prepare us
to face the more complex situations. Too often, we live with unresolved problems and
undetermined solutions. Hence, the topic on moral dilemmas can help people decipher and make
choices.

Learning Outcome

1. Explain moral dilemma;

2. Demonstrate decision making in moral dilemma;
3. Perform the series of making choices in moral dilemma; and

Activating Prior Learning

A student gets a warning from parents that getting into a relationship and getting pregnant
while studying will mean discontinuance of all support to continue her studies. Despite such
warnings and admonitions, the student disobeyed and is now two months pregnant. What is she
going to do? She is afraid to tell her parents about her situation otherwise her parents will tell her
to stop studying. But she wants to finish her studies.

The predicament is, what to do in such a case? Will she resort to abortion and continue
her studies, or, tell her parents about her present status seeing the evil of abortion and continue
her pregnancy but stop schooling? What is a good alternative to her problem?

Instructions. You are given 10 to 15 minutes to be able to come up with a solution to

the question of what should be the right thing to do. Continue the pregnancy and stop schooling
or, abort the baby and continue her studies? You may choose your partner or do it with a T-
chart for your guide.

Presentation of Contents
Moral dilemmas are not rare. We often experience making choices in the face of
conflicting situations. Others are courageous to make up their mind and face their problems.
Many; however, are stuck and cannot make proper decisions. Or, they remain undecided and
allow others to make decisions for them. Let us face it, quite a number of students are not ready
to decide. Decision making is an everyday challenge that people make in their life but there are
no classes to teach about making decisions.

What is a moral dilemma? Moral dilemma is a situation of conflict. This occurs when two
moral points are in conflict and are confused. Or, it is a “more complicated situation wherein one
is torn between choosing one of two goods and choosing between the lesser of two evils… We
have a moral dilemma when there are a number of possible actions and there are compelling
ethical reasons for the various choices” but only one can be given preference and set aside all the
rest (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018). In the first case where one has to choose between two goods, let us
study the case of Miss X who is offered a good paying job locally. However, she has always
dreamt of working abroad. She fears however that working abroad would separate her from her
family and the idea of separation makes her sad. She cannot divide herself and choose the two
possibilities. What would be a better choice for Miss X? In the second case, let us consider the
situation of a poor mother whose daughter is hungry but her situation does not permit her to buy
her daughter the food she needs. But she can steal food so that her daughter can eat. What would
be her choice? Allow her daughter to go hungry or steal food for her to be able to eat? A
situation of dilemma is complicated or difficult because out of two or several choices, there is
only one choice to make. What makes it more complicated is that there are cases when both
choices are evil. Which is the lesser of the two evils?
 3 Different Levels of Moral Dilemma

Moral dilemmas are categorized into three levels: personal, organizational and structural.

Personal Dilemma. It pertains to choices affecting the individual himself or herself. The
example mentioned above relating to the problem of schooling and pregnancy is a personal
dilemma that an individual has to resolve. Personal dilemma may also involve problems between
individuals. For instance, in a company, two very efficient employees who are both married get
involved in a relationship. Company regulations sanction married individuals who are involved
in illegitimate relationships. Having known about such relationship, what should the other
employees do about it? Suppose they tell the administration about this illicit relationship.
According to the rules, both of them would face termination from their employment. But the
people are aware about their importance for the company because of their qualifications.
Terminating these employees would be unfavorable for the company. If they don’t, they condone
illicit and immoral relationship within the company. The moral dilemma here is clearly whether
or not for the other employees to tell the administration about the existing illicit relationship of
the two employees of the company.

Organizational Dilemma. Examples of this type of dilemma would refer to business,

medical and public sector/company situation. Organizational dilemma has a broader scope and
would tend to affect every member of the organization. Solutions arrived at also have an impact
on the life of each member.

Structural Dilemma. This dilemma would include an entire network of an institution

and operative theoretical paradigm. The approval of the Bangsa Moro Law would fall under this
category of dilemma. It has the broadest scope of influence and impact of the three levels. In the
example given, the impact and effect of the approval would not only affect the people where the
law would be applied, but the entire archipelago. It is said that Mindanao desires to have its
autonomy. If you were to decide on this, would you approve the proposed law or not. Approval
of the law could mean peace and order in the region. But the move might result finally to
complete separation of the region. If the proposed law should not be approved, chances are; the
peace and order in the region will continue to be a major problem and will continue to drain the
national budget, the maintenance of strong army presence and conflict being heavily taxed on it.
What is a good alternative to follow?

Activity

Buzz Session. Group yourselves into five. Recall or think of a moral situation
where a moral dilemma is involved. Present the conflicting moral rules. Apply the steps for
moral analysis to resolve the dilemma.
ACTS WITH DOUBLE EFFECTS

In cases, an act performed produces two different consequences, one good and the
other evil, the act is said to have double effect.

In complete ignorance - the wrongful consequence is completely unexpected and

unintended.

In double effect- the wrongful consequence is expected and it can either be

unintended or intended.

So: A person whose act results in an evil effect, has diminished moral responsibility
over the wrongful consequence of his action if: 1. The act that brings about the double
effect is in itself good or morally different. The attainment of the good effect is the
intended effect. The evil effect is not perceived as a means to bring about the good effect.

For acts with double effects, the extent of moral responsibility is determined by
two general rules according to Duka, 2000.

1. The moral responsibility is perfect or aggravated if the person intends

the evil effect and the act performed bring the evil effect is in itself
wrongful.
2. It is exempted or diminished if the person intends the good effect and the
act performed to bring it about is in itself good.( Credit to the author
from which these notes were taken)

Summary
Moral dilemmas are situations when people face difficulties in making choices
or choosing an alternative from at least two or several possibilities that may be bad or evil.
Making a choice is not always easy especially when alternatives are either disadvantageous or
evil.
Exposure to the three levels of moral dilemma is important for you as students It is a
necessity to be aware that becoming a part of a larger community or institution will require
participation in a more complex moral situation or dilemma.

Getting involved in some complicated situations does not come from nowhere. These
originate from something. Your knowledge on moral dilemma and moral analysis can now
make you a wiser and better decision maker. You think twice before engaging in any gray
area. Somehow, it will help you avoid to be in complicated moral situations. It is important to
remember that deliberation is worthy of consideration prior to any decision or action.

Assessment
 Identification. Identify whether the level of moral dilemma is personal,
organizational or structural for each of the moral dilemmas below. Write your answer on the
space provided before the item. (10 points)

_______________1. Getting married with a long boyfriend or with a foreigner who is offering a
good life in America.
_______________2. Changing the form of government from the presidential type to federalism.
_______________3. Taking turns in the parish assignment of all the priests in the diocese every
three or five years.
_______________4. Maintaining State College and University tuition and miscellaneous fees or
opting for free tuition and miscellaneous scheme but with mandatory return
of service.
_______________5. Charging criminal offense starting 15 year of age or at 18.
_______________6. Choosing between father or mother custody in case of legal separation of
parents for older children.
_______________7. For a transgender to undergo sex transplant or not.
_______________8. Mandatory or random drug testing for all university students.
_______________9. No uniform or with uniform policy for university students.
_______________10. Adoption of national identity card or not.

Reflection

I am deeply aware that I face situations involving moral dilemma. Do I have the
courage to face them? Have I not been too coward that I deny the presence of a problem and I
cannot face it squarely? Had there been situations that my human actions were with double
effects. How did these taught me lessons and what did I resolve?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________
TOPIC III: Moral Assumptions
(Foundation of Morality)
Introduction
Certain assumptions are essential in ethics. Acts are considered moral or immoral, ethical
or unethical, acceptable or unacceptable because of these assumptions. These assumptions are
necessary because without them, no moral valuation can be passed on to certain acts. Here, we
speak of reason and freedom as necessary assumption of moral valuation. Acts can only be
judged to be moral or immoral, ethical or unethical when these assumptions are present. Their
absence makes these acts morally or ethically valueless. In some references, moral assumptions
are referred to as the elements of morality. This means that without reason, freedom and
voluntariness an act is not moral or ethical.

What are assumptions and what makes them so important? To illustrate their meaning
and significance, let us take the example of my duty to do my work. It is assumed that when I
report to work that I will be doing my job. The company or organization that hired me assumes
that I will perform the tasks for which I was hired. For that reason, the company pays me for the
services I render to it. The company assumes that I am doing my job. If it does not, there is no
reason for it to keep me and pay me. Assumption is therefore based on the belief that I am doing
my job whether or not it is true that I am doing it. The significance of that assumption is that the
company pays my salary. Because if it does not, it has ceased to believe that I am doing my task
or the assumption no longer stands to be true. Let us see why assumptions are necessary
components of morality or ethics.

Learning Outcomes

1. Define moral assumption;

2. Identify the assumptions of ethics or morality; and
3. Distinguish the differences among moral or ethical, immoral or unethical and amoral.

Activating Prior Learning

Decide whether the situation below suggests moral implication.

Suppose, the children in the neighborhood are playing one morning. As is the case when
children play, they end up quarrelling. Suppose a boy pushes a playmate who falls down and
starts to bleed immediately. With this scenario, consider whether the boy who pushed the
playmate is morally responsible or not. Articulate your reaction.
 Presentation of Contents
One crucial assumption in making moral valuation of certain acts and ascribing moral
responsibility to a moral agent is reason. Reason is the first element of a human act. We
assume that any person is a thinking being. By that, he or she is aware of the purpose of his or
her action. Furthermore, this assumption is also true about the consequences of such action.
Meaning, the person is also aware of the effects of the act. In other words, the person can make
judgment whether an action is right or wrong. Through reason, one can assess the rightness or
the wrongness of an act.

By this, we understand that it is not possible to ascribe moral responsibility to a child

who is way below the age of reason. The child cannot make a judgment whether his or her act is
right or wrong. By the same token, we cannot judge the action of an insane person as right or
wrong because the person has no way of evaluating the rightness or the wrongness of his or her
act. Reason, therefore, is essential before we can ascribe moral valuation to any act or any moral
responsibility to the doer of the act. Hence, only acts performed with deliberation or performed
by anyone who knows the consequences of the act are moral or ethical acts.

When reason cannot be ascribed to such acts, absolutely no moral implication is

applicable. One can get so mad over an act performed by 3-year old child but we are in no
position to ascribe to the child any form of moral or ethical guilt or responsibility. Reason
therefore is absolutely required or is assumed to be a basis for declaring the rightness or
wrongness of an act.

Second element or assumption is freedom. It is considered an important element in

making moral valuation and without which, no amount of reasoning can justify the ethical value
of an act. We say, moral action can only emanate from individuals who act according to their
choice or free will to do good. Moral valuation and moral responsibility cannot therefore be
ascribed to actions devoid of the freedom to act and as such they are not qualified as moral
action. Forcing someone to do an act will not make the person morally responsible for the action
taken. For instance, forcing someone to contract marriage, this individual may later separate
from the partner. Should the person act on that possibility, his action is without moral
implication and is free to act on it because there was no marriage at all that took place since the
person was forced under the threat of being killed or for any other reason.

An act is considered human act with moral responsibility when it is undertaken on the
basis of free choice or with a sense of freedom. Without the element of freedom, no amount of
explanation can declare someone morally responsible over the act.
 Summary

Filipinos easily blame others for certain actions committed. We have the commonly used
expression: “Kasalanan mo ang nangyari.” (What happened was your fault.) Analyzing such
accusation, we realize that it has some tone of moral valuation or judgment. Kasalanan is sin and
in the Filipino context, the utilization of the word is ethically loaded with strong religious
connotation. A person who commits sin has a moral responsibility and has also offended God not
only another person to whom the moral agent has done something wrong. A person who is
accused in these terms, may finally end up accepting not only that he or she is at fault but more
significantly, accepts that he or she, is a bad person if he/she will use the catholic equivalent of
moral significance and does not conform to God’s law or commandments.

Based on the discussion above, there is a need to be extra cautious about accusing
someone to have committed a sin or is morally guilty even when evidences favor it. To ascertain
the full implication of any accusation, there is a need to clarify it vis-a-vis the two moral
assumptions of reason and freedom. Too often, Filipinos make others suffer from moral and
religious perspectives when it should not be the case because the act is not grounded on the
assumptions of reason and freedom.

One who acts with complete or deliberate reason and freedom or voluntariness
has the full moral responsibility of the consequences of his actions.

Assessment

Short Answer Question. Answer briefly the following.

1. Without freedom can someone be considered morally responsible to his moral

actions and decisions? Explain why or why not?

2. Mr. X is a young lad but has proven medically to be mentally ill. Due to
hardship in life, his parents could not afford to bring him to the mental hospital for
further treatment. One day, Mr. X was standing at their front yard and Miss Y, a
young beautiful student passed by. Mr. X suddenly grabbed the lady on her long
hair causing the lady to stumble and had her knees injured. Is Mr. X. morally
responsible for his action towards Miss Y? Explain.

3. Boy X is a three year old naughty boy. He happened to break an expensive jar
in the National Museum considered to be a precious artefact by the curators/
museum authorities. Now, people are confuse about the situation. Is the boy morally
accountable for his action? Why? How about the parents? Why?

4. Mr. X is found guilty of committing murder. After he was placed under

psychological evaluation, as part of the standard investigation, the psychologist
 found out that Mr. X was suffering from acute psychological disorder called
paranoia. If you were to analyze his case, is Mr. X morally responsible for his
action? Why?

Reflection

Has it not been often the case that I am unforgiving to others and try not to understand
their situation? Am I not too judgmental especially to people who cannot defend themselves?
Have I given the full “ benefit of the doubt” to actions of others before making the
judgment on their actions?
 TOPIC IV: The Minimum Requirement (Elements) of Morality:
Reason and Impartiality
Introduction

Under certain situations, most people would almost always try to get most if not all the
benefits that they could possibly derive. When decisions are to be undertaken, they grab all
advantages for themselves and leave nothing to other people concerned because they claim it is
their right. Oftentimes decisions are one-sided by obstinately believing that we have all the rights
and others do not have. This is a biased or subjective way of looking for solutions to conflicts
or problems. People decide which is more favorable for them taking all the possible advantages
and never consider the interest of others who might be affected by the solutions arrived at.

The topic on the minimum requirement or conception of morality aims at helping people
to be objective in their decisions. This perspective requires the consideration of the interests of
the people who would be affected by any decision. Very often, an acceptable decision to all
parties that may be involved is difficult to reach because decisions only favor one party and not
the others. For instance, when siblings will have to divide their inheritance, the eldest desires
always to get the larger or the best of it. When dividing a property like land inheritance, the
eldest among the siblings would always want to apportion what is to his or her advantage and
never to consider the interests of the younger siblings. Alternatives in such a case are never fair
and do not represent a good solution. Fairness is difficult to achieve. Let us give it a try by
considering reason and impartiality.

Learning Outcomes

1. Express objectivity in decision making;

2. Analyze moral situations; and
3. Resolve conflicts or problems on the basis of moral obligation.

Activating Prior Learning

Give examples of conflict where people are not able to arrive at an equitable solution to a
problem or so called difficult situation that people do not know how to resolve it.

Presentation of Contents

Definitions do not make one instantly moral but it is by trying to be. To help us continue
in our journey to appropriate what is morally right and avoid what can possibly lead us to be just
the opposite; let us consider the “minimum conception of morality” by James Rachels (2003). He
says: “Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason – that is, to do
what there are the best reasons for doing – while giving equal weight to the interests of each
individual who will be affected by what one does.”

Rachels(2003) mentions two important things; reason and impartiality. When deciding,
he suggests that one should have a good reason or reasons for deciding so. A good reason is not
one that is one-sided or looks only at the interest of the one making the decision. “When I decide
and I look only at the advantages I get from my decision; it does not make me a better moral
agent.” He describes what it takes to be a better moral agent. He describes an enlightened moral
agent as a conscientious moral agent.

A conscientious moral agent according to him is the one who is concerned impartially.
That means someone who considers the interests of everyone affected by what one does or
decides. The conscientious moral agent takes every effort to carefully analyze every fact and
examines their implications and consequences if they will be acted upon; accepts principles of
conducts only after having scrutinized them to be sure that they are acceptable not only for the
one deciding but including everyone who will be affected by the decision later on. Further,
Rachels insists that a conscientious moral agent is the one who is willing “to listen to reason”
which means that the moral agent is willing to make changes or revise earlier conviction. Finally,
the conscientious moral agent is willing to act on the bases of such deliberations.

Summary

Learning to be impartial is too often difficult and painful because it implies the
willingness to give up some of our interests in favor of others’ interests. People cannot simply
give up certain advantages because they have been so used to it that losing them is unacceptable
and would require sometimes a radical change in their life.

For example, giving up a business enterprise which one has been managing for a long
time but legally does not belong to him or to her would not be easy. It would demand radical
shift in one’s life – habits, lifestyle, economic status, associations, security and even one’s
identity.

To be impartial means “free from biases”. It is the readiness to re-examine facts and data
and willingness to re-consider past decisions and adopt new ones. To be able to achieve this, it
would necessitate appealing to reason. Only a rational person would be willing to change,
challenge traditions, consider one’s real duties and obligations and to be selfless in one’s
perspective and in making decisions. Like Rachels’s reflection, it would take a conscientious
moral agent who is willing to “listen to reason” and act accordingly.
 Assessment
Answer the following questions shortly by starting with Yes, because …. and No,
because….

1. Is reason indispensable for an informed for moral decision?

__________________________________________________________________

2. Impartiality necessary to resolve conflicts?

__________________________________________________________________

3. And you apply impartiality when you are involved in a case?

________________________________________________________________ if
__________________________________________________________________

4. Mr. X and Mrs. Y are both illegal drug users. They both snatched from
victims in the public crowded places, transport and other possible avenues.
Are they morally accountable or not?
__________________________________________________________________

Reflection
Am I overwhelmed by my emotion too often and make decisions that are
unreasonable? Did I not put aside my education and make relentless pursuit even of the
innocent just to satisfy my desire to avenge or take advantage? Are not my decisions too
often inconsiderate and prejudicial or so bias of others? How can I be more
reasonable and fair in my own actions and of judging others’ actions.
TOPIC V: Standards of Moral Valuation Based on the Self
Introduction
In the preceding discussions, it was clear that the standards we refer to when making
moral judgments originate from external sources – culture, rules, practices, authority, and the
like. It came out that outside references have been considered too strongly influence people’s
decisions and choices.

In this topic, the concern is to point out that not only external references do exist in
making moral valuations but also, there are moral valuations inspired by personal choices
therefore originating from a more subjective or internal point of view.

In fact, the new generation would feel very much that way. They would rather consider
their own thoughts and opinions when deciding on certain matters and less on what others might
say about what they think is right or wrong. They are freer and more independent. Or, perhaps
they would give importance to their feelings and emotions if they have to decide on something.
That is their natural way and they are quite known for that – the millennials. Whereas before
when traditions had strong influence on people, everybody was quite concerned about one’s
reputation in the community. People would always consider what people around them might say
about their decisions or about what they are going to do or are actually doing. Therefore, it is not
impossible to say that one should not rely on any external authority to tell oneself what standards
of moral valuations to follow, but we should instead turn inwards.

We look now into three theories about ethics that focus on the self: subjectivism,
psychological egoism and ethical egoism.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify the different subjective standards as frame of reference for moral valuation;
2. Analyze each of these subjective standards; and
3. Use these frame of references in decision making.

Activating Prior Learning

In a small group, share your personal references or bases when making a decision? Are
there personal guides that help you come up with a stance or a decision?
 Presentation of Contents

Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) discussed the three senses of the self as these are presented
below.

1. Subjectivism
It suggests that the individual thinking person is at the heart of all moral valuations. The
person is the one confronted with the situation and is burdened with the need to make decision or
judgment. From this point of view, subjectivism leaps to the more radical claim that the
individual is the sole determinant of what is morally good or bad, right or wrong. Bulaong Jr. et
al. suggest some clichés expressive of this mentality:
 “No one can tell me what is right and wrong.”
 “No one knows my situation better than myself.”
 “I am entitled to my own opinion.”
 “It is good, if I say that it is good.”

2. Criticism: There is something appealing about these statements because they seem to express
personal independence. But a closer look at these statements, reveal real problems of
subjectivism. It is probable that out of extreme situation and profound disappointment, people
may possibly console themselves with these clichés. But objectively; however, we may ask
ourselves how many times did we make decisions and found out that we were wrong. Or, we
failed to recognize that our experience is practically just a speck in comparison to the
profoundness of the experience of others. Or, if only we can be honest and humble enough, then
we would admit that our opinions are not as founded as the opinions of more mature people and
less wiser than the opinion of the most foolish among us. And that finally, we realize that the
initial good/decision is not as good as we thought it was.

3. Psychological Egoism
It is a theory that describes the underlying dynamic behind all human actions. As a descriptive
theory, it does not direct one to act in a particular way. Instead, it points out that by nature,
humans are self-interested and are after their own satisfaction and therefore in all their
undertakings they are ultimately looking for self-fulfillment and satisfaction, aware or unaware.
As such, the ego or self has its desires and interests and all actions are geared toward the
satisfaction of these interests. It would seem that there is no problem with this position if we
consider actions done on a daily basis: watch a movie, read books, entertain visitors, etc. It is
acknowledged that we do things in pursuit of some interests all the time. The question; however,
is do we try to consider actions that normally are directed toward others?

Consider for instance the act of generosity. The position of the psychological egoist is that he
or she would maintain that underlying such apparently other-oriented behavior is a self-interested
desire, even when it is not being acknowledged or that the doer is not conscious of it. Helping
another might seem an act of altruism. But the psychological egoist has inherent self-interest in
expressing an act of service. In the end, the act no matter how it appears to be other-oriented, it is
by nature an act that is self-serving.
 4. Ethical Egoism
Ethical egoism differs from psychological egoism in that the latter does not suppose that
all actions undertaken are self-serving. But ethical egoism is a position that self-interest and
personal ends are the single overriding concern. Ethical egoism is totally driven by selfish
motive with no interest or concern for another. Actions are taken with the sole concern that the
ultimate benefit will be for the self. One considers oneself as the sole priority and does not allow
any other concern benefiting another. Ethical egoism is totally motivated by self-satisfaction and
nothing more.

Summary

There are certainly individuals who are influenced or work with the three senses of the
self – subjectivism, psychological egoism and ethical egoism. They work from the perspective of
the self. The self is their only point of reference in terms of their logic, choices, and decisions.
There can be no problem with this since it is normal that individuals think and plan according to
their needs, desires, their feelings or emotions and according to what they think is the right thing
to do. They plan according to what is pleasurable or what makes sense for them. However, the
problem with this is when people absolutize the self as their sole point of reference preventing
them to see things from others’ point of views.

The world is not only about our world. The world is also a “we-world” according to the
existentialist philosopher, Heidegger. He further explains that this “we-world” is to be
understood in the sense of “being-with-others-in-the-world.” It means that we are not alone in
this world but that we share the world with others. By so doing we transform it and as a
consequence of that collaboration, I am also transformed as well as the other. Mutual
recognition and sharing makes our existence more meaningful. More so, we include others
now in our moral valuations, that is, we become more considerate of the situation and more
generous of the advantages and interests of others.

The challenge therefore for people who view things only from their own perspective
would be to learn to accept others in their life and view things from this new perspective shared
with others. It would be something totally different if one could see and feel the world from
another’s point of view. Psychologists call this empathy, the ability of an individual to feel what
others subjectively feel. When one is capable of this, we become more understanding of the
person because we have understood him or her the way one understands oneself. With this, our
judging will no longer only be based from the perspective of the self but it will include the
other’s perspective.
 Assessment

Categorize the following situations among the different senses of the self or
subjective standards. Choose the letter of your answer based on the following choices
and write it on the space before each item.

A. Subjectivism B. Psychological Egoism C. Ethical Egoism

_________1. I know I am right at this one, no one else.

_________2. It is alright, I will lend you that much but you have to grant favor to my
requests.
_________3. People want always something in return to the service they render.
_________4. I will never get involved in politics. There is nothing I can get from it.
_________5. Nobody can really grasp the depth of the problem I am going through.
_________6. You are wasting your time and money; I will never join your organization for it has
nothing to offer me.
_________7. Those people pretending to be philanthropist want prestige, honor and glory.
_________8. Trust no one, trust only yourself!
_________9. No matter how you convince that they are good and sincere Christians, deep in
their hearts, they are afraid of going to hell that is why they give alms to the poor.
_________10. Nobody could convince her. She had the absolute idea that what she did was the
right one.

Reflection

Have I outgrown my childish perspective? Have I learned to see things from the
perspective of others? Am I ready and willing to accept others as they are and start a dialogue
with them? Have I been so self- centered, egoistic and selfish? What actions prove that I
am such. What must I begin to do now to improve myself. Am I ready to ask others’
opinion and conduct self- introspection? Sing the Song Who Am I popularized by Gary
Valenciano. Sing it. Then reflect and write your answer to every line asking Who am I?