SIR AMBAYON

INTRODUCTION ETHICS

What is Ethics?
 (from the Greek word ethos which means customs, usage or character.
 A set of rules of human behavior which has been influenced by the standards set
by the society or by himself in relation to his society (Reyes, 1989)
 It is also known as moral philosophy
 It seeks to examine the meaning of moral terms and the criteria by which we
make moral judgements.
 Ethics is the rational reflection on what is right, what is wrong, what is just, what is
unjust, what is good and what is bad in terms of human behavior.
 Some Ethical principles are:
1. Truthfulness
2. Honesty
3. Loyalty
4. Respect
5. Fairness
6. Integrity
 The word Ethics is derived from the Latin word “Ethicus” and the Greek word
“Ethikos”.
 Ethics are an arrangement of decent principles and a branch of attitude which
defines what is good for individuals and society.
 There are many well known figures in the history of Ethics, Greek philosophers
Plato and Aristotle, modern influences include such as Immanuel Kant, Jeremy
Bentham, John Stuart Mill, D.W. Ross, C.L. Stevenson, Alasdair MacIntyre and
John Rawls.
MEANING OF ETHICS
 Ethics refers to the evaluation of moral values, principles and standards of human
conduct and its application in daily life to determine acceptable human behavior.
EVOLUTION OF ETHICS
 The evolution of Ethics constructs a conceptual bridge between biology and
human behavior.
 Ethics merge with science in cybernetic ethics. This presents a persuasive
theory describing how ethics can be linked to science and mathematics.
 Evolutionary Ethics belongs to a branch of evolutionary science and not
philosophy. Evolutionary Ethics has no logical connection to the formal ethics of
philosophy.
THE MODEL OF ETHICS
A
w +
a
r Facade Walk their Talk
e
n Opportunist Salt of the Earth
e
s _
S
- Practice +

1. FAÇADE
 A Facade is an exterior side of a building
 The word comes from the French language.
2. WALK THEIR TALK
 Walk their Talk considers the consumer’s ethical intention and the ethically
minded consumers rarely purchase ethical products.
3. OPPORTUNIST
 Opportunists are people who see a chance to gain some advantage from
a situation, often at the expense of ethics or morals.
4. SALT OF THE EARTH
 Salt of the Earth is the most worthy of people; a very good or worthy
person.
TYPES OF ETHICS
1. Meta-Ethics
2. Normative Ethics
3. Applied Ethics
4. Descriptive Ethics

META-ETHICS
1. Meta-Ethics is the branch of Ethics that seeks to understand the nature of
Ethical properties, statements, attitudes and judgments.
2. A Meta-ethical question is abstract and relates to wide range of more
specific practical questions.
NORMATIVE ETHICS
 Normative Ethics is the study of ethical action.
 Normative ethics is distinct from meta-ethics and descriptive ethics.
APPLIED ETHICS
 Applied Ethics is the most practical of the three divisions of the philosophy
of ethics.
 Applied ethics is the actual application of ethical theory for the purpose of
choosing an ethical action in a given issue.
DESCRIPTIVE ETHICS
 Descriptive ethics is the study of people’s beliefs about morality.

CODE OF ETHICS
Ethics as Science (Timbreza, 1993)
 It is based on reason which studies human acts and provides norms for their
goodness and badness.
 It is a systematic study about the grounds and norms of human life.
Ethics studies Human Acts and Acts of Man
1. Human Acts (Actus Humanus) – those acts are done by human being which is
based on knowledge and the full consent of the will.
 An act which proceeds from the deliberate freewill of man (Glenn 1965)
 Doing a human act if he knows what he is doing and he is doing it freely
and willingly irrespective of whether the action is good or bad.
 E.g gluttony or bad.
2. Acts of Man (actus hominis) – actions are done in the absence of either
knowledge or will
 Comprises all spontaneous biological and sensual processes like nutrition,
breathing, sensual impressions
 All acts performed unconsciously like people sleeping
 E.g. thinking natures call (pee), virtuous act, yawning, eating, sleeping
The Context of Good
Good as an adjective
 “good person”/good deed, good film
 Quality of goodness that is possessed by all the things that we designated good
Different meaning of Ethics according to Triumvirate
Both Plato and Aristotle define it as: “what constitutes the good life”, associated it with
happiness in turn comes from living in accordance with virtues such as temperance
courage, piety, and justice. The reason for then is the best guide to behavior.
Socrates: the virtue is knowledge, the context of love and wisdom to do what is good
and what is not.
: a virtuous man who believes that “if one knows what the good is, one will do
what is good.
Plato: believed that “the good” was an abstract form, beyond the everyday world
Aristotle: saw a virtue as natural to human beings
 1. Practical Science – deals with systematized body of knowledge that can be
applicable to human action
- application of the human knowledge and its practicality to human
experience
- considered to be part of life
- a part of man’s existence
2. Normative Science – sets a basis or a norm for the direction and regulation of
human actions
- sets its rules and guidelines to maintain a sense of direction to
human actions
Ethics deal with voluntary human conduct
 includes all actions as well as non-actions
 includes involuntary activities that are unlikely performed yet involve a degree of
personal approval
 thus, it provides norms for the goodness and badness of a certain act.
Morality
 denotes a system of belief as to what is good and bad
 conformity to conventional standards of moral conduct
 deliberate flouting of those standards is termed “immorality”
 shared values (set of values)
 community holds responsibilities in their actions
“Choose what is right, do what is good, decide for what is humane”
-RPC
2 ways to determined the concept of Good in Philosophical Discourse
Good as noun:
1. Intrinsic goods of goods in themselves
e.g. Aristotle an example: Health-something that is pursued for its own sake
2. Extrinsic Good – pursued for its own consequences
e.g. money
What is the greatest good?
 It is the highest of the abstract immaterial forms according to Plato
 It is the highest goods for humans as the exercise of the virtues by means of
which they can achieve the good life or well being.
 In terms of the fulfillment of God’s purpose, love, happiness, pleasure, living in
harmony with others and with nature.

ARTUZ
CHAPTER 1
LESSON 2: Moral vs. Non-moral Standards
INTRODUCTION

What is a standard?
• Used or accepted as normal or average.
• An idea or thing used to measure, norm or model in comparative evaluation.
Why do we need to distinguish moral standards from non-moral one?
• Some values do have moral implications while others don’t.
How do we address cultural conundrum?
 People have to understand the difference between moral standards and non-
moral ones, to identify fundamental ethical values that may guide our actions.

MORAL VS NON-MORAL
MORAL NON-MORAL

Force others to act accordingly. We have no right to impose on

others
Affect other people Do not affect other people

Moral Standard
 Based on natural Law, the consequence of one’s action and sense of duty.
 Normally promote “the good”.

o Consistency of Moral Standards

 May differ from society to society and culture to culture.

o Classification of Theories of Moral Standards

Garner and Rosen (1967) classified the various moral standards
formulated by moral philosophers as follows:
o Consequence Standard (Teological) - rightness or wrongness of
the rule depends on the consequence or the good that is produced
by following the rule.
o Not-only Consequence Standard (Deontological)- rightness or
wrongness of an action do not only depend on the consequence of
an action.

o What makes standard Moral?

 For Theist- God is the ultimate source of what is moral revealed to human
person.
 For Non-Theist – God is not the source of Morality.
 - Moral standards are based on the wisdom of philosophers like
Confucius or Immanuel Kant.

o Origin of Moral Standards

 Theist- theistic line of thought states that moral standards are of divine
origin.
 Non-Theist – (20th Century Thinkers) it simply evolve.

o Characteristics of Moral Standards

 Welfare of beings
 Relies on sound reasoning
 Overriding hegemony
 Impartial, fair and just
 Emotions and vocabulary

AUTOR

Non-Moral Standards
• Refers to standards by which we judge what is good or bad in a non-moral way.
• Not linked to moral considerations.
• Manage and govern individual life, aspirations and desires that may decide a
person’s place in a group.
• Set of rules on how an individual should behave in society.
• Any violations that does not pose a serious threat to human well-being.
• Include independence, prestige, fame, popularity and wealth.

Example of Non-moral Standards

• Standards of etiquette
• The law
• Standards of aesthetic
Non-moral Characteristic
• Welfare of non-beings
• Relies on authority or law
• Religion, tradition
• Limits Hegemony
• Self Interest
• X emotions and vocabulary
Examples of Non-moral Standards
 • Standards of etiquette by which we judge manners as good or bad.
• Standards we call the law by which we judge legal right and wrong.
• Standards of aesthetics--- good and bad art.
• The athletic standards--- how well a game is being played.

BARTAL
CHAPTER 1 LESSON 3: Moral Dilemmas

What is Moral Dilemma?

A moral dilemma is also called an ethical dilemma and refers to a situation
where an individual needs to make a choice but faces a conflicting situation between
one or more alternatives.
Example:
1) Protect and preserve virgin forest VS. Allow miners and logger for economic
development.
2) Miya is a deeply religious person, and she considers killing humans wrong.
Sadly, she found out that she's having an ectopic pregnancy.
Ectopic pregnancy is a type of that occurs outside the uterus, most commonly in
fallopian tube. In other words, the fetus does not develop in the uterus. Now if this
happens the development of the fetus will endanger the mother and if Miya
continues her pregnancy there is a huge possibility that she will die.
According to experts the best way to save Miya's life is to abort the fetus. Which
necessarily implies killing the fetus. If we do not abort the fetus, then Miya as well
as the fetus will die.
In this example of a moral dilemma, Miya is faced with two conflicting options. 1st
resort to abortion, which will save her life but at the same time jeopardize her moral
integrity or does not resort to abortion but endangers her life as well as the fetus. In
other words, Miya is faced through the huge moral dilemma.

Meaning of False Dilemma

Is a situation where the decision-maker or the agent has a moral duty to do one
thing , but is tempted to do something else. A false dilemma is a choice between a right
and a wrong.
For example, a lawyer or an accountant can face an opportunity to prioritize self-
interest over the client’s interest.

Historically, there have been moral dilemma debates with different philosophical
approaches. Contributions from Gratian of Bologna and Thomas Aquinas and their
schools of thought take center stage in the moral dilemma discussion.
  Gratian talks about an all-knowing being, referring to God, who ensures that any
choice situation has at least one right act presented to a person.

 The other debate stems from Thomas Aquinas who came up with the moral
philosophy that is known as natural law ethics, and argued that it is necessary
that everyday reasoning be led by obvious principles, such as ensuring that evil
acts are not to be committed.

Characteristics of a moral dilemma

• A person is expected to do two or more actions. It is possible for a person to do
these actions, but not at the same time.
• At times there is an appropriate and an inappropriate choice. The problem is
knowing which is the best choice.
• In some cases, someone can get hurt, making the choice even harder to make.
• At times, what is at stake is a legal issue, e.g., witnessing an acquaintance
stealing and the choice to ignore the theft or report it.

BASA
LESSON 4: THREE LEVELS OF MORAL DILEMMA

INDIVIDUAL DILEMMA
 A person, or an individual, has two or more moral values to consider, he or she
can choose one only, and choosing one or the other will not solve the problem in
a moral way.
 Judgement is based on the self- chosen principles, and moral reasoning is based
on individual rights and Justice.
 A moral dilemma experienced by a person which challenges his values and
priorities.

ORGANIZATIONAL DILEMMA
 Can take many forms and these are the moral problems in the workplace.
 Organization dilemma is a challenge for every organization nowadays. It is how
to match discrepancy between individual needs and aspiration on the one hand,
and the organization goals on the other.

STRUCTURAL DILEMMA
 Refer to moral predicaments in public administration.
  Finding satisfactory system of roles and relationship is an ongoing universal
struggle.

Example of Structural Dilemnas;

1.) Differentiation vs. Integration
-The tension between allocating work and coordinating sundry efforts create a
classic dilemma.
2.) Gap vs. Overlap
-If responsibility are not clearly assigned, important task fall through the cracks.
Roles and activities can overlap, creating wasted effort and unintended redundancy.
3.) Lack of Clarity vs. Lack of Creativity
-If employees are unclear about of what they are supposed to be doing, they
often shape their role around personal preferences instead of organizational goals,
frequently leading to problems.
4.) Excessive Autonomy vs. Excessive Interdependence
-If the efforts of Individual or Group are too autonomous, people often feel
isolated and unsupported.
5.) Excessive Autonomy vs. Excessive interdependence
-If the efforts of Individual or Group are too autonomous, people often feel isolated
and unsupported.
6.) Centralized vs. Decentralized Decision Making
-In decentralized decision making, organizations can respond to change more
rapidly and effectively because the decision makers are the people cosest in the
situation. However, top managers my lose some control. This is the dilemma of tight
over centralization or diffusing authority which is loose.

BERMUDEZ
ETHICS LESSON 5

Freedom as the Foundation of Moral Acts

Intended Learning outcome:
Explain why only Human Beings can be Ethical
Introduction
Do the lower forms of animals have ethics?
Is ethics only for human persons? If so, why?
Ethics Applies Only to Human Persons
The song. My Way/Born This Way implies choice or freedom "I did my way. Unlike the
lower forms of animals, human persons have a choice or freedom, hence morality
applies only to human persons
Why are animals considered to be non moral?
Animals cannot act morally, because they will not sacrifice their own good for the sake
of others, but will rather pursue their good even at the expense of others.
Ethics, therefore, applies only to human person. We cannot say a cat is "unethical"
when it eats the food at table intended for you or when a dog urinates on your favorite
bag lying on the floor

Dilemmas presuppose freedom.

Freedom-loving societies have customary ways of training the young to exercise their
freedom.
There is such a thing as a dilemma because there is such a thing as freedom.
If there is no ability or power of choice, then any incident simply happens without any
interference. There would also be no obligation to do any act in expectation of the
responsibility following the act.
Freedom and Moral Choice
Without freedom it is impossible to make a moral choice" If we are to have free will we
must have the ability to make a decision that is unhindered.
Kant believed that we must have free will if we are to be held morally responsible for our
actions
If God did not give us free will then our decisions cannot be considered immoral or
moral as we would have had to act in the way we did. Thus we cannot be held
responsible.
Making moral choice is a necessary consequence for being free, a consequence of
being a human person.
A human person has freedom, he'she has a choice and so is responsible for the
consequences of his her choice. The lower forms of animals have no choice since they
are bound by instinct and so cannot be held responsible for their behavior
To be Ethical: Own Not Merely Abide by Moral Standards
Having free will freedom to choose among alternatives, which implies prior analysis and
study, is coming to terms with what you finally affirm or deny.
When you arrive at a personal conviction and self-affirmation, you begin to own the
moral standards.
The moral standards begins to be integrated, internalized. You follow the norm not
because it is imposed by others, not because others says so or automatically impose it
on you.
Merely abiding by most standard means applying them as basis to resolve a mural
problem without necessarily having internalized them.
Merely abiding by them means once the enforcer is not around, the moral standard is
not followed.
Or if you do not own or internalized the standard, you will tend to use it for convenience,
to evade responsibility, to put the blame on standard itself when things do not end will.
You simply become legalistic and adopt the maxims, “low the rule or law, even if the sky
falls down”, “the law says so the law is hard, but it is the law (dura lex sed lex). You
follow the law because other authorities, regulators say so, not because you say.
Owning moral standards means internalizing them, making them part of your conviction.
Internalized or embodied moral standards are being followed with or without anyone
telling you.
You internalize a rule after using reason to understand. When you are persuaded of its
wisdom, it becomes your basis of resolving an ethical problem.
You decide to do something not because the law says so but because you yourself say
so.
Lower forms of animals have no choice.
To be truly ethical or moral, we must internalize or possess not just adhere to moral
standards. "I did it My Way" because I am convinced, have to do it "My Way" and not
because others tell me so.

BOLIC
CULTURE: HOW IT DEFINES MORAL BEHAVIOR

What is Culture
Culture encompasses religion, food, what we wear, how we wear it, our language,
marriage, music, what we believe is right or wrong, how we sit at the table, how we
greet visitors, how we behave with loved ones and a million other things.
Culture is passed on to the next generation by learning not through the genes or
heredity. Culture includes all human phenomena which are not purel results of human
genetics.
Enculturation, Inculturation and Acculturation
Culture change or evolve. there are various ways by which cultures change.
Enculturation
• Means the process of acquiring the rules, norms, values, customs and guidelines
of a culture in order to be a part of society.
• refers to that learning process in which an individual comes to know about the
rules, customs, skills and values of the society.

Inculturation
 • The term that Catholic leaders and theologians have used in recent decades to
denote a process of engagement between the Christian Gospel and a particular
culture.
• Inculturation is the adaptation of Christian teachings and practices to cultures.
• Is making the gospel take roots in a culture and introducing that transformed
culture to christianity.
Acculturation
• The process by which people learn and adapt a new culture.
• Acculturation implies the process of transforming the cultural beliefs and customs
of one's own culture, by adopting traits of a different culture.
• Refers to the modification of culture of an individual or group, due to the
interaction with other culture.
How Culture Shapes The Moral Agent
Culture definitely affects the way we evaluate and judge things. Consider the
african women not as privileged as the african men. Some societies consider it alright
gathering vegetables at the backyard of their neighbor considering the act as getting a
share. In such societies, the act would not be consider stealing. In most societies it is
consider as stealing. In Islamic culture having several wives is allowed. In other
cultures, it’s concubinage or adultery.
Culture has a very long lasting hold on an individual. A person may have become
highly educated, may have even obtained a doctorate degree educated with Christian
values of forgiveness, but if he comes from a society with a culture of vengeance having
the sense of obligation to make an act of revenge when a member of his tribe has been
killed or harmed by another, he becomes ultimately vindictive and joins his tribe seeking
revenge.

BUSTILLOS
CHAPTER 1
LESSON 7: CULTURAL RELATIVISM

What is cultural relativism?

 Cultural relativism is the belief that all cultures are equal in that no culture is
greater than another in terms of issues like politics, law, and so on. This theory
argues that all cultural values are evenly legitimate. This is is based on the idea
that there is no ultimate standard of good or evil.
  In the the context of cultural relativism, the manner by which the African women
is treated in comparison to that of African man should not be judged against
other culture’s standard.

Cultural Relativism vs. Cultural Perspective

 Cultural relativism is where one suspends one’s cultural roots and understand by
seeing another culture according to the standards of that culture while culltural
perception is the lens through which humans view other people and the world
around them.

Advantage of cultural relativism

 Increased tolerance towards people with different cultures and customs.
 Allows differences to be recognized and respected.
 It is a system which promotes cooperation.
 It creates a society where equality is possible.
 It preserves human cultures.
 It stops cultural conditioning.
 Cultural relativism creates a society without judgment.

Disadvantage of cultural relativism

 It would create chaos.
 It could limit humanity’s progress.
 Cultural relativism only works if humanity is perfect
 Cultural relativism can turn perceptions into truths.

CARANCIO
The Filipino Character: Strength and Weaknesses
Senator Leticia Shahani submitted to the Senate this report titled “A Moral Recovery
Program: Building a People, Building a Nation” on April 27, 1988.
The Filipino Character: Weakness
1. Extreme Family Centeredness
Excessive concern for family means using one’s office and power to
promote family interests and thus functionalism patronage, political
dynasties and the protection of erring family members. It results in lack of
concern for the common good, and acts as a block to national
consciousness.
2. Extreme Personalism
 “Takes things personally,” cannot separate objective task from emotional
involvement. Because of this the Filipino is uncomfortable with
bureaucracy, with rules, and regulations and with standard procedures.
3. Lack of Discipline
A casual attitude towards time and space, manifested in lack of precision
and compulsiveness, in poor time management and procrastination.
Aversion to following procedures strictly results in short cuts…
4. Passivity and Lack of Initiative
Waiting to be hold what to do, reliance on others (leaders and
government), complacence, and lack of a sense of urgency. There is a
high tolerance for inefficiency, poor service, and even violations of one’s
basic rights.
5. Colonial Mentality
Lack of patriotism, or of an active awareness, appreciation and love of the
Philippines and an actual preference for things foreign.
6. Kanya-kanya Syndrome, Talangka Mentality
Done by tsimis, intriga, and unconstructive criticism. It is evident in the
personal ambition that is completely insensitive to the common good. E.g.,
the lack of a sense of service among people in the government
bureaucracy.
7. Lack of self-analysis and self-reflection
The tendency to be superficial and somewhat flighty. In the face of serious
personal and social problems, there is lack of analysis or reflection and
instead satisfaction with superficial explanation and solutions.
8. Emphasis on Porma Rather than Substance
This lack of analysis and emphasis on form is reinforced by an educational
system that is more form than substance.
The Filipino Character: Strength
1. Pakikipagkapwa-tao
2. Family Orientation
3. Joy and Humor
4. Flexibility, Adaptibility and Creativity
5. Hard Work and Industry
6. Faith and Religiousity
7. Ability to Survive

Key Take aways:

 The Filipino has a number of strengths. His/her strengths when they become
extreme, however, also become his/her weaknesses.
  His/her strengths help him/her become ethical and moral but his/her weaknesses
obstruct his/her moral and ethical growth.
 Culture has a significant impact on morality.
 The Filipino group-centeredness and “kami” – mentality make it difficult for the
Filipino to stand up against the group when that is the moral thing to do.
 There is much need for home, school and society as a whole to help every
Filipino to grow into the strong moral person everyone is called to become.
 For the Filipino to become the moral and ethical person, he/she should capitalize
on his/her strengths and eliminate his/her weaknesses.

COLLANTES
Lesson 9: Universal Values

WHAT TO EXPECT:
1. Explain why universal values necessary for survival
2. Identify the three universal values shared by all cultures
Value
 The word value is derived from French word valoir which means worth, merit,
usefulness or importance of a thing.
 A value is a belief that something is good and desirable.(Haralambos,2000)
 Values are individual beliefs that motivate people to act one way or another.
 Values represent an individual highest priorities
Universal values are values that apply to all types of people, regardless of their social,
ethnic or cultural origin.
Example of Universal Values
 Freedom
 Equality
 Respect
 Responsibility
 Do not harm someone
 Do not Lie
Why there are Universal Values ?
 it could be that something has universal value when everybody finds it valuable
(Isaiah Berlin).
 It is something could have universal value when all people have reason to
believe it has value (Amartya Sen).
Importance of Universal Values
  It is a fundamental beliefs that guide or motivate attitudes and actions of all
people.
 It help us to determine what is important to us.
 It describe the qualities we chose to embody.
 It require us to recognize the human characteristics and to show the same
respect for human dignity and sensitivity in people of other communities that we
expect them to show for ours.
 The function of universal values is to help us manage differences with mutual
respect and without resorting to destruction.
The Three Universal Values Shared By All Cultures
1. Caring for the young
2. Murder is wrong
3. Tell the truth

DICHOSO
Chapter 2 - Lesson 1
Man as a Moral Agent

MORAL AGENT
MORAL comes from latin word “mores” referreng to society’s patterns, standards, rules
of doing things.
AGENT comes from latin word “agere” to do, act.
A moral agent is one who performs an act in accordance with moral standards.
Moral agent has the capacity to conform moral standards, to act for the sake of
moral considerations for the sake of moral law.
Moral Agent is purpose-driven or end-driven.
As a moral agent his duty is to know, to love, and serve God, his ultimate end.

FUNDAMENTAL OPTION
It is a human person’s basic choice or inner orientation either for a good life or for a bad
life.

The moral agent ot the human person becomes what he makes of himself by choice. He
is nothing until he starts his existence by making choices.
-Jean Paul Satre
The moral agent will be a result of a creative process. It has to create his end, purpose
or directions. He has to invent his destiny.
- Teilhard de Chardin and Alfred North Whitehead
Moral agent as being-with-others, who is inseparably related to his fellow man.
-Martin Heidegger, Gabriel Marcel and Martin Buber.
The moral agent directs his life to improve, refine, develops this world in order to bring
out the world to come.
- Brabander
Moral Agent should direct his life to the spiritualization of this material world.
-R. Franceur

DISCAYA
CHAPTER 2
Lesson 2: The Development of Moral Character of the Moral Agent

Meaning of Defining Moment

 significant life-changing event or moment that reverberates throughout your
career and personal life and so changes everything.
Example:
 Defining moment of a cancer patient
 Defining moments of the Saints

Relationship Between Moral acts and Character

 Moral character is necessary for moral behavior. Moral character facilitates
doing the moral action.

“The person who has moral character does moral actions more readily – more easily
and more willingly than one who does not…” (Knovel, 2019)

DUHAPA
Lesson 3
THE STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Intended Learning Outcomes:

• Describe each stage of moral development
• Evaluate one’s personal growth against the stages of personal development
Defining
Moral Development
 Moral Development refers to the “process through which a human person
gains his/her beliefs, skills and dispositions that make him/her a morally mature
person.”
William A. Kay (1970) has the following to say regarding the nature of moral
development.
... Just as the pattern of intellectual growth can be simply described as passing through
stages of animal behavior, pre-logical thinking, thought governed by empirical logic and
finally by formal logic, so morality can be described as passing through stages of
behavior controlled first, by taboo; then second, by law; third by conscience (i.e.
irrational, intrajected values); fourth, by reciprocity; fifth, by social consensus and finally
by personal moral principles, though not necessarily in that order.
Stated differently, the five stages may be reduced to three as follows:
The amoral stage - egocentric, hedonist and prudential considerations.
The pre-moral stage - authoritarian, ego-idealist, social and reciprocal
considerations.
The moral stage - personal, autonomous, altruistic, rational,
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development
Kohlberg (2013) describes the stages of moral development in 3 stages, namely: Level
1 – Pre-conventional morality, Level 2 - Conventional morality, and Level 3 - Post-
Conventional morality. Each level has two stages each so that there are six stages of
moral development. They are described in the following.
Level 1
PRE-CONVENTIONAL MORALITY
This is the lowest level of moral development in Kohlberg’s theory. At the pre-
conventional level, children don’t have a personal code or morality instead, their moral
code is controlled by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or
breaking adults’ rules.
Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation.
The child/individual does good in order to avoid being punished. If he/she is punished,
he/ she must have done wrong. Children obey because adults tell them to obey. Moral
decisions are based on fear of punishment.
Stage 2: Instrumental Orientation.
Right behavior is defined by whatever the individual believes to be in his/her best
interest. "What's in it for me?" In this stage there is limited interest in the needs of
others, only to the point where it might further the individual's own interests.
Level 2
CONVENTIONAL
Throughout the conventional level, a child’s sense of morality tied to personal
and societal relationships. Children continue to accept the rules of authority figures, but
this is now due to their belief that this is necessary to ensure positive relationships and
societal order. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid during these
stages and a rule’s appropriateness or fairness ins seldom question.
Stage 3: “Good Boy, Nice Girl” Orientation
In stage 3, children want the approval of others and act in ways to avoid disapproval.
Emphasis is placed on good behavior and people being "nice" to others. The individual
is good in order to be seen as being a good person by others. Therefore, answers relate
to the approval of others. The individual values caring and loyalty to others as a basis
for moral judgments.
Stage 4. Law and Order Orientation
The child/individual becomes aware of the wider rules of society, so judgments concern
obeying the rules in order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt.
Level 3
POST-CONVENTIONAL MORALITY
This is the level of full internalization. Morality is completely internalized and not based
on external standards. Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles and moral
reasoning is based on self-chosen principles and moral reasoning is based on individual
rights and justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as far as most
people get.
Stage 5. Social contract orientation
The child/individual becomes aware that while rules/laws might exist for the good of the
greatest number, there are times when they will work against the interest of particular
individuals. In this level, individuals reason out that values, rights and principles
transcend the law. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid orders.
Stage 6. Universal, ethical, principle orientation
Individuals at this stage have developed their own set of moral guidelines which may or
may not fit the law. They have developed moral judgments that are based on universal
human rights. The principles apply to everyone.
Development of Conscience-based
Moral Decision
Moral development includes development of conscience-based moral decision. This is
in the post-conventional level of Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Panizo
defines conscience as "an act of the practical judgment of reason deciding upon an
individual action as good and to be performed and as evil and to be avoided." It is
metaphorically referred to as the "inner or little voice of God." Panizo (1964) quotes St.
Thomas regarding the obligatory force of conscience: "Every conscience, whether right
or erroneous, whether with regard to acts which are evil in themselves or acts which are
indifferent, is obligatory, so that he who acts in opposition to his conscience, does
wrong."
THE HEINZ DILEMMA
A woman was on her deathbed. 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 laboratory to steal the
drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his
wife? Why or why not?

FABRID
Chapter III
HUMAN ACT

LESSON 1. THE MEANING OF HUMAN ACT

INTRODUCTION
Not all acts of the human person as a moral agent are considered human act.

ACT OF MAN VERSUS HUMAN ACT

Fr. Coppens, (2017) “human acts are those of which a man is master, which he has the
power of doing or not doing as he pleases.”

Panizo, (1964) “human acts are those acts which proceed from man as rational being.

Example: Observing prescribed diet.

In other words, human acts are the acts of moral agent.

“ actions committed by unconscious and insane persons, infants, or those who are
physically forced to do something are not considered as human acts but acts of man.”
THE DETERMINANTS OF THE MORALITY OF HUMAN ACT

Rev. Coppens, S.J.

morally good - three things are considered. Determinants of Morality:

1. the object of the act

2. the end, or purpose, and
3. its circumtances

Axiom: “Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu”

“ a thing to be good must be wholly so; it is not vitiated by any defect.”

THE OBJECT OF AN ACT IS THE THING DONE.

We cannot act without doing something, and that thing that is done is the object of the
act.
The act or object may be viewed as containing a further specification.

Example: Going to church. Eating meat.

THE END, OR PURPOSE.

The end here spoken of is not the end of the workman or agent.
No matter how good the object of an act may be, if the end intended is bad, that act is
thereby vitiated, spoiled or impaired.
“ The end does not justify the means ”

Example : Robin Hood

THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TIME, PLACE AND PERSONS HAVE THEIR PART IN
DETERMINING THE MORALITY OF AN INDIVIDUAL ACT.
The moral character of an act may be so affected by attendant circumtances, that an act
good in itself may be evil when accompanied by certain circumtances. (Coppens,2017)

They either increase or diminish the moral goodness or evil of human acts.

Morally Good
act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumtances together.

FRIAS
LESSON 2
ACCOUNTABILITY OF MORAL ACT

Learning objectives
1.Define Moral Acts and Moral Accountability
2. Discuss the three (3) bases of Moral Accountability
3. Give examples of these three bases of moral accountability being used in real-word
situation
1. Human (Moral) acts
- comes from a Latin word “Actus Humani” this refers to “actions that process from the
insight into the nature and purpose of one’s doing and from consent and free will”
- are the free and conscious acts of a human person which are proper to humans alone.
These actions are what makes a human being “truly human”, an earthly creature
different and distinct from all others.
BASES OF MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Fr. Coppens (2017), When I perform a free act—one which able to do or not to
do, as I choose –the act is evidently imputable to me: if the thing is blameworthy, the
blame belongs to me: if it is praiseworthy, I am entitled to praise. Every human act
therefore, since it is a free act, is imputable to him who performs it.
THREE BASES OF MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY
1. KNOWLEDGE
- The act must be deliberate.
- It must be performed by a conscious agent who is very much
aware of what he/she is doing and of its consequences –good
or evil.
2. FREEDOM
-
The act must be performed in freedom.
-
It must be done by an agent who is acting freely, with his/her
own volition and powers.
3. VOLUNTARINESS
- The act must be done voluntarily.
- - It must be performed by an agent who decides willfully to
perform the act.

GISMA
Lesson 3: Feeling as a Modifier of Moral Decision- Making

Feeling in Decision-Making
Feeling in general, is an emotional state or reaction, experience of physical
sensation, like a feeling of joy, feeling of warmth, love, affection tenderness, etc.
 How do they affect moral decision-making?
“Several studies conclude that up to 90 percent of the decisions were made
based on emotion. We use logic to justify our actions to ourselves and to others.”
 Researches also show that “actual emotional states can influence the process of
moral reasoning and determine moral judgement.”
Are there advantages of emotional decision making?
According to recent research, feelings or emotion have positive effects on decision-
making. Some identified as follows:
 A totally emotional decision is very fast in comparison to a rational decision. This
reactive and can be useful when faced with immediate danger, of in decision of
minimal significance.
 Emotions can provide a way for coding and compacting experience, enabling fast
response selection. This may point to why experts “gut” level decisions have high
accuracy rates.
 Decisions that start with logic may need emotions to enable the final selection,
particularly when confronted with near equal options.
 Emotions often drive us in directions conflicting with self-interest.
Emotional Decision-making can also come with a number of negatives.
 We make quick decisions without knowing why and then create rational reasons
to justify a poor emotional decision.
 Intensity of emotions can override rational decision-making in cases where it is
clearly needed.
 Immediate and unrelated emotions can create mistakes by distorting and
creating bias in judgements. In some cases this can lead to unexpected and
reckless action.
 Projected emotions can lead to errors because people are subject inaccuracy
about how they will feel in the future.

Moral statements as expression of feelings

Are moral statements or values mere expressions of feelings of emotions as
claimed by the linguistic philosophers?
According to some philosophers, called (emotivists) the statement “stealing is
wrong” is not a statement of fact, it is an expression of desire of emotion.
The rule of Maxim “Stealing is wrong” means “I desire that you do not steal.”
An emotion statement is not verifiable like factual statement. “Pedro stole my cat”
is verifiable, can be established by evidence. But “Pedro’s act of stealing my cat is
morally wrong” which is equivalent to “I desire that Pedro should not steal” is not
verifiable.
The following explains this ethical theory:
Emotivism is the view that moral judgements do not function as
statements of fact but rather as expressions of the speakers or writers feelings.
According to the emotivist when we say “ You acted wrongly in stealing that money” we
are not expressing and fact beyond that stated by “ You stole that money.” it is however,
as if we had stated this fact with a special tone of abhorrence, for in saying that
something is wrong, we are expressing our feelings of disapproval toward it.

Managing Feelings
“Anyone can get angry that is easy but to do this to the right person, to the right extent``,
at the right time with the right motive, and in the right way is not for everyone, nor is it
easy, (Bool II, Nicomachean Ethics). In other words, your anger should not be
displaced. The moral person manages his/her feelings well.

HETI-AYON
 ETHICS: CHAPTER III - LESSON 4: Reasons and Impartiality as Minimum

INTRODUCTION
The minimum requirements of morality are reason and impartiality. Moral judgement
must be backed up by good reason and impartiality.
WHAT IS REASON AND IMPARTIALITY
Refer to a mental activity following the basic principle consistency, the lack of
contradiction between one idea and another. Deriving necessary conclusion from
premises, avoiding all forms of deception or fallacy or reasoning.
Reason: is the basis or motive for an action, decision or conviction.
Impartiality: requires that we give equal or adequate considerations to the interests of
all concerned parties.
Fallacy of Reasoning
A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or "wrong moves," in the
construction of an argument.
1. Ad Hominem - a fallacy attacking the characteristics or personality of a person
instead of the argument.
2. Ad Misericordiam - ad misericordiam or appeal to pity is a fallacy in which someone
tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting one's opponent's feeling of pity
or guilt.
3. Ad Verecundiam - ad verecundiam or appeal to authority is a form of fallacy in which
the opinion of an authority on a topic is used as evidence to support an argument.
Establish truth and meaningful moral judgments
A logical, impartial objective reason avoids ambiguities like equivocation, circular
reasonings, amphibology, etc. That’s why coherent reasoning is needed.

SCOTT RAE’S 7 STEPS OF MORAL REASONING

The following is another sample method of arriving at an ethical or moral decision
1. Gather the facts/information
2. Determine the ethical issues, similar to “Statement of the Problem”
3. Determine what virtues/principles have a bearing on the case
4. List the alternatives or develop a list of options
5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues/principles
6. Consider the consequences or test the options
7. Make a Decision
Values Clarification Method
Values clarification method as a part of the moral reasoning model consists of a series
of questions which one may ask himself or others in order to arrive at one’s true values.
The following consists of the steps of the values clarification model: (Raths, L. et al,
1978)
1. Choosing Freely
- Did you choose this value freely?
- Where do you suppose you first got the idea?
2. Choosing from alternatives
- What reasons do you have for your choice?
- How long did you think about this problem before you decided?
3. Choosing after thoughtful consideration
- What would happen if this choice were implemented?
- What is good about this choice?
4. Prizing and being happy with the choice
- Are you happy about feeling this way?
- Why is this important to you?

5. Prizing and willing to affirm the choice publicly

- Would you be willing to tell the class how you feel?
- Should someone who feels like you stand up in public and tell people how she or he
feels?
6. Acting on the Choice
- What will you do about your choice?
- What will you do next?
7. Acting repeatedly in some pattern of life
- Have you done anything about it?
- Will you do it again?
As a result of the process, one may discover an ideal priority of values. One may need
to recollect and re-orient oneself to genuine moral values
Critique: Creative Responsibility
One significant guide to the moral reasoning process is what ethicists like Fr. Gorospe
(1974) termed “Creative Responsibility”
- It is responding silently or verbally to a call and addressing an ethical problem
creatively by considering all possible points of view thinking outside the box, and using
relevant frameworks.

INOCENCIO
Lesson 5: The Difference Between Reason and Will
What to Expect?
At the end of the lesson,
• Distinguish between reason and will.
• Differentiate knowing and actually executing a good moral decision; and
• Judge their own moral behavior in terms of planning and execution in important
moral experiences.
Driftwood at Sea
a. To which direction is the driftwood going?
b. When can you or any person be like the driftwood?
c. In what sense is an indecisive person considered a driftwood ?

WILL
The moral person is endowed with an intellect and will. The “will” is what
“disposes” what the “the intellect proposes”.
REASON
Reason conducts the study, research, investigation, fact-finding. It uses logic, the
principle of
consistency, avoid fallacious reasoning to come up with a truthful and accurate
proposition.
In a research study, the product or work of reason is the body of facts gathered,
organized, synthesized and evaluated. The job of the will is to make a decisive
conclusion.
WILL
The will is the faculty of the mind that is associated with decision making. It’s the
one that says yes or no. This author says this, that author says that, all others are
saying the same thing. Now, decide with your will what you yourself should say or think.
• Decision making which an activity of the will can be developed.
• A culture of spoon-feeding does not developed the will.
• Decision making which is an activity of the will can be developed. Early in life,
like children, one should already be given the opportunity to exercise his will, like
being trained to make choices from alternative.
 • Will needs courage, it implies affirming, accepting oneself in spite of ones’
defects, lack , or imperfections.

All in all, reason has from the very beginning of the traditions of natural law been a
central element. Reason has made it possible for humans to understand the underlying
morals that the natural laws consisted of.
For Plato, reason was important since it made it possible for the human mind to
understand the Ideas of good and evil and to recognize concrete subjects existing in
actual reality.

SUMMARY
The concept of reason and will, It is clear to see the importance of both as components
in any ‘good’ legal theory. Both the concepts of reason and will are crucial for a
successful legal system. They are dependent on one another. This indirectly means that
the concepts of reason and will are opposites.

JOSE
LARUAN
LAURENCIO
LOPEZ
MALINAO
MAULANA