Name: ___________________ Date: _______________

Course: ________________

Chapter VI SYNTHESIS: MAKING INFORMED DECISIONS

by: Ramon Castillo Reyes

I. Introduction

What is the value of a college-level class in Ethics? We have been introduced to

four major ethical theories or frameworks: utilitarianism, natural law ethics, Kantian
deontology, and virtue ethics. None of them is definitive nor final. What then is the use of
studying them? Each represents the best attempts of the best thinkers in history to give
fully thought-out answers to the questions “What ought I to do?” and “Why ought I to do
so?” This quest has not reached its final conclusion; instead, it seems that the human
condition of finitude will demand that we continue to grapple with these questions. The
story of humanity appears to be the never-ending search for what it means to be fully
human in the face of moral choices.
The preceding chapters clarified several notions: (1) These questions of what the
right thing to do is and why are questions that all human beings---regardless of race, age,
socioeconomic class, gender, culture, educational attainment, religious affiliation or
political association---will have to ask at one point or another in their lives: (2) Neither
the laws nor rules of one’s immediate community or of wider culture of religious
affiliation or sufficiently answer these questions, especially when different duties,
cultures or religions intersect and conflict; (3) Reason has a role to play in addressing
these questions, if not in resolving them. This last element, reason, is the power that
identifies the situations in which rules and principles sometimes conflict with one
another. Reason, hopefully, will allow one to finally make the best decision possible in a
given situation of moral choice
II. Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Identify the different factors that shape an individual in her moral decision
making:
2. Internalize the necessary steps toward making informed moral decision and
3. Apply the ethical theories of frameworks on moral issues involving the self,
society and the non-human environment.
III. Discussion

Activity 1.

 Read

THE MORAL AGENT AND CONTEXTS

The one who is tasked to think about what is right and why it is so, and choose to
do so is a HUMAN INDIVIDUAL.
THE FOUR CROSS-POINTS:
1. THE PHYSICAL
2. THE INTERPERSONAL
 3. THE SOCIETY
4. THE HISTORICAL
 Who one is, firstly, is a function of physical events in the past and material factors
in the present that one did not have a choice in.
 An individual is also the product of an interpersonal cross-point of many events
and factors outside of one’s choosing. Thus, who one is – in the sense of one’s
character or personality has shaped by one’s relationships as well as the physical
factors that affect how one thinks and feels.
 Third cross-point is the societal: “who one is” is shaped by one’s society. The
term “society” pertains to all elements of the human groups – as opposed to the
natural environment – which one is a member of.
 The fourth cross-point is the historical which is simply the events that has
undergone. In short, who one is right now is shaped by its history.

RELIGION AND ETHICS

Ethics
- practical science morality of human conduct.
Religion
- a religion is an organized system of beliefs and practices often centered on one or
more Gods.
=Monotheistic -one God
=Polytheistic -many God's
- FOUR LARGEST RELIGIOUS GROUP -
•Christianity
•Islam
•Hinduism
•Buddhism
THE 4 MAJOR ETHICAL THEORIES OR FRAMEWORKS
 Utilitarianism
 Natural Law Theory
 Kantian Deontology and the
 Virtue Ethics
What are the Value of Studying Ethical Theories or Frameworks?
They serve as guideposts into making informed moral decision whenever we are
confronted with ethical problems. Of course, we need so much of consideration
knowing that we are not the only entity that exists in the world.
These ethical theories or frameworks, clarify many important aspects of moral.
Example:
1. Utilitarianism- puts more value on the notion of common good.
- It argues that an act is good if it will bring about the greatest good
for the greatest number of people.
 2. The natural law theory - it highlights that what is good is imprinted in our very
being in the form of natural inclinations.
3. Kant on deontology- puts the premium and rational will because it is the only
human capacity that can determine one's moral duty.
4. Virtue ethics- promotes the habituation of one's character. There should be a
continuous manifestation of the virtue to achieve the greatest good and goat-
happiness.
SOCIAL LIFE: IN THE PHILIPPINES CONTEXT AND IN THE
GLOBAL VILLAGE
- what makes our society complex is the presence of culture the world is
composed of the varied manifestations of culture in their traditions.
- how we do things concerning our moral duty should not be of insulted to
other culture.
THE MORAL AGENT AND MORAL CONTEXT

What want to do in one’s life is not dictated by one’s physical, interpersonal,

social, or historical condition.

What want ought to do is also not abstracted from one’s own specific situation.

MORAL AGENT

One always comes somewhere. One is always continuously being shape by many
factors outside of one’s own free will. The human individuals always exist in the tension
between being conditioned by external factors and being a free agent.

The moral agent is not calculating, unfeeling machine that produces completely
objective and absolutely correct solutions to even the most complex moral problems.

Famous saying: Epimeleia h’e uato, mean translated on English “Know thyself”.
Ramon C. Reyes explained that “Who one is” is a cross point. It means that one’s identity
WHO ONE IS- WHO I AM; is a product of many forces and events that happened
outside of one choosing.

Who one is firstly the function of PHYSICAL. You inherited the genetic
materials of your biological parents. Your body have been shaped and continues to be
continued by the set of environment. All of these are given. It had happened and still
happening whether you like it or not. You did not choose to be human being nor a set of
biological parents, or to be born and grow up in that set of physical environment.

As in individual is also product of an INTERPERSONAL – one did not choose

her own parents, character traits, personality, her overall doing things and thinking about
things have all been shape by the character of her parents surrounding her; siblings,
friends, classmates, workmates. Thus, WHO ONE IS: the sense of one’s character or
personality has been shaped by the one’s relationship.
 The third cross point for Mr. Reyes is the societal. Who one is shape by one’s
society. The term society is all the elements of the human groups- natural environmental.
The one member of culture. Our Who One Is was molded in a large part by kind of
society and culture which is we didn’t choose. The Filipino have their own way of doing
things, e.g. Pagmamano, is their own values and system.

Fourth, is the Historical when is simply the events that one’s people has
undergone. In short one’s person history shape who one is right now. However, being a
product of all their cross point is just one of the Who one is according to Reyes. This
happen because a human individual has a freedom. This freedom is not absolute: one
does not become something because one chooses to be. This freedom means that one has
the capacity to give herself a particular direction in life according to her own ideal life.

CULTURE AND ETHICS

CULTURE

 Is the characteristics and knowledge of a particular group of people,

encompassing language, religion, cuisine, social habitat, music and arts?

JAMES RACHEL

 an American philosopher who specialized ethics and animal rights.

 Was born on May 30, 1941 at Columbus, Georgia.
 Graduated from Mercer University in 1968. He received his Ph.D. in 1967
at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

CULTURAL RELATIVISM

 As the position that claims that there is no such thing as objective truth in
the realm of morality.

REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM

 Is an argument which first assumes that the claim in question is correct, in

order to show the absurdity that will ensue if the claim is accepted as such.

Rachel posits three absurd consequences of accepting the claim of cultural

relativism:

1. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot criticize the practices or beliefs
of another culture anymore as long as that culture thinks that what is doing is
correct.
2. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even criticize the practices or
beliefs of one’s own culture.
 3. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even accept that moral progress
can happen.
 Rachel end his article on cultural relativism by noting that someone can
recognize and respect cultural differences and still maintain the right to
criticize beliefs and practices that she thinks are wrong, if she performs
proper rational deliberation.

RELIGION AND ETHICS

 Many people who consider themselves “religious” assume that it is the teachings
of their own religion that define what is truly “right” or “wrong”, “good” or
“bad”.
 Beyond all the differences, however, religion in essence represents a group’s
ultimate most fundamental concerns regarding their existence.
 Many religious followers assume that what their religion teaches can be found
either in their sacred scriptures or in other forms of preaching that their leaders
had promulgated and become part of their tradition.
 Philosophical question that can be asked, vis-à-vis ethics, is “What exactly does
sacred scripture command?”
o Ex. “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” (Genesis 21:24)
 Based on what Ramon C. Reyes says concerning individual’s cross-points, one
can see that the reading or interpretation of a particular passage or text is the
product of an individual’s embodiment and historicity and on the other hand, her
existential ideal.
 Second, one must determine what justifies the claim of a particular religious
teaching when it commands its followers on what they ‘ought to do’.
 The philosophical-minded individual therefor is tasked to be critical even of her
own set of beliefs and practices and to not simply follow for the sake of blind
obedience.

MORAL DELIBERATION

 It is the practical reasoning of a person.

LAWRENCE KOHLBERGE

 He proposed the moral development.

LEVEL 1: PRECONVENTIONAL

 Child sense of morality is externally control.

STAGE 1: Obedience and Punishment

 STAGE 2: Instrumental Orientation

LEVEL 2: CONVENTIONAL

 Children continue to accept the rules of authority figures but this now due
to their belief that this is necessary to ensure positive relationship and
societal order.

STAGE 3: Good Boy, Nice Girl Orientation

STAGE 4: Law and Order Orientation

LEVEL 3: POST-CONVENTIONAL

 A person is matured enough. They are living in their own ethical

principles such as basic human rights, liberty and justice.

STAGE 5: Social-Contract Orientation

STAGE 6: Universal Ethical Principle

MORAL PROBLEMS

 There are different types of moral problems, each one requiring a particular
set of rational deliberation.
 Determine our level of involvement in the case at hand.
 Establish whether we are facing with a moral situation or not.
 Establish all the facts that might have a bearing on our decision.
 Identity of all the people who may potentially be affected by the implications
of a moral situation or by our concrete choice of action.
 The individual has to make his/her conclusions or decision.

TYPES OF ETHICAL PROBLEM /ISSUES

 A situation in which we need to clarify whether a certain action is morally

right or morally wrong.
 Whether a particular action in question can be identified with a generally
accepted ethical or unethical action.
 The presence of an ethical dilemma.

THE VALUE OF STUDYING ETHICAL THEORIES OR FRAMEWORKS

 These ethical theories/frameworks may serve as guideposts; given that they

are the best attempts to understand morality that the history of human thought
has to offer.
  Utilitarianism pays tribute to the value of impartiality, arguing that an act is
good if it will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number.
 Natural law theory puts more emphasis on the supposed objective, universal
nature of what is to be considered morally good.
 Kantian Deontology puts the premium on rational will, freed from all other
considerations.
 One has to realize that the philosophical study of theories/frameworks must
not merely end in a smorgasbord of theories. What the responsible moral
individual must instead perform is to continuously test the cogency and
coherence of the ethical theory/framework in question against the complexity
of the concrete experience at hand.

SELF, SOCIETY, AND ENVIRONMENT

Individual Self

In the realm of the self, one has to pay attention not just on how one deals with
oneself, but also on how one interacts with other individuals in personal relations. One
may respond to the demand for an ethically responsible “care for the self” by making full
use of the four ethical theories or frameworks.

JOHN STUART MILL’s utilitarianism, though seemingly a hedonistic theory

given its emphasis on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, elevates the human
element above the animalistic and above the merely selfish.

THOMAS AQUINAS natural law theory states as its first natural inclination the
innate tendency that all human being share with all other existing things; namely, the
natural propensity to maintain oneself in one’s existence.

THE NON-HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

In the case of utilitarianism, some scholars point out that this hedonistic doctrine
that focuses on the sovereignty of pleasure and pains in human decision-making should
extend into other creatures that can experience pleasures and pains, namely, animals.
Thus, one of the sources of animal ethics is utilitarianism.

Since Kantian Deontology focuses on the innate dignity of the human being as
possessing reason, it can be argued that one cannot possibly universalize maxims that in
the end will lead to an untenable social existence.

Thomas Aquinas, on the other hand, may not necessarily talk about physical
environment and human moral responsibility to it as such, but one can try to infer from
his philosophy that certain actions should be avoided because they do not produce a
harmonious, peaceful society.

Lastly, Aristotle’s virtue ethics talks about how to become a better person.

A CLOSING THAT IS REALLY AN OPENING

In the end, there is only a beginning: We do not a computer program here that can
automatically calculate what the right thing to do in a given situation.

There is only the human individual and his/her community of fellow human
beings who need to accept that they must continue to explore the meaning of what is
good and right while hoping to arrive at the best judgements they can make at this point
in time.

Realizing the finitude of human understanding and of the capacity to make

choices, but at the same time hoping that one’s best attempt at doing what is right does
mean something in the end – these are part and parcel of making informed moral
decisions.

ACTIVITY PAGE (Case Analysis)

Name: ________________________________ Date: ___________________

Course: _________________________
Organ Trafficking and Human Needs

The many development in the past few decades in both the life sciences and in
biotechnology have given rise to the recognition of a host of ethical issues that are
concerned with the physical survival and welfare of living creatures including, of course,
human beings.
Physicians and other health care professionals seem well placed to play a role in
the monitoring and, perhaps, in the curtailment of the trafficking in human beings for the
purpose of organ removal. They serve as important sources of information for patients
and may have access to information that can be used to gain a greater understanding of
organ trafficking networks. However, well-established legal and ethical obligations owed
to their patients can create challenging policy tensions that can make it difficult to
implement policy action at the level of the physician/patient. In this article, we explore
the role—and legal and ethical obligations—of physicians at 3 key stages of patient
interaction: the information phase, the pre transplant phase, and the post-transplant phase.
Although policy challenges remain, physicians can still play a vital role by, for example,
providing patients with a frank disclosure of the relevant risks and harms associated with
the illegal organ trade and an honest account of the physician's own moral objections.
They can also report colleagues involved in the illegal trade to an appropriate regulatory
authority.
 A Saudi Arabian man married a Filipino woman as a cover for buying her kidney,
trying to circumvent the Philippines' strict new rules to fight organ trafficking, officials
said Monday. The man's transplant was blocked by authorities, but the case shows the
difficulty the Philippines faces in fighting rampant trade in organs fueled by wealthy-but-
ailing foreigners buying kidneys from impoverished Filipinos. A human rights group says
it has documented nearly 200 poor kidney donors recruited by organ-trafficking
syndicates in a single province in the last few years. Social Welfare Secretary Esperanza
Cabral said the Saudi man applied for a transplant at a government-run hospital, listing
his wife as his voluntary donor. But hospital officials became suspicious when they
learned the couple had married only recently and that the husband spoke no English or
Tagalog, while the Filipino wife spoke no Arabic. "Clearly, it was not a donation," Cabral
told a news conference Monday. "It was actually organ sale." The Saudi man's transplant
application was rejected two months ago, though neither he nor his wife faced any
charges. Neither would say how much the woman was promised in exchange for her
kidney, Cabral said. Justice Undersecretary Ricardo Blancaflor said the transplant would
have been allowed had the marriage been authentic and if there was no commercial
transaction involved. The Philippines was named the No. 5 hotspot for organ trafficking
by the World Health Organization in 2005. China was No. 1. The trade mostly involves
kidneys, since most people can live with only one. Amihan Abueva, regional coordinator
of the private Asia Against Child Trafficking, said since last year her group has located at
least 195 kidney donors from poor communities in Quezon province, southeast of Manila,
who was recruited by syndicates. One of the donors was a 17-year-old male who received
P95, 000 ($1,980). At least two of the donors — who were paid less than promised —
have filed cases against the organ traffickers, Abueva said. The law allows cases to be
filed up 10 years after the crime was committed, and up to 20 years if it is large-scale
trafficking, she added. In 2007, out of 1,046 kidney transplants performed in the country,
81 percent were from living, non-related donors and 51 percent of the recipients were
foreigners, said the doctors' group Philippine Society of Nephrology. It wasn't clear that
all of those transplants involved an organ sale, but the statistics raised suspicions. The
government has been trying to curb the trade. It recently adopted strict rules restricting
foreigners from receiving organ transplants from Filipino donors. The new rules added to
a 2003 law that already prohibited organ sales, which are punishable by up to 20 years in
prison. However, the rules make an exception for family members or anyone with
emotional and social ties to the recipient — and Cabral said the case of the Saudi man
shows how far people will go to get around the law. Cabral had likened the sale of
kidneys to prostitution, and called for tougher action against brokers and doctors who
engage in the transplant of kidneys and other organs. She had appealed to those thinking
of selling their organs not to do it, saying they pay a steep price for a P100, 000 to P150,
000 payments that will run out in two months. In contrast, she said the brokers and
doctors engaged in the racket earn millions from each "transaction." -
I. This chapter identified and explained the steps in making informed decisions
when confronted with moral problems. The steps can be summarized as
follows:
1. Determine your involvement in the moral situation.
2. Gather all the necessary facts.
3. Identify the stakeholders.
4. Name all the alternative choices possible and their potential effects on
all stakeholders.
5. Identify the type of ethical issue at hand.
6. Make your ethical conclusion or decision.
 Activity 2 (Semi Final requirement)
Instruction: Discuss briefly and concisely the following questions (copy
and answer) Write – yellow paper – 10 pts. each

Let’s apply what you have learned.

1. Search your library resources as well as online sources to come up five other
ethical issues that can be categorized under “medical ethics”. List the issue down,
cite sources, and provide short explanation of each issue as well as one main
argument for and one main argument against a particular stand in the issue. Pay
particular attention to topics that are relevant to the contemporary Philippine
context. Make sure your sources are trustworthy and that you get all the necessary
facts straight.

2. Examine your feelings or emotions regarding the issue of organ trafficking. Did
you feel sympathetic to the woman who was about to sell her kidney to her Saudi
Arabian husband? Or were you morally repulsed by what she was planning to do?
Apply Ramon C. Reyes idea of the five cross-points that contribute to the
formation of who you are in order to understand your feelings about this
particular moral issue.

VI. REFERENCES:
Bulaong, Oscar G. Jr., “Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation” Published &
Distributed by REX Book Store. 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr. St., 1977 C.M. Recto
Avenue Manila. Tel. Nos. 735-1364, 736-0567.
Calano, Mark Joseph T. “Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation” Published &
Distributed by REX Book Store. 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr. St., 1977 C.M. Recto
Avenue Manila. Tel. Nos. 735-1364, 736-0567.
Lagliva, Albert M. “Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation” Published &
Distributed by REX Book Store. 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr. St., 1977 C.M. Recto
Avenue Manila. Tel. Nos. 735-1364, 736-0567.
Mariano, Michael Ner E. “Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation” Published &
Distributed by REX Book Store. 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr. St., 1977 C.M. Recto
Avenue Manila. Tel. Nos. 735-1364, 736-0567.
Principe, Jesus Deogracias Z. “Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation”
Published & Distributed by REX Book Store. 856 Nicanor Reyes Sr. St., 1977
C.M. Recto Avenue Manila. Tel. Nos. 735-1364, 736-0567.