ETHICS

Definition

ETHICS has been defined as philosophical science dealing with the

morality of human acts. It provides the principles of the morality of human
acts.
Etymologically, Ethics is derived from the Greek word Ethicos, or that
which pertains to ethos the English translation of which is “custom” or
“character”
Ethics is often called moral philosophy, a study that deals with the
principles and laws governing the morality of the human act.
For purposes of this course, Ethics is defined as the “practical and
philosophical science of the morality of human acts or human conduct”.

a) Ethics is a science. It is a relatively complete and systematically

arranged body of connected data together with the causes or
reason by which these data are known to be true. Ethics squares
with this definition, for it is a complete and systematically
arranged body of data which relate to the morality of human
conduct; and it presents the reasons which show these data to be
true. Ethics is therefore a science.

b) Ethics is a practical science. If the data of a science directly implies

rules or directions for thought or action, the science is called
practical. If the data of a science enrich the mind without directly
implying rules or directions, the science is called speculative. A
speculative science presents truths that are to be known; a practical
science presents truths that are to be acted upon. A speculative
science enlarges our knowledge and enhances our cultural
equipment; a practical science gives us knowledge with definite
guidance. Now the science of Ethics presents data which directly
imply and indicate directions for human conduct. Ethics is
therefore a practical science.

c) Ethics is a science of human conduct. By human act we mean only

such human activity as is deliberate and free. A deliberate and free
act, an act performed with advertence and motive, an act
determined (i.e., chosen and given existence) by the free will, is
called a human act. Acts performed by human beings without
advertence, or without the exercise of free choice, are called acts of
man, but they are not human acts in the technical sense of that
expression which is here employed. Ethics treats of human acts;

1
 human acts make human conduct: Ethics is therefore a science of
human conduct.

d) Ethics is the science of the morality of human conduct. Human

conduct is free, knowing, deliberate human activity. Such activity
is either in agreement or disagreement with the dictates of reason.
Now the relation (agreement or disagreement) of human activity
with the dictates of reason is called morality. Ethics studies human
activity to determine what it must be to stand in harmony with the
dictates of reason. Hence, Ethics deals with the morality of human
conduct.

The book of Montemayor (1994) provides the following definitions of

Ethics:

1. Ethics is the practical science of the morality of human actions.

2. Ethics is the science of human acts with reference to right and wrong
3. Ethics is the scientific inquiry into the principles of morality.
4. Ethics is the study of the rectitude of human conduct
5. Ethics is the human conduct from the standpoint of morality.
6. Ethics is the science which lays down the principles of right living
7. Ethics is the practical science that guides us in our actions that we may
live rightly and well.
8. Ethics is normative and practical science, based on reason, which studies
human conduct and provides norm for its natural integrity and honesty.
9. According to Socrates, ethics is the investigation of life.

Ethics is the study of man as moral being, one who is rationally able to
distinguish between right and wrong. It examines how man is accountable
for his actions and its consequences. It proposes how man ought to live his
life - meaningfully.

Ethics is concerned with morality, the quality which makes an act good
or evil, correct or wrong. Ethics examines and explains the rational basis
why actions are moral or immoral. In other words, Ethics is concerned with
the norms of human behavior.

Looking into these definitions we can say that they are similar to each
other. The definitions speak of the field of study of ethics as human conduct;
and of the investigation of such human conduct in terms of its morality. The
important terms that can be seen in them are:

2
 1. Science-systematic study or a system of scientific conclusions
clearly demonstrated, derived from clearly established principles and duly
coordinated
2. Morality – the quality of human acts as right, wrong or indifferent,
moral immoral or amoral.
3. Human acts –acts done with knowledge, freedom and free will or
consent.

Ethics is a practical and normative science, based on reason, which

studies human acts, and provides norms for their goodness and badness
(Timbreza, 1993)

As practical science,
❖ Ethics deals with a systematized body of knowledge that is applicable to
human action.
❖ The primary consideration of Ethics is the application of human
knowledge and its practicality to human experience.
❖ Thus, ethics is an indispensable part of man’s daily existence.

As a normative science,
❖ Ethics sets a basis or norm for the direction and regulation of human
actions.
❖ It sets rules and guidelines to maintain a sense of direction to human
actions
❖ It aids man in distinguishing whether one’s action can be considered good
or bad.

ETHICS…

❖ Is based on REASON. All ethical theories and all moral decisions must
have its basis from the power of reason.

❖ Is Different from RELIGION or THEOLOGY. Philosophy accepts truth on

the basis of reason. Those who do not believe in God may still have moral
life. Sometimes, those who believe in God may even be more immoral than
those who don’t.

❖ Studies HUMAN ACTS. Ethics particularly deals with voluntary human

conduct.

3
The Object of Ethics
Material Object of Ethics refers to the subject matter to be studied
namely, the human acts.
Formal Object is the morality of the human act. It is which is learned
and to be applied.
Formula Object Quo is the human reason employed in the study of
the course.

Importance of Ethics
Montemayor (1994) proclaims that the importance of the study of
ethics follows immediately from the importance of ethics itself. His idea is
manifested in the following:

1. Ethics means right living and good moral character and it is in

good moral character that man finds his true worth and perfection.
All the great teachers of the ages maintain that the supreme
purpose of human living lies not in the acquisition of material
good or bodily pleasures, nor in the attainment of bodily
perfections such as health and strength; nor even in the
development of intellectual skills but in the development of the
moral qualities which lift man far above brute creation.

2. Education is the harmonious development of the whole man-of all

ma’s faculties: the moral, intellectual, and physical powers in man.
Now then highest of man’s power are his reason and will. Hence,
the primary objective of education is the moral development of the
will.

Why Study Ethics?

There are several compelling reasons for you to study Ethics. These
are:
 Ethics is the very investigation of the meaning of life.
 You will be guided in understanding what real happiness is
 It will help you understand that man’s ultimate goal is not
acquisition of material goods rather his actual fulfilment lies in the
development of the moral quality
 It provides for you an idea of what right living is all about and the
importance of acquiring good moral character
 It can give the necessary guidelines for the acquisition of his goal.
 Character-building

4
The Three Approaches to Ethics (Branches of Ethics)

Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general

subject areas:

Meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Meta-ethics. It

deals with the nature of moral judgment. It looks at the origins and meaning
of ethical principles.
❖ Are ethical principles merely social inventions? Do they involve
more than expressions of our individual emotions? Meta-ethical
answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the
will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning
of ethical terms themselves.

Normative ethics. It is concerned with the content of moral judgments

and the criteria for what is right or wrong. It takes on a more practical task,
which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct.
❖ This may involve articulating the good habits that we should
acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our
behavior on others.

Applied ethics. It involves examining specific controversial issues,

such as abortion, infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns,
homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war.

DIVISION OF ETHICS

Ethics is divided into General Ethics and Applied or Special Ethics.

General Ethics is about the principles of morality. It explains the

norms with which the moral significance of the human act is determined.
General Ethics presents truths about human acts, and from these truths
deduces the general principles of morality.

Special Ethics is the application of the principles of General ethics to

the problems and issues confronting a person on account of his
circumstances in life, for instance, as a citizen, neighbor, worker, wife,
husband, or child. Special Ethics includes the sub-branches of professional
ethics, such as medical ethics, business ethics, legal ethics, biological and
environmental ethics. Special Ethics is applied Ethics. It applies the
principles of General Ethics in different departments of human activity,
individual and social.

5
 HUMAN ACTS
A. DEFINITION

As Ethics is defined as the practical science of the morality of human

actions, it is imperative to have a clear understanding of the act, the human
actions. Human actions may either be moral, immoral or amoral depending
on the circumstances that surround them.

Ethics deals with the study of man and particularly with his actions.
But not every act which proceeds from man is a human act, as used and
understood in ethics. By human act acts in ethics, we mean:
• The free voluntary acts of man
• The acts with knowledge and consent
• Acts which are proper to man as man; because, of all animals,
he alone has knowledge and freedom of will.
• Acts which, we are conscious are under our control and for
which we are responsible.
• Human acts are those which man is master, which he has the
power of doing or doing as he pleases.

Acts, therefore, to be truly human, must be done willfully, knowingly

and freely. Without will or consent, knowledge and freedom, there can be
no human act properly so-called. Only human acts have moral significance.

A human act is an act which proceeds from the deliberate free will of
man. In a wide sense, the term human act means any sort of activity, internal
or external, bodily or spiritual, performed by a human being. Ethics,
however, employs the term in a stricter sense and calls human only those
acts that are proper to man as man. Now man is an animal, and he has many
activities in common with brutes. Thus, man feels, hears, sees, employs the
senses of taste and smell, is influenced by bodily tendencies or appetites.
But man is more than an animal; he is rational, that is to say, he has
understanding and fee will. Hence it is only the act that proceeds from the
knowing and free willing human being that has the full character of a
human act. Such an act alone is proper to man as man. And therefore Ethics
understands by human acts only those acts that proceed from a deliberate
(i.e., advertent, knowing) and freely willing human being.

Ethics is not concerned with acts of man, but only with human acts.
Human acts are moral acts. For human acts man is responsible, and they are
imputed to him as worthy of praise or blame, or reward or punishment.
Human acts tend to repeat themselves and form habits. Habits coalesce into

6
what we call a man’s character. Thus, we find verified the dictum of ethics:
“A man is what his human acts make him.”

B. Classification of Human Acts

I. The Adequate Cause of Human Acts. – While all human acts have their
source in man’s free rational nature, some acts begin and are perfected in
the will itself, and the rest begin in the will and are perfected by other
faculties under the control of the will.

Thus, some human acts find their adequate cause in the will alone
(always remembering that we speak of the will of the advertent, knowing
man, i.e., of the deliberate will); and these are called elicited acts.

Other human acts do not find their adequate cause in the simple will-
act, but are perfected by the action of mental or bodily powers under the
control of the will, or, so to speak, under orders from the will; and these acts
are called commanded acts.

Under the head of “Adequate Cause” we therefore consider:

(A) Elicited Acts

Human acts are either elicited or commanded acts. Elicited acts are
those performed by the will and are not bodily externalized. Paul Glenn
enumerated the following elicited acts:

• Wish is the tendency of the will towards something, whether this

be realizable or not. The object of wishing may include the impossible, or
that which is remotely possible such as winning the sweepstakes. The
simple love of anything; is the first tendency of the will towards a thing,
whether this thing be realizable or not. Every human act begins with the
wish to act.
• Intention is the tendency of the will towards attainable but without
necessarily committing oneself to attain it. Such is our intention to study the
lesson, to attend a party, or to spend a vacation in Baguio. The purposive
tendency of the will towards a thing is regarded as realizable, whether the
thing is done or not. Intention is distinguished as actual, virtual, habitual,
and interpretative intention.
• Consent is the acceptance of the will of those needed to carry out
the intention. Thus, a woman is said to show consent when she consciously
attracts attention to herself. The acceptance by the will of the manes
necessary to carry out the intention. Consent is a further intention of doing
what is necessary to realize the first or main intention.

7
 • Election is the selection of the will of those means effective enough
to carry out the intention. A salesman shows election when he opts to visit
a client instead of just writing him a letter. The selection by the will of the
precise means to be employed (consented to) in carrying out an intention.
• Use is the command of the will to make use of those means elected
to carry out the intention. It is this act of the will which moves the salesman
to dress up and take a ride to see his client. The employment by the will of
powers (of body, mind, or both) to carry out its intention by the means
elected. True, the movement itself is a commanded act, but the
commanding, the putting to employment of bodily action, is the elicited
will-act of use.
• Fruition is the enjoyment of the will derives from the attainment of
the thing he had desired earlier. The joy of the woman on being
complimented for her attractiveness, or the satisfaction of the salesman in
closing a deal with his client is fruition. The enjoyment of a thing willed and
done; the will’s act of satisfaction in intention fulfilled.

Of the elicited acts listed, three appertain to the objective thing willed,
and three to the means of accomplishing it. Suppose the thing willed is a
trip to Europe. Then:
I wish ……………………………………..
I intend ………………………….
I enjoy when accomplished ……

I consent …………………………..
I elect ………………………………………
I use my faculties ……………….

(B) Commanded Acts are:

(a) Internal: acts done by internal mental powers under command of
the will.
(b) External: acts effected by bodily powers under command of the
will.
(c) Mixed: acts that involve the employment of bodily powers and
mental powers. Of course, all human acts are internal since all
originate in the will which elicits or commands them. Again, all
external acts are mixed since the outer activity which perfects them is
but the expression and fulfilment of the interior act of will. But, for
the sake of simplicity, we call those human acts external which are
perfected or completed by the exterior powers of the body; and we’ll
call mixed only those acts which involve the use of bodily powers as
well as internal powers distinct from the will.

8
 Commanded acts are those done either by man ‘s mental or bodily
powers under the command of the will. Commanded acts are either internal
or external actions. Examples of internal actions are conscious reasoning,
recalling something, encouraging oneself, controlling aroused emotions and
others. Examples of external actions are walking, eating, dancing, laughing,
listening, reading and others. Some actions are combinations of internal and
external actions such as listening, studying, reading, driving a car, writing
a letter or playing chess.

II. The Relation of Human Acts to Reason. – Human acts are either in
agreement or in disagreement with the dictates of reason, and this relation
(agreement or disagreement) with reason constitutes their morality. On the
score of their morality, or relation to reason, human acts are:
(a) Good, when they are in harmony with the dictates of right reason;
(b) Evil, when they are in opposition to these dictates;
(c) Indifferent, when they stand in no positive relation to the dictates
of reason. Indifferent human acts exist in theory, but not as a matter of
practical experience. A human act that is indifferent in itself becomes good
or evil according to the circumstances which affect its performance,
especially the end in view (or motive or purpose) of the agent.

C. Constituents of the Human Act

So, for an act to be human, it must possess three essential qualities: it

must be knowing, free, and voluntary.
i. Knowledge A human act proceeds from the deliberate will; it
requires deliberation. Now “deliberation” does not mean quiet, slow,
painstaking action. It means merely advertence, or knowledge in
intellect of what one is about and what this means. An act may be
done in the twinkling of an eye, and still be deliberate. For Ethics,
then, deliberation means knowledge. A human act is by definition a
deliberate act; that is, it is a knowing act. No human act is possible
without knowledge.
The will cannot act in the dark, for the will is a “blind” faculty
in itself. It cannot choose unless it “sees” to choose, and the light, the
power to see, is afforded by intellectual knowledge.
ii. Freedom. A human act is an act determined (elicited or
commanded) by the will and by nothing else. It is an act, therefore,
that is under the control of the will, an act that the will can do or leave
undone. Such an act is called a free act. Thus, every human act must
be free. In other words, freedom is an essential element of the human
act.

9
 iii. Voluntariness. The Latin word for will is voluntas, and from
this word, we derive the English terms, voluntary and voluntariness.
To say, therefore, that a human act must be voluntary, or must have
voluntariness, is simply to say that it must be a will -act. This we
already know by the very definition of the human act. Voluntariness
is the formal essential quality of the human act, and for it to be
present, there must ordinarily be both knowledge and freedom in the
agent. Hence, the term voluntary act is synonymous with human act.

The Voluntariness of Human Acts

A) Kinds or Degrees of Voluntariness

i. Perfect and Imperfect. Perfect voluntariness is present in the

human act when the agent (i. e., the doer, performer, actor)
fully knows and fully intends the act. Imperfect
voluntariness is present when there is some defect in the
agent’s knowledge, intention, or in both.
ii. Simple and Conditional. Simple voluntariness is present in
a human act performed, whether the agent likes or dislikes
doing it. Conditional voluntariness is present in the agent’s
wish to do something other than that which he is actually
doing, but doing with repugnance or dislike.
iii. Direct and Indirect. Direct voluntariness is present in a
human act willed in itself. Indirect voluntariness is present
in that human act which is the foreseen result (or a result
that could and should have been foreseen) of another act
directly willed. A human act that is directly willed is called
voluntary in se (i. e., in itself), while a human act that is
indirectly willed is called voluntary in causa (i. e., in its
cause).
iv. Positive and Negative. Positive voluntariness is present in a
human act of doing, performing. Negative voluntariness is
present in a human act of omitting, refraining from doing.
v. Actual, Virtual, Habitual, and Interpretative. Actual
voluntariness (or actual intention) is present in a human act
willed here and now. Virtual voluntariness (or virtual
intention) is present in a human act done as a result of (of in
virtue of) a formerly elicited actual intention, even if that
intention be here and now forgotten. Habitual voluntariness
(or habitual intention) is present in a human act done in
harmony with, but not as a result of, a formerly elicited and
unrevoked actual intention. Interpretative voluntariness (or

10
 interpretative intention) is that voluntariness which, in the
judgment of prudence and common sense, would be
actually present if opportunity or ability for it were given.

B) Indirect Voluntariness
Indirect voluntariness, or voluntariness in cause, is present in that
human act which is an effect, foreseen or foreseeable, of another act directly
willed.
We have seen that human acts are acts under the free control of the
will. It is clear that, since the will controls such acts, the will is responsible
for them. In other words, human acts are imputable (as worthy of praise or
blame, reward or punishment) to their author.
Two supremely important ethical questions present themselves in the
matters of indirect voluntariness and imputability.

i. The First Question: When is an agent (doer, actor, performer) responsible

for the evil effect of a cause directly willed?
The agent is responsible for such an effect when three conditions are
fulfilled, viz.:
(1) The agent must be able to foresee the evil effect, at least in a general
way.
(2) The agent must be free to refrain from doing that which is the
cause of the evil effect.
(3) The agent must be morally bound not to do that which is the cause
of the evil effect.

ii. The Second Question: When may one perform an act, not evil in itself,
which has two effects, one good, one evil?
One may perform such an act when three conditions are fulfilled, viz.,
(1) The evil effect must not precede the good effect.
(2) There must be a reason sufficiently grave calling for the act in its
good effect.
(3) The intention of the agent must be honest, that is, the agent must
directly intend the good effect and merely permit the evil effect as a
regrettable incident or “side issue.”

11