MODULE 5

BUSINESS ETHICS & SOCIAL

RESPONSIBILITY
 CRITICAL SURVEY OF THE DIFFERENT
NORMATIVE ETHICAL THEORIES COMMONLY
USED IN BUSINESS DECISION MAKING
“There is always a best way of doing everything?”
– Ralph W. Emerson

INTRODUCTION
Ethics is not only concerned with the study of what is right or wrong in our human conduct.
As a practical science, ethics also investigates how man ought to behave in a very specific and
concrete situation by examining his conduct in the light of various norms that guide his moral
judgement. The word ought also implies the moral obligation on the part of the actor or the doer
of such action. This chapter discusses the different ethical theories as proposed by different
philosophers which are commonly used by businessmen, managers and decision makers to
benchmark and evaluate their ethical decisions.
OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this chapter, the students are expected to:
1. Understand and evaluate critically the various ethical theories and principles as proposed
by different philosophers.
2. Appreciate ethics as a normative science.
3. Resolve moral issues and ethical dilemmas in business from the perspective of various
ethical theories.
4. Develop the ability to identify and resolve moral issues in business.
Key Terms:

● Consciousness

● Natural Law

● Eternal Law

● Categorical Imperative
 ● Moral Rationalism

● Egoism

● Egoist

● Egotist

● Hedonism

● Utilitarianism

● Moral Positivism

● Divine Command Theory

● Virtue

1. The Norms of Morality According to the Scholastic Philosophy and Traditional Ethics
Morality consists of the conformity or non-conformity of the human conduct with norms. In
the light of Traditional Ethics, these norms are called the “dictates of reason.” Morality
therefore, is defined as the quality of a thing manifesting its conformity or non-conformity
with its norms or criteria. R. Gula, defines the norms of morality as, “the criteria of judgment
about the sort of persons we ought to be and the sort of actions we ought to perform”
(Agapay, 1991). These are standards that indicate the rightfulness or wrongfulness, the
goodness or evilness, the value or disvalue of a thing.

Norm Ethical Principles

Rules, among Others
Human Conduct Judgment
Conformity
Or Mortal
Non-conformity or
Immoral
Figure 7. evaluating the Human Conduct

The Norms of Morality

 ● Conscience. Traditional ethics considers conscience as the proximate norm of morality.
It is defined as the practical judgment of reason deciding upon an individual act as good
and to be followed or as evil and therefore, to be avoided. Conscience is the nearest
criterion in terms of evaluating the human conduct. It tells us further that a thing is good
and should be followed and some things are evil and thus, should be avoided. Although
conscience is one of the criteria for evaluating the human act, its judgment may not be
correct all the time. That’s why there is a need to educate our conscience so that it can
form correct moral judgment.

Types of Conscience:
Moralists say that there are eight kinds of conscience, to wit: antecedent, consequent, right or
true, erroneous, certain doubtful, scrupulous, and lax.

1. Antecedent conscience is a judgment before an action is done. Its main functions are to
command, to advice, to forbid, and to permit.
2. Consequent conscience is a judgment after an act is done. It bears the following effects:
inner peace and remorse.
3. True conscience is a conscience which judges things truly as they are. Knowledge and the
sense of responsibility for one’s actions help greatly in forming a correct conscience.
4. Erroneous conscience is also called false conscience. it judges things in a distorted
manner since it considers bad acts as good and good acts as bad. This distorted judgment
in erroneous conscience is brought about by a false interpretation of the moral principles.
There are two kinds of erroneous conscience, namely: Invincible or inculpable and
vincible or culpable. The former means that the agent is without fault or knowledge
while the latter means that the conscience is erroneous through the agent’s fault.
5. Certain conscience is a subjective certainty of the legality of particular actions to be done
or to be omitted. This is the kind of conscience that moralists recommend to be always
followed by man.
6. Doubtful conscience happens when a person is not certain about a moral judgment.
Moralists recommend that this kind of conscience should not be followed unless the
person has resolved the doubt.
7. Scrupulous conscience is one which sees wrong where there is none. It is a conscience
which is extremely austere; it is always scared to commit evil.
8. Lax conscious is the opposite of scrupulous conscience. It is the kind of conscience which
fails to see wrong where there is wrong. This conscience categorically needs a right
education.
● Natural Law ( agere sequitur esse). Traditional ethics considers this as the remote norm
of morality. It reflects what the thing is in accordance with its nature. According to
Traditional Ethics, everything has been made with a specific nature and a purpose. St.
Thomas Aquinas believes that the purpose is always good. A good act therefore, is what
befits the nature of man; a bad act is one that does not befit man’s nature. For example, a
knife is supposed to cut things into pieces. If the knife does not cut things into pieces
anymore, it is no longer true to what it is. Agere sequitur esse (action follows being)
means that a thing is good insofar as it is true to its nature and purpose. Similarly, a good
man is one who behaves and acts in accordance with his nature as a man. Man’s nature is
good. And if he acts accordingly, then he is true to what he is. If he does something bad,
his action is no longer reflective of what he is supposed to be. An action, therefore, is
good or bad depending on its conformity or nonconformity to the act’s nature in relation
to its purpose or end.

THE OLD MAN AND THE SCORPION

Once there was a very old man who used to meditate early every
morning under a large tree on the bank of the Ganges River in India. One
morning, having finished his meditation, the old man opened his eyes and
saw a scorpion floating helplessly in the strong current of the river. As the
scorpion pulled closer to the tree, it got caught in the long roots that
branched out far into the river. The scorpion struggled frantically to pull
itself but got more entangled in the complex network pf the tree roots.
When the old man saw this, he immediately stretched himself into the
extended roots and reached out to rescue the drowning scorpion. But as
soon as he touched it the animal jerked and stung him wildly. Instinctively,
the old man withdrew his hand, but then, after having regained his balance,
he once again stretch himself out along the roots to save the agonized
scorpion. But every time the old man came within the reach, the scorpion
stung him so badly with its poisonous tail that his hands became swollen
and bloody and his face distorted by pain.
At the moment a passer-by saw the old man stretched on the roots
struggling with the scorpion and shouted: “Hey, stupid old man, what is
wrong with you? Only a fool risks his life for such an ugly useless
creature. Don’t you know that you may kill yourself trying to save that
ungrateful animal?”
Slowly, the old man turned his head, and looking calmly at the
stranger’s eyes, he said: “Friend because it is the nature of the scorpion to
sting, why would I give up my own nature to save?”
 ● Eternal Law. Traditional ethics considers eternal law or the divine law as the ultimate
norm of morality.
It is the plan of God in creating the universe and assigning to each creature a specific
nature. For St. Thomas Aquinas – “the divine wisdom directing all actions and
movements.” For St. Augustine – “the divine reason or will of God commanding the
natural order of things be preserved and forbidding that it be disturbed.” Eternal Law
provides for the cosmic order where every creature stands different and independent from
each other but not apart from the unified purpose of creation. There is harmony in the
diversity in the universe. For the scholastic philosophers, there is only one criterion in
evaluating the human act, that is, the eternal law. For them, conscience and natural law
are reflections of the divine law.

Business Applications:
a. Ideally, the three norms of morality according to Traditional Ethics must be able
to guide our business decision making process. However, these three criteria are
not widely accepted by decision makers.
b. Common sense directs that the “dictates of reason” should be enough to guide our
evaluation between the actions that we perform and the norms that determine
what is acceptable and what is not in our human behavior.

2. Kantian Ethics *Immanuel Kant 1724-1804)

Born in Konigsberg, Germany on April 22, 1724, Kant received his education at the
Collegium Fredericianum and University of Konigsberg. In college, he studied chiefly the
classics, and at the university, he studied physics and Mathematics. After his father died, he
was compelled to forego his university career and earned a living as a private tutor.
In 1755, aided by a friend, he resumed his studies and obtained a doctorate. His initial stint as
a teacher at the University of Konigsberg focused on lecturing on Science and mathematics.
Gradually, however, his field of concentration covered almost all branches of Philosophy.
Although Kant’s lectures and works were written during this period, he established his
reputation as an original philosopher. He was made professor of Logic and Metaphysics in
1770, and received a chair at the University of Konigsberg where he continued to teach and
influence a lot of students. Kant’s unorthodox religious teachings, which were based on
rationalism rather than revelation, brought him into conflict with the government in Prussia,
and in 1792, he was forbidden by Frederick William II, King of Prussia, to teach and write on
religious subjects. Kant gave in to this for five years, but after the death of the king, he
considered himself released from his obligation. In 1798, the year following his retirement
from the university he published a summary of his religious views. He died on February 12,
1804.
 His works include the following:The Critique of Pure Reason, The Prolegomena, The
Foundations of The Metaphysics of Morals, The Critique of Practical Reason, The Critique
of Judgment, and Religion Within the Limits of Pure Reasons, among others.

Kant’s Moral Rationalism

Kant believed that reason is autonomous. For him, reason is “the be all and end all” of
everything. Following this line of thinking, Kant maintained that all trusts and all knowledge
are derived from human reason. And therefore, all laws and all moral principles also came
from human reason. According to Kant, reason commands and we must obey it without
questioning. In effect, Kant is proposing an absolute morality, which for him requires
absolute obedience.

For Kant, morality:

- A priori. (Not based and not derived from experience.)
- It is universal. (It applies to everybody.)
- It is absolute. (Moral laws are complete and fixed.)
- Moral laws are immutable. (Moral laws cannot be changed.)
As to the question “Why must we do good?” Kant answers by saying, that “we must do
good, because we must, it is our duty to obey immediately without questioning.” “Duty” then for
Kant, is the test and the mainspring of all morally good acts. Thus, for Kant, an acceptable and
an action that is good, comes from one’s sense of duty as its motive. Because of this, Kant claims
that the motive in moral acts cannot be happiness, pleasure, God, or religion but simply – duty.
The measure of a good motive or will or intention is in the context of one’s sense of duty.

Kant’s Categorical Imperative

Kant was probably best known for his theory about a single, general moral obligation that
explains all other moral obligations we have. This is his concept of Categorical Imperative. Kant
argues that since morality is a product of reason, the obedience to this command is true and
binding because it is beyond experience. Since morality for Kant is a priori, the command to
live a moral life by obeying the laws of reason is a must. A categorical imperative, generally
speaking, is an unconditional obligation, or an obligation that we have regardless of our will or
desires.
Moral duties can be derived from the categorical imperative which can be formulated in three
ways:

● The first formulation (the Formula of Universal Law or the Principle of

Universalizability) says: “Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can
at the same time will that it becomes a universal law.”
 ● The second formulation (the Formula of Humanity or the Principle of Humanity) says:
“Act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other,
always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.”
● The third formulated (the Formula of Autonomy) is a synthesis of the previous two. It
says that we should so act that we may think of ourselves as legislating universal laws
through our maxims. We may think of ourselves as such autonomous legislators only
insofar as we follow our own laws.

This theory is saying that we have universal duties, despite one’s subjective (and thus, merely
hypothetical) imperatives that seek to fulfill one’s own inclinations or happiness instead of these
duties, known as Deontological Ethics. Kant was often cited as the most important source of this
strand of ethical theory, in particular, of the Theory of Conduct, also known as the Theory of
Obligation.
Critique on Kant’s Ethical Philosophy
The emphasis of Kant’s Philosophy is on the absolute and immutable nature of morality;
however, it shows some basic defects.
Because for him reason is autonomous, Kant confuses what is merely indicative for what
is constitutive. Reason is a declarative faculty; it sees things; it does not make things. Also, it
tells us the law; it does not make the law. According to Kant, nothing can be superior and
inferior to itself at the same time. For reason is the supreme commander and the commanded at
the same time. His theory does not explain why reason commands, and why we must obey.
In addition, Kant misses to reflect that human reason does not and cannot make the moral law.
Instead, it only discovers it. Man only discovers the moral law in his every nature as a rational
animal. Therefore, Kant is wrong because reason does not make the moral law, it only tells us
about the law.
Another theory that we can drive from Kant’s ethical philosophy is his claim that the sense of
duty is the sole norm of morality. Duty cannot be the only motive in the performance of an act
because there are other motives that are more worthy and more noble than the concept of sense
of duty. Motives such as, love, pity, mercy, and a lot more, are examples of these actions, which
are not only good but unquestionably of highest category of love and patriotism, e.g., the death
of Jose Rizal and Ninoy Aquino are examples of actions whose motivations are not inspired by
one’s sense of duty but by love for the country. According to Kant, these actions of Rizal and
Aquino cannot be considered morally good because they were not done out of pure sense of
duty.
Business Application:
 a. Kant introduces the importance of humanistic dimension into business decisions, e.g.,
treat human beings not as means to an end, because human beings have ends in
themselves.
b. Kant stresses the importance of motives and of acting on principles, e.g., business
decisions are based sometimes on personal convictions and principles regardless of the
outcomes or results.
c. Kant’s Categorical Imperative gives us firm rules to follow in moral decision making,
rules that do not depend on circumstances or results and that do not permit individual
exceptions e.g., no matter what the consequences may be or who does it, some actions
are always wrong, e.g., lying, breaking promises, and others.

3. The Machiavellian Principle (Niccolo Machiavelli 1469-1527)

Niccolo (di Bernardo) Machiavelli is an Italian essayist, dramatist, historian, sketch
writer, biographer, dialogist, writer of novels, and poet. He was born on May 3, 1469 in
Florence, Italy. He was the third of four children of Bernardo Machiavelli, an impecunious
lawyer and Bartolomea Nelli, an educated woman who wrote poetry.

When he was in his twenties, it was the height of the influence of the great Dominican
preacher Savonarola in Florence. Then this influential man came to such a miserable end
in1498, when he lost his regime. Machiavelli learned early about the relative power of food
and evil forces in society. Later on, he was sent to France as part of the second chancery of
Florence. In December of 1500, Machiavelli ended his mission in France and in October of
1502 he was sent to Imola to meet with Cesar Borgia, duke of Romagna. He was awed by the
duke’s leadership style of using every means possible to stay in power. He likewise noticed
that Cesar Borgia’s success was basically grounded on the duke’s good fortune, so he lost his
power just when fortune deserted him.

In 1512, Machiavelli lost his post at the chancery and returned to Florence. In 1513, he
was suspected of taking part in an abortive conspiracy and was tortured, imprisoned and was
fined heavily until Cardinal Giovanni Medici was elected pope and became Pope Leo X.
Machiavelli was then granted amnesty together with other prisoners of the Medici
government. After getting out of prison, Machiavelli wanted very much to be a part of the
government and started working on The Prince. It was not easy to gain connection with the
government again and so when he did, he was given the task to write the history almost his
entire life. Eventually, France treacherously took possession of Italy. The Holy Roman
emperor sent troops to help deal with the French forces but because the troops were
undisciplined, they did not succeed. The Medici government collapsed and Machiavelli lost
his position in the government. Machiavelli noted how easy the rule of power could destroy a
city. He died on June 21, 1527.

Ethical Philosophy
 The life experience of Machiavelli contributed to his thoughts on the rules and principles
of effective political behavior. He recorded his unsystematic thoughts in two books, The
Prince and The Discourses. In The Discourses, Machiavelli wrote approvingly of the Roman
Republic, expressing enthusiasm for self-government and liberty. In The Prince, however,
his emphasis was on the need for an absolute monarch. The clue to Machiavelli’s thoughts
lies in the apparent inconsistency of these two books. By expressing his preference for an
absolute monarch in The Prince, he did not intend to reject the desirability of self-
government about which he spoke so approvingly in The Discourses.

Machiavelli, along with his principles, particularly those from The Prince, will always be
associated with the phrase – “the end justifies the means,” also his views on cruelty,
selfishness, and the bad side of human nature. His book, The Prince, describes his concept of
a leader as a cruel, evil, and deceiving person. However, reading his words again, one would
note that he was not actually implying that leaders should be evil, dishonest, and not even the
words “the end justifies the means” were literally written in his work.

What Machiavelli was suggesting in his work, is that sometimes people have to do
something not necessarily good to attain something good. His principles indicated that a
leader should be prepared to do evil when necessary to gain power. He mentioned ways on
how to deal with a state that has “rotten” people. His principles operated with the assumption
that people are bad which, during his time, was true for the state of Florence in particular,
and for Italy in general. Reading through his biography, and his novel, The Prince, it can be
observed that Machiavelli did not create his own principles for a leader’s personal gain but to
maintain a government or a principality for the good of the state.

His principles reflected in The Prince were principles derived from actual experiences.
Throughout his life, he had observed how weak the state of Florence was, and how the
weaknesses of some leaders led to the state’s collapse. He wanted a strong leaders to unite
Italy, which, during that time, was divided between disputing powers and the threat of
foreign invasions.

Machiavelli’s principles were based on his negative perceptions about human nature and
the social problems of his time. From these, he made very radical recommendations on how a
leader should govern effectively. In the same book – The Prince, Machiavelli indicated that
men must govern in the real world as they are, and not in some ideal world where men
behave as they ought to – honest, loyal and fair. Basically, what Machiavelli is implying is
that there is no problem with a good prince in a state where all people are good a d honest.
However, since this is not the case at all times, Machiavelli recommends his radical principle
of governance – “the end justifies the means,” which was necessary for the survival of a
government and a leader in his time. The following words from The Prince can somehow
summarize this Principle:
“Any man who tries to be good all the time is bound to come to ruin among the great number
who are not good. Hence a prince who wants to keep his authority must learn not to be good,
and use that knowledge, or refrain from using it, as necessity requires.”

The principles found in The Prince therefore, refer to gaining and maintaining political
power and in the process creating a strong republic. If his principles were intended for the
greater good, then they are neither immoral nor unethical. However, when the same
principles are to be used by people for personal gain – they become immoral and unethical.
Much of these though, may still be subject to debate. Machiavelli has always favored a
republic over a dictatorial form of government, as shown in The Discourses. This can be
seen as his inconsistency, but for others, it only shows that principles reflected in The Prince
were means to jumpstart a united Italy which was Machiavelli’s main vision – the creation of
a strong Italian Republic.

“The end justifies the means.”

Leader
Means End

Absolute Do
Monarch anything
illegal or Creation of an

Figure 8. The Machiavellian Principle

In addition, Machiavelli also espouses violence in the process of creating a strong leader
in 16th century Italy. In the book The Prince, Machiavelli states in Chapter 18:

“You must know, then, that there are two methods of fighting, the one by law, the other by
forces; the first methods of that of men, the second of beasts; but as the first method is
insufficient, one must have recourse to the second.”
 From that statement, Machiavelli is clearly promoting the concept of violence in his
ethical philosophy. Consistent with his ethical paradigm “that the end justifies the means” he
seems to assert the use of violence to achieve a stable leadership.

Critique on Machiavelli’s Principle

1. The philosophy of Machiavelli gives an alternative to come up with a basis for running a
government. In our present society, we are experiencing a serious financial crisis and our
economy may collapse if the government would not create means to collect sufficient
resources to pay the country’s debt and overcome the deficit. The Arroyo government
pushes the lawmakers to pass the 12% VAT to pull together funds by collecting more to
increase the national budget. It seems to be a dilemma between making people pay more
taxes, thus, increase the cost of goods, and helping the people catch up with difficulties of
life. More taxes collected will mean more funds for the government to spare for various
projects for the poor. However, more taxes collected would mean higher cost of
commodities that the public has to shoulder. In this case, the government is bent to use
power for the public good. Exercising power at the expense of the people’s convenience
seems justified in this case.
On another note, using the principle “the end justifies the means” could mean more
suffering for the poor. The poor becomes poorer while the rich becomes richer. Higher
taxes imposed will be passed on the consumers as the businessmen remit increased taxes
to the government as a result of higher cost of goods paid for by consumers. Even if the
government intends to help the poor as it collects more taxes, the poor may find it more
difficult to cope with the very high cost of living as prices of commodities increase. Thus,
before the government gathers enough funds to help the poor, the effect of raising the
taxes has already made the situation miserable.

2. Lord Acton, a British statesman, once said: “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power
corrupts absolutely.” Although power is used to maintain and to govern a state, staying
long in power could also be dangerous. This is the reason why so many countries today
have abandoned the political system called monarchy. Aside from a few exceptions like
some Arab countries and Brunei, countries nowadays are not anymore ruled by kings and
queens, men and women having absolute power over a state by virtue of their birth and
ancestors. A few countries have preserved the trappings of monarchy, but usually this is
called constitutional monarchy, where their kings and queens are mere symbolic
figureheads. The real power resides in an elected Prime Minister. Reason: A human
being cannot be trusted with absolute power.

3. “The end does not justify the means.” We should never employ bad means in order to
attain a good end. We should not do evil so that good may result. The reason behind this
principle is that the morality of an act primarily depends on the nature of the act itself and
not on the intention of the agent, nor on the consequence of the act.
 4. “Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu.” (An act, in order to be morally
good, must be wholly or entirely good, anything wanting makes it bad.) The means that
for an act to be morally good, the specific determinants of morality which are: 1) the end
of the agent (motive); 2) the end of the action (means); and 3) the circumstances of the
action, must be good. If one of these three elements is questionable, then the whole action
becomes morally questionable.
5. Although Machiavelli was considered as a social reformer in the sense that he wanted a
strong leadership in a troubled 16th century Italy, his paradigm for leadership suggests
that one should be indifferent to morality as well as legality. In this light, no one can
convince Machiavelli or any of his followers of the importance of an ethical decision. For
some, the Machiavellian system is not immoral but simply amoral.

Business Applications:
On Management
A management style where all employees are required to work very hard no matter what
it takes just to achieve the bottom line could be a scenario of applying the Machiavellian
principle. The employees sacrifice their time for family, relationship with others and with God to
comply with the demands of the competitive work environment. Some may even be required to
leave their homes to be assigned to a far destination accessible to the demands of the job but not
to the requirements of a good family life. Indirectly, the means to achieve the goal of a
corporation takes all measures, even changing the lifestyle of a person.
On the Individual
In meeting the demands of a job to make both ends meet or to provide for a comfortable
life for the family, people tend to prioritize their time for work over time for family. Their
intention is to give the best to the family in terms of material things but in the process, they
sacrifice quality time for the family. In effect, the good objective of providing for the family
becomes the excuse for neglecting other responsibilities. Mothers may miss out on being the first
teachers of the children, fathers may no longer notice that the kids have started to grow fast.
Parents may miss important events in the family just because they have to work very hard to earn
more. Even if they want to ensure a better life for their family by working hard, if home-life is
overlooked, there may be no more family to offer the fruits of working hard. The end does not
justify the means.
On Leadership
Sometimes, an autocratic leadership style is necessary especially in running an
organization. Although the democratic style of leadership has its own benefits, it may not work
in some instances, and in some organizations. At times, we need a strong autocratic leader to
motivate people, to attain the goals of a state or organization, as in the case of progressive
countries like Singapore, Malaysia, and Taiwan.

4. Utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill

The word utilitarian is derived from the Latin words “utile bonum” or “utilis” which
means usefulness. The utilitarian ethics is considered the most important consequentialist
theory, whose principle is best explained by the maxim, “Do whatever produces the greatest
good for the greatest number.” The theory also argues that what makes an act right is its
consequences and not the motive of the action.

Utilitarian is a theory very much similar to Hedonism (a school of thought that considers
pleasure as the highest good). It makes utility or usefulness a norm of morality. If an act
administers to the temporal welfare and happiness of man, then it is good. But if an act
obstructs or hinders or retards happiness, then it is bad. To a utilitarian, the effects or
consequences determine the goodness or badness of an action. In other words, an act is
considered moral if it results in good consequences, otherwise it is immoral. An act is good
if and when it gives good results, if it works, if it makes you successful, and if it makes you
attain your purpose. Otherwise, it is bad.

The two main proponents of this principle are Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.

JEREMY BENTHAM (1748-1832)

Jeremy Bentham was a child prodigy who was born to a wealthy Tory family in London
on February 15, 1748. At the age of three, he has read the multi-volume history of England.
He studied the Latin grammar at age four. At age eight, he went to Westminster. He received
his Bachelor of Arts degree at The Queen’s College in Oxford three years after his entrance
at the age of 12 in 1763. In 1766, he obtained his minister of Arts degree from the same
educational institution. His lawyer father urged him to attend the Lincoln’s Inn in preparation
for a legal profession. He trained as a lawyer but never practiced law. He was admitted to the
bar in 1769.

In 1776, he attended a series of lectures on law by Sir William Blackstone, a famous

scholar. Bentham called Blackstone’s fallacy as “rhetorical nonsense.” He was disgusted by
the way the legal and political professions used their power to oppress those beneath them in
the social order. He called such actions, including the inalienable rights, as “nonsense on
stilts.”

After receiving his Master of Arts degree, he decided to go into a literary career instead
of practicing law. He published his first book, entitled Fragment on Government in 1776.
The book is a critique on the political views of Sir William Blackstone. Bentham showed
interest both in legal and social reforms for England. He wrote daily commentaries on the
need to bring reason, order, empirical evidence and morality to British law. He also
advocated prison and educational reforms and the extension of voting rights.

Bentham wanted to create laws not just for the convenience of the elite but also for the
best interest of the whole community. He became an enemy to church authorities, lawyers,
members of the parliament and wealthy businessmen but he was popular to many English
citizens because of his thinking. He was an influential public figure until he died on June 6,
1832.

Ethical Philosophy

The term Utility, according to Bentham, has two meanings. By utility, it means that
property in any object which tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or
happiness. Utilitarian ethics puts emphasis and significance on the consequences as a result
of an act and completely disregards the motive of an act. An action is considered right or
wrong depending on the consequence.

Utilitarian principle disregards the importance of motive because motive is known only to
the person who has it. It would be difficult or impossible for others to praise or blame a
moral agent of a person’s action if motive alone will determine human act as good or bad, or
right or wrong. For instance, if a man builds a wooden bridge where people can cross to
avoid the flood, the action is said to be praiseworthy. However, if the man collects money
from those who use the bridge, then the motive is selfish and the act would not be
praiseworthy.

Motives are personal; hence, it is difficult or impossible to know this with a high degree
of certainty. There is difficulty in evaluating the moral acts of others and holding them
morally responsible, for their acts would not be apparent. As such, observers could render
judgments that are inconclusive or purely speculative.

The utilitarian Principle according to Bentham can be coined in the phrase – “The
greatest good is the greatest pleasure of the greatest number.” This simply implies that an
action is considered to be good if it gives the person the greatest pleasure or happiness (in
the view of Mill) to the majority of people affected by the action. An action is bad or evil if
it does otherwise.
JOHN STUART MILL (1806-1873)

John Stuart Mill was the oldest of the nine children of Harriet and James Burrow Mill.
He was born in London. His father, James Mill, was a well-known philosopher who admired
Jeremy Bentham. James Mill, following his and Bentham’s plan, had John read Greek at the
age of three and Latin at the age of eight.

Mill was known to have read Plato’s Dialogue at the age of 10. His father often lectured
him on various topics and had John prepare a summary of his dialogue the following day.
Each morning, as John and his father went for a walk, his father test him on subjects he
studied the previous day.
John received intense schooling from his father for which John would later say “through the
training bestowed on me, I started, I may fairly say, with an advantage of a quarter of a
century over my contemporaries. Unfortunately, I was never a boy.”

His father James received a government post as an assistant examiner at the East Indian
House, after he finished writing the history of India. Five years later, James Mill arranged a
position for John. John, who was only 17, had to work for 24 years at the East Indian House.
At age 20, he fell into a “dull state of nerves.” He attributed his breakdown to his education
which overemphasized the analytical and ignored the emotional values.

Mill’s Ethical Philosophy

John Stuart Mill believes that human beings pursue happiness naturally and will avoid
pain or suffering. He concluded that since man naturally seeks happiness and avoid pain, then
what constitutes good moral is happiness and pain constitutes moral evil. Therefore, an act
that promotes happiness is moral, and that which causes pain is immoral. In this case, Mill’s
brand of utilitarianism differs from Bentham’s brand of utilitarianism which emphasized
“pleasure” while Mill’s utilitarianism promoted the concept of “happiness.”

To the utilitarian, happiness is not merely the happiness of one person but rather the
happiness of the greater number of people. The amount of happiness becomes great if a
greater number of people experience it. An act that can make many people happy is better
than an act that gives happiness to only or few persons. Calculation of consequences as moral
analysis is “act only if the action will promote the greatest amount of happiness for the
greatest number of persons.”

Utilitarian ethics provides the general criteria for what makes up happiness but not the
specific forms of happiness. According to John Mill, happiness can be defined positively and
negatively. Positive definition: “Happiness is anything that is pleasurable to the greater
 number of people.” Negative definition: “Happiness is the absence of pain.” The concepts of
pleasure and pain are central to the utilitarian theory. “What is pleasurable is good, and
what is painful is bad; what causes pleasure is moral, what causes pain is immoral.”

Pleasure, according to John Stuart Mill, has two forms; the physical and the mental. The
first form is the sensual indulgences to bodily gratification (e.g., sexual intercourse, eating,
drinking, dancing, among others.) the second form refers to intellectual, spiritual, and moral
pleasures. This includes man’s noble feelings, imagination and moral sentiments. Physical
pleasure is the lower form of pleasure and is considered by Mill as animalistic or beastly
since it appeals to the lower faculties of man. Mental pleasure is superior and is generally
more difficult to achieve and pursuing them gives dignity to man. Pleasure of this form
includes enjoyment of freedom of the will, intellect, social recognition, feeling of self-worth
and respect, feeling of peace and security, and others.

Mill’s utilitarian refers to the mental pleasures when it defines happiness as pleasure.
Happiness pursues mental pleasures and this is what differentiates utilitarianism from
hedonism. Human beings desire greater pleasure (mental rather than physical) because man
has faculties more elevated than those of animals.

Critique on Utilitarianism

1. Utilitarianism proposes an earthly goal for man which is the temporal welfare here on
earth. The ultimate and supreme purpose of man cannot be found in this life.
2. Utilitarianism makes morality relative. What is pleasant or useful to one individual, may
be painful and harmful to another individual. Relative morality leads to moral chaos and
confusion.
3. Utilitarian theory makes morality extrinsic. Morality is extrinsic if it depends on the
effect or on a concomitant factor of an act. Intrinsic morality is based on the essence of
things and on the nature of an act itself. Utilitarianism, like hedonism, confuses the nature
of the act with the effect of the act. It is much like mistaking the symptoms with the
disease.
4. Utilitarianism tends to be biased on the majority. (“The greatest good is the greatest
pleasure or happiness of the Greatest number.”) although the majority could be correct by
virtue of their number, the minority could also be right.

Business Applications:
 a. This principle can be used in Cost -Benefit Analysis. (e.g., projects are determined by
their outcomes – more benefits or more costs).
b. The principle can also be used in the formulation of budgets (e.g., determining the
overall impact of the budget).
c. Utilitarianism as a guide in decision making can also be applied in the resolution of
labor and management conflicts (e.g., win -win solution for both management and
labor).
d. Utilitarianism as an ethical principle can also be used in the calculation of opportunity
costs, (e.g., choosing between working abroad and working in the country).

5. Moral Positivism (Thomas Hobbes 1588-1679)

Thomas Hobbes was born to an impoverished clerical family in Malmesbury, Wiltshire,

England on April 5, 1588. He received his college education at Oxford University in England,
where he studied the classics. After Oxford, he worked for William Cavendish as a secretary,
tutor, and general advisor to the family.

He went on several “grand tours” where he met the leading European intellectuals of his
time to study different forms of government. Hobbes became interested in reasons why people
allow themselves to be ruled and in the best form of government for England. He wrote his most
famous work, entitled Leviathan, in 1651. In his writing, he argued that people are naturally
wicked and could not be trusted to govern. Hobbes believes that an absolute monarchy – a
government that gives all power to a king or queen – was best. Hobbes believes that a strong
central authority was necessary to avoid evil and discord in the society.

Ethical Philosophy

Thomas Hobbes believes that human beings are basically selfish creatures who would do
anything to improve their position. According to Hobbes, people would act on their evil impulses
if left alone. Therefore, they should not be trusted to make decisions on their own. In addition,
Hobbes felt that like people, nations are selfishly motivated. For him, each country is in a
constant battle for power a d wealth. To attest to this, Hobbes wrote, “If men are not naturally in
a state of war, why do they always carry arms and why do they have keys to lock their door?”

In general, it is considered that the basis of all moral laws are laws of the state. Therefore,
a behavior is good when it is in accordance with the laws of the state, and evil, if it is forbidden
by the state. According to Hobbes, nature primitively is in a state of universal war. “Man is a
wolf unto his fellowmen (homo homini lupus). Hence, there is a need to check and to control
these evil tendencies of man by creating laws that can regulate his behavior.

According to Hobbes, governments are created to protect people from their own
selfishness and evil. The best government is one that has the great power of a Leviathan, or sea
monster. Hobbes believed in the rule of the king because he felt that a country needs an
authority figure to provide production and leadership. Because the people are only interested in
promoting their own self – interests, Hobbes believes democracy – allowing citizens to vote for
government leaders – would never work. Hobbes wrote, “ All mankind [is in] a perpetual and
restless desire for power… that [stops] only in death.” Consequently, giving power to the
individual would create a dangerous situation that would start a “war of every man against every
man” and make life “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
Critique on Moral Positivism

Hobbes’ view on the normative morality is solely dependent on the laws established by
the state, which gives further sole responsibility in identifying what is right or wrong to the one
who created the laws. Moral positivism sets inside the natural order of things. Prior to the
creation of a state, there was already a law (divine positive law) which was the basis of natural
law that governs him. Killing human beings is always an evil act. It is against human nature and
at the same time, it is bad even before there was a state to legislate laws to prohibit it.

Significance

Hobbes’ moral positivism anticipates the chaotic outcome if laws are not abided. We all
believe that the purpose of the government is to protect the rights of its people, preserve justice
and enforce the laws. Likewise, it is a must for every nation to have someone who would manage
and administer them. Hence, the creation of laws and the obedience of its subjects are important
in the order and maintenance of peace in countries.

Business Applications:
a. Businesses must follow the laws of the state and government regulations.
b. Business enterprises must create company policies to maintain discipline and order within
the organization.
c. Businessmen and managers must be law abiding citizens.
d. Strong authority figures are sometimes necessary in organizations to dissuade people from
doing evil things and prevent discord.

6. Divine Command Ethics

Divine Command Ethics is another type of theory that is often used in ethical debates, so
it merits inclusion in this survey of standard ethical theories. This theory says that there is a
divine being, who has set down a finite series of rules that adherents claim can provide guidance
to most, if not all, moral decisions. An important example is the set of rules known as the Ten
Commandments taken from the Judeo – Christian traditions. It includes key moral prohibitions
common to most cultures as well as some specific rules set down to exact adherence to a
particular religion. For instance, the Ten Commandments provide rules against stealing, adultery,
murder, and so on. These basic rules are taken as guides for one’s behavior in a wide range of
cases. Hence, the rule against murder is claimed by some to imply that euthanasia and abortion
are wrong. Of course, almost as many deny that the rules can be extended in such a manner.

A variant of divine command theory is a command theory based on non- divine, but
morally exemplary individuals such as the Buddha which means “the enlightened”. Buddhism’s
Four Noble Truths a d the related Eightfold Path of right seeing, thinking, speaking, lifestyle,
acting, mindset, meditating and effort as well as sets of rules of nuns and monks, follow the
same logic as the divine command theory, the only difference being their origin in the teaching is
a non-divine being or person. In both cases of the Judeo – Christian religion and the Buddhist
religion, the logic of the teaching is the same. There are central moral injunctions that we are
supposed to obey upon pain of divine retribution in the Judeo – Christian tradition, or failure to
achieve nirvana in the Buddhist tradition.

Analysis of Divine Mandate Theory

[cf. Raymond Edge and John Groves. (1999). Ethics of Health Care. Singapore: Delmar
Publishers, pp. 34-36.]

1. Divine Command theories assume belief in either divine beings or exemplary individuals.
This theory and belief can be questioned, e.g., not all people believe that God exists.
2. Divine Command theories cannot cover all possible cases of moral decision. This
problem often leads to either fundamentalism, which merely states that the extensions of
the basic rules to other cases are unproblematic, or it leads to differences in interpretation
of the basic rules and therefore differences in people’s moral views.
3. Divine Command theories generally have a “no exception” clause, either explicit or
implicit. This is a problem for people living in morally complicated times e.g., moral
decisions become problematic when people do not believe in God or in an exemplary
being like Buddha.
4. Command theory has what may be called the “Euthyphro Problem” from the Platonic
dialogue which it originated. The following questions show an example of this: Is an
action morally unacceptable because the divine being or the exemplary individual
(arbitrarily) says no? Or is it a case that the divine being or exemplary individual is
basing the rule on some justifying reasons? Is an action good because God loves it, or
does God love it because it is good? If it is the former, it is hard to imagine why we
would feel compelled to obey a rule so arbitrarily chosen. If it is the latter, then we can
eliminate the middleman and refer directly to the justifying reason. In either case, one
could question assenting to rules provided by the command theory.

Divine Command Responses to Analysis

Followers of the divine mandate ethics might answer the criticism with the following
justification:
 ● While there is no convincing response to the first criticism when dealing with
unbelievers, the supposition of a divine being or exemplary being is unproblematic when
dealing with believers. For the true believer, it is simply a matter of seeing the light.
● The response here is simply to argue that the questions of interpretations are not
insurmountable. With enough study and faith, one can come to generally acceptable
interpretations that extend the reasoning behind the basic rules to fit all current situations.
It is simply a matter of likening the text and admonitions to ourselves.
● It is believed that the very need for exceptions to reveal the truth is a sign of a decadent
time, and perhaps a greatest adherence to the rules will lead to a more morally sound
society.
● A command theorist could argue that there are reasons behind a religion’s moral
injunctions. But that we are unable to completely fathom the justification due to our
personal limitations. Hence, we are asked to obey on faith in the superior wisdom of the
divine being or the exemplary individual.

It is clear that divine command ethics often provides a meaningful system for decision
making for believers. However, this is a world of believers and non-believers, a world of
complex problems never before faced by previous generations. It is difficult to imagine that the
ancient texts will resolve with a high level of certainty issues such as cloning, or whether it is
appropriate to collect and freeze the sperm from a dead spouse so that artificial insemination can
take place at a later time. The complexity and context of the questions associated with modern
health care will stretch any absolutist theory such as divine command ethics seemingly to their
limits.
While divine command ethics seems suitable for personal decision making, it appears
somewhat problematic when one is required to reason together with those of a different belief
system and come to a decision acceptable to all. Individuals who perceive that they have
revealed truth may find it difficult to see the value of other opinions, or of exploring the myriad
of options that surround problems. This is understandable when one considers that unlike the
other ethical systems that seek the correct or right answer, the answer provided by divine
mandate ethics is not only right but good, which places the opposite view as not only wrong but
perhaps bad.

Business Applications:
a. For Christian Believers, a good action (or an acceptable business decision) is an action
that conforms to the commandments of God as reflected in the Bible and the teachings of
the church.
b. For non-Christians, a good action (or an acceptable business decision) conforms to the
teachings of exemplary non-divine beings like the Buddha or Prophet Mohammad.
6. Ethical Egoism (Ayn Rand 1905 – 1982)
Ethical egoism is the theory which says that the promotion of one’s own good is in
accordance with mortality. It is the view that one ought to do what is in man’s self-
interest, if necessary, to the exclusion of what is in other people’s interests. The moral
rule for ethical egoism is to look after his own self and it is about how a person should
behave. This simply implies that a person should be selfish or self-interested. Calling the
theory “ethical” does not suggest there might be a decent way to be selfish. This is just a
theory that advocates egoism. To love one’s own self is not as bad as people may think. It
becomes bad when other people are being affected in a negative way, with the acts of
loving one’s self too much.

Ethical egoism tends to be a rare stance among philosophers. Many contend that
the view is implausible on its face, and that those who advocate it seriously usually do so
at the expense of redefining “self-interest” to include the interests of others.

An ethical egoist might counter with the assertion that furthering the ends of
others is sometimes the best means of furthering one’s own ends. One of the most
recognized ethical egoists is the philosopher and prolific writer named Ayn Rand.

AYN RAND (1905 – 1982)

Ayn Rand was a fascinating person and an inspiring advocate of freedom but a
very mixed blessing philosophically. A novelist and philosopher, Ayn Rand was born
Alyssa Rosenbaum on February 02, 1905 in St. Petersburg, Russia. Her family lived in a
large, comfortable apartment above the chemist shop owned by her father.

At age nine, she made the conscious decision to become a writer. In her teens, she
discovered the works of great romantic writers such as Victor Hugo and Edmond
Rostand. But as her private vision of human potential expanded, the social horizons of
human possibility were shrinking around her. In February 1917, she witnessed the first
shots of the Russian Revolution from her balcony.

Soon, a communist gang nationalized her father’s shop. Almost overnight, her
family was reduced to crushing poverty. Against the growing squalor of Soviet Life,
Alyssa Rosenbaum nurtured a burning desire to abandon Russia for the West. She
obtained a passport to visit relatives in Chicago, where she selected the pen name of Ayn
Rand. She adopted Ayn from a Finnish Writer and Rand from her Remington – Rand
typewriter. At age 21, she went to the United States. Weeks later she arrived in New
York City with only $50 in her purse and never returned to Russia.
 She supported herself with a variety of odd jobs and eventually became a movie
extra in Hollywood, like Cecil B. De Mille’s film King of Kings. While working on this
movie, she literally “bumped” into an actor named Frank O’Connor who, later, became
her husband. She wrote different novels, screenplays and short stories. The first book that
made her famous was the Fountainhead, which was published in 1943. Then in1967, she
published another work entitled Atlas Shrugged. Her other works include: For The New
Intellectual (1961), The Virtue of Selfishness (1964), Introduction to Objectivist
Epistemology (1979), and Philosophy, Who Needs It? (1982).

Ethical Philosophy

“My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom: existence

exists and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from these. To live, man must
hold three things as the ruling values of his life: reason, purpose and self-esteem. Reason,
as his only tool of knowledge; Purpose, as his choice of the happiness which that tool
must proceed to achieve; and Self-esteem, as his inviolate certainty that his mind is
competent to think and this person is worthy of happiness, which means: worthy of
living. These three values imply and require all of man’s virtues…” – Ayn Rand, Atlas
Shrugged.
The objectivist ethics rebuilds morality from the group up. “You cannot say ‘I
love you’ if you cannot say the ‘I’,” wrote Ayn Rand. According to her Objectivist
philosophy, a person’s own life and happiness are the only ultimate good. The attainment
of requires a morality of rational selfishness – one that does not give undeserved rewards
to others. In essence, Rand says that when a person says “I love you” the love given to
the beloved is not a selfless love but given through a selfish motive. Rand calls this
rational self- interest.
Rand also considers “altruism” as a tool of evil and a manifestation of a false
morality. Following this thought, Rand contends that selfishness is the supreme virtue
and the primacy of the self is of paramount importance.

Rational Selfishness

For Ayn Rand , the moral purpose of man’s life is the achievement of his own
happiness. Hence, for her, sacrifice is a form of evil, and self – deprivation is also evil.
The good of the self is the standard of morality. To illustrate the concept of rational self-
interest, Dr. Emerita S. Quito (2008) comes up with an example of the issue of saving a
drowning man. If the person to be saved is a Stranger, it is morally proper to save him
when the danger to one’s own life is minimal; when the danger is great, it would be
immoral to attempt to save that stranger. To do so would be an expression of lack of self
– esteem on the part on the person who wants to save the life of the drowning stranger.
 On the other hand, if the person to be saved is not a stranger, then the risk one
should be willing to take is greater in proportion to the greatness of that person’s value to
oneself. If it is the man or the woman one loves, then one can be willing to give one’s
own life to save him or her – for the selfish reason that life without the loved person
could be unbearable.

Critique on Objective
● Objectivism includes positions which are at odds with the ideas held by most
people. It’s a popular philosophy that originated in the writings of a novelist with
no formal background as an academic philosopher.
● Objectivism is a guide to win life and not a philosophy for winning games.

● It attempts to provide an explanation of humanity, without adequate reference to

the reality of being a member of the species of humanity.
● It attempts in trying to place philosophy above science, to place man above
reality.
Egotist Egoist
• A person who thinks in terms of his own
advantage, generally by disregarding the
• A person who has a very high
interest of others.
opinion of himself and whose
language often consists of self- • An arrogant or conceited person, always
praise. talking about himself.
• Someone who is self-centered or • Concerned with both his long-term and
selfish, often without realizing short-term interests.
it.
A person who is childishly
concerned only with his most
myopic, immediate self-interest; he
is a solipsist; a here-and-now type of
fellow.
Figure 9. difference Between Egotist and Egoist

Egotism Egoism
 • The practice of too frequently ● The prescriptive doctrine that all
using the word I; hence, a speaking persons ought to act from their own
or writing overmuch of one’s self; self - interests.
self-exaltation; self-praise; the act or
● Excessive concern for oneself with or
practice of magnifying one’s self or
without exaggerated feelings of self -
parading one’s own doing.
importance.
• An exaggerated sense of self-
importance: CONCEIT

Figure 10. difference Between Egotism and Egoism

Business Applications:
a. In business decision making, sometimes self-interest is considered and given priority over
and above the interest of others, e.g., saving the company from bankruptcy by laying off
or terminating employees.
b. The decision making process in business must be done rationally, e.g., thinking before
acting.
c. The promotion of self-interest, especially on the part of the employees, is sometimes
preferred over the interest of the organization. (For example, a neophyte employee is
performing his job diligently for fear that infractions of his duties may lead to dismissal
and eventually to loss of his job.
d. Self-esteem and confidence are important personality factors for business leaders and
managers. (A manager for instance, can be confident but not necessarily arrogant.)

8. Virtue Ethics: Socrates, Plato and Aristotle

Virtue Ethics focuses on the character of the person and the virtues he manifests. In this
view, the person must reflect the appropriate moral virtues and integrity in making decisions
rather than focus on reasons for doing the action, as proposed by deontological Ethics and on the
result of his actions as proposed by Teleological Ethics.
The main proponents of virtue ethics are Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.

VIRTUE
DEONTO
ETHICS TELEOLO
LOGICAL
(heart/ch GICAL
ETHICS aracter) ETHICS
SOCRATES (470 – 399 B.C.E.)
Socrates was born in Athens, Greece in the year 469 B.C.E. his father was a stonemason
and his mother was a midwife. He was known to have an “ugly” physic appearance but he saw
not his physical defects and believed that the inner beauty is that of the soul.
Because Socrates’ search was for ideas about the soul, he examined his life and the lives
of his fellow Athenians during his adult stage. He was imprisoned for “not worshiping the Gods
created by the state” and was accused of “corrupting the minds of the youths of Athens” as
stated by Anytus who was an antagonistic politician. He was then sentenced to death by Meletus,
the prosecutor. He was given a chance to evade death by accepting voluntary exile as a custom
for those who were charged with such crimes. Instead of accepting exile, he chose to defined his
principles in court with a jury of 501 people. In the course of the trial, the jury found him to be
guilty and death penalty was imposed. But as a custom, he was given a chance to submit an
alternative sentence. He could have chosen to stop his philosophical teachings or he might have
chosen to live in exile to be set free and live. But instead, he chose to die and never gave her up
what he believed in. Socrates was executed in 399 B.C.E. by making him drink a cup of
hemlock.

Ethical Philosophy
Socrates posited three special tenets in his moral philosophy.
1) Virtue (moral excellence) is identical with knowledge.
2) Vice (moral evil) is identical with ignorance (lack of moral knowledge.
3) No one commits an evil act knowingly. Doing wrong arises out of ignorance.

Critique on Socrates’ Philosophy

Socrates’ stand on the third tenet states that “no one commits an evil act knowingly and
doing wrong arises out of ignorance.” The reason for this is that sometimes, a person may have
knowledge but he deliberately commits an evil act to satisfy his hidden motive. Thus, a person
should not use ignorance to excuse himself in doing evil. But on the other hand, Socrates stated
that a person will commit only moral evil if he lacks moral knowledge.

Business Application:
In the business world, employers make “critical decisions” that have impacts on the
operation of the company. The result might lead to uncertainty. For example, when a private
company is contemplating giving an increase in salaries to its employees. The moral issue here
lies on the impact of the increase on the families of the employees rather than (but not
sacrificing) on the continued operation of the company due to the diversion of funds.

PLATO (428-348 B.C.E.)

Plato was also born in Athens, Greece in the year 428 B.C.E. Among his relatives were
Solon, Athens’ famous lawgiver and also believed to be one of the kings of Athens. His given
name was Aristocles but he earned the name “Plato” which means (broad” or “wide” due to his
physical attributes like his wide forehead and wide shoulders.
During his younger years, Plato had excellent performance in mathematics, music,
poetry and wrestling. Plato followed the trial of his friend and mentor, Socrates. After Socrates’
death, he left Athens and studied the Pythagorean mathematics and esoteric (secret) mysteries of
human nature for 12 years. He also studied geometry with Euclides. When Plato went back to
Athens he then founded a school of philosophy which was named after the Greek hero
Acamedus which later became known as the “Academy.” His university lasted for almost 900
years until Emperor Justinian closed it in the year 529 A.D. Plato died in 348 B.C.E.

Ethical Philosophy
Knowing the Forms. For Plato, these are eternal or universal principles and perfect ideas.
Plato maintained that all things in the physical world are symbols of these perfect Forms in the
World of Ideas. And Since these Forms are symbols, the world is not the true reality.
Plato also believed that people are born to be intrinsically good. However, they make
judgments through the irrational part of the soul. This then results to a moral conflict. People do
not choose an evil act to harm themselves. They are only doing evil acts because they are acting
due to ignorance.
Morality means waking up the reason to its true purpose . In the virtuous soul, reason
must control the appetites. Also reason must direct the will away from the sensuous pleasures to
move toward eternal ideas. If the appetite and the will dominate, then we act irrationally out of
ignorance, which then results in doing evil acts. For Plato, the correct action or the moral action
is an action that is commanded by man’s reason.
Will dominates (vice/evil)
Ideal Setting REASON

VIRTUOUS ACT Appetite dominates (vice/evil)

Figure 11. Plato’s Concept of Correct Action

Critique on Plato’s Philosophy
Plato’s principle of idealism focuses on the idea that there is evil in the world because the
soul is imprisoned in the body of the person. This principle is geared towards perfection of the
soul. But because people are not perfectly created, they commit immoral acts. But the soul can
be perfected by knowing what is needed to maintain a healthy soul, by doing what is moral and
right.

Business Application:
Plato’s ethical philosophy can be applied in business. For example, in business decision
making, an outcome is acceptable only if it is done in the light of reasonable process according to
Plato’s concept of a virtuous act. For Plato, the right action, and thus, a moral action is one that
is guided by reason. In addition, Plato believes that a reasonable and a virtuous action is one that
is not dominated by the will or the appetite of the reason.
ARISTOTLE (384-322 B.C.E.)
Aristotle was born in Stageira, Thrace in 384 B.C.E. his father was the physician of the
king of Macedonia and his mother came from a family of physicians. Because of his parents’
attributes, Aristotle developed interests in Biology and Science.
His parents decided to send him to Plato’s Academy. At that time, he was 17 years old
and Plato was 61 years old. He remained in the Academy of 20 years both as a teacher and
student. Because of Aristotle’s prolific intelligence, he earned the reputation as the “mind of the
university.”
After Plato’s death, Aristotle left the A academy. In 343 B.C.E., King Philip of
Macedonia requested Aristotle to become the teacher of his son, Alexander was given the throne
of Macedonia, Aristotle went back to Athens and founded his school called Lyceum. After the
death of Alexander the Great, Aristotle left Athens and went to Chalcis where he died because of
stomach complications. He died at the age of 62.

Ethical Philosophy
According to Aristotle, we must take the “middle way” or the mean between two
extremes. Aristotle also rejected all forms of imbalance. We must not only develop our mind, but
also our body. virtue comes from the ability to govern excessive or lack of feelings. Any
extremes would lead to vice. Thus, virtue comes from the mean between these extremes.
The Golden Mean Principle simply states that “to be happy, one must live of life of
moderation.” This means in everything that we do, we must avoid doing the extremes. For
Aristotle, any excess or lack of it is a form of evil or vice. For example, in taking food, we must
eat accordingly with the proper amount of food proportional to our bodies’ needs. Any excess or
deficit in the food intake would cause problems to our health, e.g., too much food – gluttony, no
food -starvation.

VIRTUOUS ACT
 Extreme (vice/evil)
Moderate Setting –
Extreme (vice/evil)
Figure 12. Aristotle’s Principle of the Golden Mean

Critique on Aristotle’s Philosophy

The principle of Aristotle is the most appropriate and proper for application among the
three philosophies mentioned above. His idea gives a person a sense of responsibility not only to
himself but also to his surroundings – the environment and people. Too much emphasis however,
on the middle ground could lead to mediocrity and lack of desire to achieve greater and loftier
goals.
Business Application:
a. The principle of Aristotle has many applications in business decisions. For example, in
production planning and inventory control-finished goods and raw materials must be
carefully controlled so that the company will not incur too much cost. If there is too much
finished goods or raw materials, inventory and warehouse costs are high while lack of
finished goods or raw materials would entail a high opportunity loss and delay in
manufacturing.
b. The Principle of Moderation can also be used in determining and planning for profit in
business, e.g., too much profit results to greed, no profit results to bankruptcy.
c. Virtuous conduct is important not just in decision making but also in maintaining
ascendancy and personal integrity.
d. Success in business is not only measured in terms of profit but also by the company’s
moral integrity and credibility.

9.The Concepts of Good and Evil in Epicureanist and Hedonist Philosophies

At the onset, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of the term “hedonism.” The moral
doctrine called “hedonism” is indeed one of the so-called major positions among different kinds
of eudaimonism (a Greek word for happiness). It is based on the Greek concept of hdonh -
hèdonè or sensuous pleasure and contends that happiness is the goal of our human life that must
be searched for and pain must be avoided. Thus, to a hedonist, the pleasure derived from the
satisfaction over delicious food is not different from the pleasure derived from search for wisdom
or the pursuit of knowledge. Accordingly, since there is no quantitative difference among
pleasures, the sole distinction is that of “quantity,” therefore it matters how much (quantity) we
enjoy pleasure. Hedonism considers further that the quantity of pleasure must be understood and
explained by the intensity of pleasure. According to hedonism, the more quantitatively
(intensive) pleasure we have, the happier we shall be.
 Hedonists maintain that most moral virtues are to be learned and pursued. For them,
pleasure is natural and has a very strong inclination that we do not have to command ourselves
by “moral ought.” Thus, they contend that it is rather foolish and meaningless to command
ourselves to cultivate other moral virtues (which are unnatural) and perform in accordance with
those virtues. On the contrary, the most important thing, as understood by the hedonists (namely
what is “morally right”) is to know and try to attain quantitatively maximum pleasure (which is
explained as the most intensive) and avoid any possible bodily pain and distress or turmoil of the
soul. The quantity of pleasure and pain not only refers to “intensity,” but also sometimes to their
“duration.” This shift of the hedonist’s quantitative emphasis from “instantaneous intensity” to
temporary duration as the quantitative maximum indeed allowed a sophisticated form of
hedonism later developed by Epicurus.

EPICUREANISM: The Doctrine of Pleasure

EPICURUS (341-271 B.C.E.)
He was born around 341 B.C.E, seven years after Plato’s death, and grew up in the
Athenian colony of Samos, an island in the Mediterranean Sea. He was about 19 when Aristotle
died, and he studied philosophy under followers of Democritus and Plato. Epicurus founded his
first philosophical schools in Mytilene and Lampsacus, before moving to Athens around
306BCE. There, Epicurus founded the Garden, a combination of philosophical community and
school. The residents of the Garden put Epicurus’ teachings into practice. Epicurus died from
kidney stones around 271 or 270 B.C.E. After Epicurus’ death, Epicureanism continued to
flourish as a philosophical movement. Communities of Epicureans sprang up throughout the
Hellenistic world; along with Stoicism, it was one of the major philosophical schools competing
for people’s allegiances. Epicureanism went into decline with the rise of Christianity. Certain
aspects of Epicurus’ thought were revived during the Renaissance and early modern periods,
when reaction against scholastic neo-Aristotelianism led thinkers to turn to mechanistic
explanations of natural phenomena.
Epicureanist Philosophy
Epicurus developed an interesting, rather moderate and philosophically acceptable moral
theory based on hedonism. That is way, perhaps, when we talk about Hedonism, we think of
Epicureanism. Epicurus’ philosophy deals with one’s own very practical concerns, a way of
living not an abstract system of thought. Perhaps it may be said that the greatest appeal of
Epicurus’ philosophy lies in its simplicity and common sense. According to Epicurus, pleasure is
our first and kindred good. It is the starting point of every choice and every aversion, and to it we
come back and make feeling the rule by which to judge every good thing. Therefore, we call
pleasure the Alpha and the Omega of a blessed life. Epicurus maintained that the life which
contains the greatest amount of happiness and the least pain should be an every human being’s
goal. By pursuing the impulsive pursuit of immediate and intense pleasure, life cannot be
achieved. Although Epicurus believed that the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain led
to the genuine and greatest happiness to the human being, he also realized clearly the
shortcomings and defects of Cyreniacs, which could not see the painful consequences of
dissipation and overindulgence in the natural drive and pursuit of sensuous, immediate pleasure.
For the genuine Epicurean, as Epicurus showed by leading his own life as a quiet,
cultured country gentleman, surrounded by congenial friends, far removed from the disturbing
turmoil of politics or harassing anxiety of economic strife and competition. This hedonism may
be called more restrained, intelligent, and prudent. In other words, Epicurus ‘moral doctrine of
how to live is rightly called the philosophy living, or you may call it a pursuit of pleasure guided
by person and intelligence in that a person is the master of his/her pleasure rather than being
blindly enslaved by the intensity and glamour of the immediate, sensuous pleasures. Intelligence
indeed controls emotion and desire, which allows this person to be genuinely free.
Thus, the state of one’s own control of one’s soul frees him from the blind thrust of
sensuous pleasure and bodily ill and pain as well as the mental turmoil of everyday is living. In
other words, the tranquility of the soul and the health of the body must be the greatest happiness
one is able to achieve as the highest good. Therefore, it is said, ‘Eat, drink and be merry, for
tomorrow you may die’ is really a travesty of Epicureanism as a philosophy.

EPICUREANISM AND HEDONISM

Hedonism always has followers in the history of humankind, perhaps not as a theory of
morality, but almost the justification of the pursuit of sensuous pleasure. As stated above,
Epicureanism has been understood as synonymous with Hedonism, which we showed above as a
misconception of Epicurus’ philosophy. This does not mean that Epicurus went beyond
hedonism. On the contrary, Epicurus held the basic principles of hedonism to his heart and never
left its turf. In comparison to Aristippos and his Cyreniac hedonism, Epicurus was above all a
philosopher and made philosophical (and mathematical) investigations the basis for the pursuit of
happiness.
To Epicurus, pleasure is what good is and the ultimate goal of human life. However,
instead of the momentous intensity of sensuous pleasures, Epicurus found the maximum
pleasures in those which would endure and even make us wise. In fact, Epicurus himself led the
life of a philosopher free from bodily pain and from mental agonies and turmoil, enjoying the joy
of friendship. He even advocated conscious mastery and control over one’s own pleasures. Thus,
what one ought to do is to maintain the hermit-like serene life liberated from physical
displeasures and from the anxiety and agonies of everyday practical life. Precisely because
hedonism is a theoretical justification of our natural human inclinations (to pursue pleasure), we
find hedonism not only in the West, but also in India and China. Hedonism is always associated
with egoism (which purports that the criterion of right action is self-interest and the greatest
gratification of one’s own self interest is considered the ultimate goal of life), that is, as long as
hedonism asserts, pursuit of pleasure, the pursuit of pleasure is unfailingly associated with self-
interest.
Types of Pleasure
 For Epicurus, pleasure is tied closely to satisfying one’s desires. And he distinguishes
four types of pleasures:
1. Intense, short-lasting pleasure (spending all money in clothes.)
2. Less intense, longer-lasting pleasure (saving money for future schooling.)
3. Pleasures that culminate in pain (going to the dentist because one has eaten a lot of
chocolate.)
4. Pleasures that give us peaceful well-being (acting morally).
Epicurus believes that the fourth type of pleasure, of acting morally, is one that people should
aim for. In addition, intellectual pleasures should also be desired by men. For Epicurus, the study
of philosophy is one of the finest intellectual pleasures.
Critique and Significance

● Hedonism explains very well the emotional basis and aspects of human actions.

● It purposes an earthly goal for man, namely, the temporal welfare here on earth.

Business Applications:
a. The pleasure-pain principle is sometimes used in business decision making, e.g.,
measuring that profit (pleasure) or loss (pain).
b. The concept of pleasure can also be used as a benchmark when businessmen derive
reasonable returns from business activities.

10. Pragmatism of Pierce, James, and Dewey

Pragmatism is a philosophy that attempts to clarify our ideas to emphasize the practical
usefulness of ideas and belief as the criteria for truth. Pragmatism is a philosophy that bridges the
gap between empiricism and rationalism. As a school of thought, pragmatism maintains the
following assumptions:

● To be valid, all theories must be put into practice.

● There must be a close connection between thinking and acting.

● Ideas to be regarded as true must be useful.

● For ideas to be significant there must be practical results.

PRAGMATISM

The Tender-minded The Tough-Minded

 Rationalistic (going by “principles”) Empiricist (going by “facts”)
Intellectualistic Sensationalistic
Idealistic Materialistic
Optimistic Pessimistic
Religious Irreligious
Free-willist Fatalistic
Monistic Pluralistic
Dogmatic Skeptical

The main proponents of this philosophy are: Charles Sanders Pierce (pronounced purse),
William James and John Dewey. It was actually Pierce who begun this movement of pragmatism
but was popularized by James. However, it was John Dewey who integrated pragmatism with the
American education system. Although Pierce pioneered pragmatism, he changed his
“pragmatism” into “pragmaticism.” He said that the word pragmaticism was “ugly enough to
be safe from kidnappers.”

1. Charles Sanders Peirce

Pierce was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1839. He was trained in Mathematics,
Science and Philosophy from an early age. At age 16, Charles entered Harvard in Cambridge
where his father was a professor. After graduating from Harvard, Pierce studied Chemistry at the
Lawrence Scientific School where he graduated summa cum laude. He later worked as a
‘scientist for the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey for 30 years. He also lectured at Harvard
University in Cambridge and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

His Philosophy
Pierce focused his pragmatism on logic and science. For him, there must be connectivity
between idea and action. He said that our ideas are clear and distinct only when we can translate
them into some kind of meaningful action.
Pierce contends by saying that in the logical analysis of meanings-an idea that is useful in
solving the difference between two propositions in significant. For him, if an idea is not useful in
solving a problem or bringing about a desirable result, then it does not have any significance at
all.

2. William James
 Born in New York City to wealthy and highly cultured parents, William James (1842-
1910) showed his extraordinary personal and intellectual abilities at an early age. He studied art,
Chemistry, Anatomy and Physiology. He graduated from Harvard in1869 with a degree in
medicine but decided not to go into practice. From Physiology, James moved on to teach
Psychology and then became a Philosophy professor.

His Philosophy
James focused his pragmatism on Psychology and religion. For him, pragmatism is an
inquiry into the practical meaning of events and issues. James argues that a thing is true only if it
works. He came up with a modified version of Pierce’s pragmatism and associated the idea of
practicality with truth. He contends by saying that “an idea is only true if it does what you want it
to do.” In other words, an idea is true or good only insofar as it has what James called “a
practical cash value.” From James’ point of view, pragmatism is a philosophy that associates
truth with practical results.

3. John Dewey
He was born and grew up in Burlington, Vermont (1859-1952). He was a student of C.S.
Peirce at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. After receiving his Ph.D. in 1884, Dewey
became a faculty member of the University of Michigan. In 1894, he became the chairman of
the Department of Philosophy, Psychology, and Pedagogy at the University of Chicago. In 1904,
Dewey moved to Columbia University in New York.

His Philosophy
John Dewey based his pragmatism on ethics and sociology. He called his version of
Pragmatism “Instrumentalism” or “experimentalism.” Influenced by Darwin , he based his ideas
on the concept of evolution and believed that man can achieve moral progress and create an ideal
society through improvements in education. He considered his philosophy of “Instrumentalism”
to be a bridge between science and ethics.
For Dewey, knowledge and practice are instruments of doing food (instrumentalism). He
also believes that theories must be put into action and should yield desirable and predictable
consequences.

In the context of education, Dewey believes that a “school should reflect society.” As an
educator, he said that “nothing is more important in the remaking of society than education.”
Furthermore, he was also convinced that man can solve social problems and create an ideal
society through education.

Business Applications:
a. Business plans remain to be plans unless they are executed and implemented.
b. Pragmatism as a philosophy has been associated with “anything goes approach” in
business. This was very popular in the 20th century America.
 c. Pragmatism as a philosophy seems to imply that the right solution to any problem
becomes the practical solution and therefore, the moral solution.
d. In business decision making, the concept of “cash value” is always considered.

11. Christian Ethics

(Cf. Ethics: The Philosophical Discipline of Action by E. Babor, pp. 43-52.)
What distinguishes Christian ethics from other ethics is the Christian belief that the Moral
Law is given not by an interpreter but by a lawgiver, Jesus Christ.
1. Ethical Teaching of Jesus Christ
The moral paradigm used by our Lord Jesus Christ is similar to those of Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle, e.g., a personal call towards self-realization. It may be argued, however, that His
ethics contains different nuances compared to those of the Greek triumvirate since His is so
radical, so demanding , yet so fair, because it is addressed to every one whether he is a king, a
prince, a rich man, a pauper, or a slave. For Jesus, there is only one ethics which cuts across race,
nationality, talent, ability, educational background, sex status, and others. His moral teaching
recognizes no social stratification. Furthermore, it does not discriminate between a slave and a
freeman, the rich and the poor, or the powerful and the weak.
Though our Lord Jesus Christ did not write anything, through the Sacred Scriptures we
can follow how He teaches His radical (from the word radix meaning root) ethical ideal.

For purpose of clarification, let us classify the Lord’s ethical teachings through the
following headings:
a. The ethics of Jesus shows more preferences to the poor and the oppressed.
b. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics of love;
c. The ethics of Jesus demands honesty and authenticity;
d. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics which teaches faith in God as a Father;
e. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics of peace and reconciliation; and
f. The ethics of Jesus demands sacrifice and suffering.
The Ethics of Jesus, indeed, manifests a preferential option for the poor, the
abandoned, the disadvantaged, the unprivileged, the persecuted, the exploited, and
the oppressed. To them, Jesus promises heaven as their reward. The ethical ideal
emphasized by Jesus is for them to bear their lot and develop a sense of hope for
their glorious future. This is very evident to the indigent, the rejected, the
exploited, and the manipulated Filipinos or any human being who believes in
Him. At least, we can say that because of the Filipino’s affinity to Jesus, the
Filipinos in general try to bear poverty because Jesus says in the Beatitudes:
“Blessed are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of God.”
2. Ethical Teaching of St. Augustine
 The focal point of Augustine’s moral imperative God; and because love is the highest
attribute of God, love, eventually, is considered by this so-called proponent of medieval
philosophy as the basis and central point of his moral teaching.
Augustine believed that God is the starting point and the terminal point of everything in
existence. God is the Creator and He created everything out of love, therefore, is the impetus that
propelled God to create. Since everything was created by God with love, God expects all His
creation to come back to Him. Nevertheless, of all His creations, God Showed much favor to
man for He gives man free will. So, Augustine proceeds in saying that because man has free will,
he is endowed by God with the power to choose between good and evil. Because man has free
will, it is the reason why there is evil, says Augustine.
The first philosopher in the medieval period is so resolved in his conviction that it is man
who authors evil and not God, because everything which God created is good.
Evil for Augustine is the negation or absence of good. When a man does evil, he does it
because of his free will; man lacks goodness and turns himself away from God. It follows, then,
that an immoral person is a person who lives in sin.
In Augustinian ethics, human acts are nothing else but gestures of man’s free will. But,
whether or not man does good or evil, the moral idealistic “ought” remains the same and that is –
man should strive to have his moral upkeep. Despite his acceptance that man by nature is
imperfect (because of his free will), Augustine insists that man is capable of attaining perfection
on the condition that man should keep himself good.
For Augustine, to be good is to desire of God. Since man desires of happiness, man
should , by necessity, desire for God because it is God alone who can give him perfect happiness
and ultimate satisfaction. Augustine says that beauty, power, honor, fame, health, and the like
cannot give man perfect happiness and ultimate satisfaction because they are by themselves
finite and mutable. This is the reason why Augustine insists that only the cardinal virtues can
give man sure assurances towards his reunification with God. So, just like Plato, Augustine
reechoes the necessity of wisdom and virtue to be practiced by man for man to become morally
alive.
Augustine’s understanding of God as love drive him to take love as the basis and central
point of his ethics. Furthermore, Augustine suggests that man should practice the cardinal virtues
in the name of charity or love because for him love is the foundation of all virtues. Put
differently, this is, it seems, his way of reverberating the Pauline theology of love. His greatest
virtue is neither prudence nor justice, neither temperance nor fortitude. Rather, it is love. This
makes love the center of moral injunction in the Augustinian moral teaching.

3. Ethical Teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas

Aquinas is an avid follower of Aristotelian philosophy, in general, and of Aristotelian
Ethics, in particular. He “Christianized” the pagan moral philosophy of Aristotle. This suggests
that one cannot appreciate Thomistic ethics if one does not appreciate Aristotelian ethics. This is
made evident by the fact that Aquinas take the concept of virtues taught by Aristotle in his
Nicomachean Ethics and integrates his theological virtues to complement Aristotelian virtues;
this means that, to Aquinas, Aristotelian ethics is incomplete in that it needs his theological
virtues as complement. Therefore, the Aristotelian virtues should find a point of convergence
with the supernatural or theological virtues of Aquinas. With the wedding of the two sets of
virtues, Aquinas added his concept of Beatific Vision. For Aquinas , the connatural virtues and
the supernatural virtues will equip man with the necessary requirements towards man’s well-
being here on earth as well as his eternal life in heaven. As a whole, the Aristotelian virtues
and the supernatural virtues, which are faith, hope and love, will help man attain Beatific Vision
(St. Thomas’ term for salvation in which man sees God face to face).
Now, let us consider the angelic thinker’s concepts of human actions. According to
Aquinas, “every agent acts for an end.” Human actions are always geared towards ends. When
these ends are attained, they also become the means for the attainment of other ends, they also
become the means for the attainment of other hands. In other words, there is a series of ends in
human actions. For example, A eats. The end od E- why he eats-is to satisfy his hunger. But
when A has eaten already (meaning he has already attained his end in eating), A will make use of
energy brought about by the food he ate. Thus, the achieved end of A becomes the means of A’s
attainment of further ends. It follows, then, that there should be a final end of all these ends.
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle call this final or ultimate end of human actions – happiness.
Accordingly, Thomistic ethics is centered on the concept of the Natural Law and the
Eternal Law. For Aquinas, God, of His divine providence, plans for all things and directs all
things proper purpose, and proper ends. According to Aquinas, the Natural Law and Natural
Moral Law are copies and reflections of the Eternal Law. Since the Natural Law is the reflection
of Eternal Law, Aquinas says that the Natural Law and the Eternal Law are one. In sum, the
Eternal Law of God rules all things in their order and purpose (end) and man, in his rational
nature cannot be exempted from the governance of Eternal Law.
Business Application:
a. Ideally, Christian Ethics, which is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, should provide
the ultimate standard when benchmarking business decisions. However, for some
reasons, businessmen do not at all times promote and uphold Christian virtues.
b. The Principle of Stewardship should remind business decision makers that the earth’s
resources are not constant and therefore being responsible in its usage is a way of
respecting the natural order of things as planned by God Himself.
,
12. The Ethical Teaching of Buddhism
Buddhism was founded by Siddharta Gautama, the Buddha. Records show that Buddhism
is the second oldest religion in India. This is plausible because Buddha was originally a Hindu.
As a religion, Buddhism is referred to as a religion of liberation. But liberation of whom and
from what?
Ethics of Buddhism is an ethics born out of the realities of the pain of human life. It is an
ethics which is intended to relive all forms of human suffering e.g., suffering from old age,
disease, death, and the like. For Gautama, the Buddha, the therapy of human suffering must be a
spiritual resource. This spiritual cure lies in one’s acceptance of the real life, e.g., that life
(human existence) cannot be freed from suffering. That is why, if man wants to do away with
suffering, man should cut off the radix of suffering which is craving. In effect, Buddha is
convinced “that the world is bad, that it is the source of evil and of suffering for man.”
Buddhism – both as philosophy and religion – can be holistically seen in its jewels or
better known as the three jewels in Buddhism. These are Buddha, Sangha, and Dharma. So,
anyone who wishes to become Buddha’s follower should first of all know the life of Buddha.
Sangha refers to the Buddhist community. Thus, a candidate must show willingness to become
part of his community. Lastly, the Dharma refers to the teachings or doctrines taught by Buddha.
It is in the Dharma that Buddha’s ethical teaching can be found.
Buddha’s ethics is centered on the truth about suffering and its elimination. According to
Buddha, every individual man has three characteristics, namely: Suffering (dukkha),
impersonality or substantiality (anatta), and impermanence (annica). These three basic human
characteristics constitute the truth of human suffering. The annihilate suffering, Buddha teaches
his celebrated Four Noble Truths which are also construed as Buddha’s doctrine of the Middle
Way which Buddha intended for understanding, peace of mind, wisdom, and enlightenment. The
Four Noble Truths are as follows:
1. Life is permeated by suffering (dukkha).
2. The origin of suffering is craving (tanha).
3. Suffering can be eliminated through the elimination of craving; and
4. The elimination of suffering is possible through the Eightfold Path.
The Eightfold Path is the continuum of the Four Noble Truths. They are as follows:
1. Right Understanding (Samma-ditthi);
2. Right Thought ( Samma sankapa);
3. Right Speech (Samma – vaca);
4. Right action (Samma – kammanta);
5. Right Livelihood (Samma – ajiva);
6. Right Effort (Samma – vayama);
7. Right Mindfulness (Samma – sati);
8. Right Concentration (Samma – samadhi).

Critique on Buddhism as a Philosophy

 ● Not all suffering is actually bad as reflected by the Buddhist philosophy, e.g., some
suffering could be vicarious, like the suffering of Jesus Christ.
● The concept of Nirvana is somewhat contradictory, e.g., that bliss is only attained
through the elimination of suffering.
● The demands of the Eightfold Path cannot be experienced or attained by a lot of people.

Business Applications:
a. Buddhism as a philosophy can offer a novel mindset of discipline among managers as
well as employees within the organization.
b. Self – discipline, which is a primary tenet of Buddhism can also be applied to the
person’s relationship with other beings including the entities of the environment.
c. Buddhism as a philosophy enjoins people to develop their sense of wisdom. For
according to Buddha, “Whenever there is morality, there is wisdom and whenever
there is window, there is morality.”

Cases of Analysis
Case1: Golden Taurus Garment Company
Golden Taurus is a garment company managed by a Taiwanese national. The company is
experiencing near bankruptcy because of the current strikes of its employees’ union. The
management attributes the current difficulty in the company’s financial condition to labor unrest.
Eva Wu, the owner, has experienced being bullied and received several death treats.
Some of the issues raised by the employees against the management are the below
minimum wage salaries, series of unpaid SSS premiums, and delayed payment of salaries. Also,
employees do not get their 13th month pay even if the law entitles every employee regardless of
employment status. Also, employees are asked to sign a five – month contract, which excludes
them from getting the year-end bonus. Per company policy, only those employed with six –
months employment contract can get the year – end bonus.
Long working hours and less break time add to the complaints of the employees.
Working hours start at seven in the morning and end at six in the evening. Break time in the
morning is from 10:00 to 10:15 and none in the afternoon. Employees can eat their lunch
between 12:45 and 1:00 which gives them only a fifteen-minute lunch break.
Employees are so concerned with violation of contract. Sewers are given quota which is
against the agreed per piece basis. They are also troubled with the poor working conditions and
the inadequate supply of water of their personal hygiene in the restroom.
Without the knowledge of employees, Golden Taurus filed a bankruptcy status, and later
operated under a new company name.
Questions:
1. Does the company’s current financial condition justify the compensation given to the
employees? Explain.
2. Is it ethical to deny the employees the information about the company’s financial
conditions and decisions?
3. Is it moral to let the employees sign a five-month contract instead of a six-month
contract?

Case 2: XYZ Cement Company

In 1982, XYZ Cement Company began its plant operation in Pampanga. Local residents
were very happy because of the economic benefits they got from the plant especially the 400
local residents employed. After a few years of operation, the plant started to emit large volumes
of pollution. Local residents noticed the constant vibration and loud noise coming from the plant.
Local residents filed a suit against the company asking the court to issue an injunction to
close the plant. The residents claimed that the loud noise and the vibrations posed dangers to
their health and damaged their poverty.
The company was using the best available technology in their operation. The court
refused to issue the injunction arguing that closing the plant would mean more harm than good to
both parties. The court instead ruled that the XYZ should pay the residents a one -time fee to
compensate them for the damages done. The amount was computed based on the fair market
price the residents would receive if they were inclined and able to rent their property.

Questions:
1. Was the decision of the court fair? Why or Why not?
2. If you were the owner of the cement plant, what will you do to solve the problem?
3. Discuss the cost and benefit of the case from the perspective of the principle of
utilitarianism.