equate ethics with their feelings.

Moreover, if being ethical

What is ethics? But were doing "whatever society
accepts," then to find out what is
By Manuel Velasquez, Claire being ethical is clearly not a ethical, one would have to find
Andre, Thomas Shanks, S.J., and matter of following one's feelings. out what society accepts. To
Michael J. Meyer A person following his or her decide what I should think about
feelings may recoil from doing abortion, for example, I would
(Source: what is right. In fact, feelings have to take a survey of
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics frequently deviate from what is American society and then
‐resources/ethical‐decision‐maki ethical. conform my beliefs to whatever
ng/what‐is‐ethics/) society accepts. But no one ever
Nor should one identify ethics tries to decide an ethical issue by
Ethics is based on well- with religion. Most religions, of doing a survey. Further, the lack
founded standards of right and course, advocate high ethical of social consensus on many
wrong that prescribe what standards. Yet if ethics were issues makes it impossible to
humans ought to do, usually in confined to religion, then ethics equate ethics with whatever
terms of rights, obligations, would apply only to religious society accepts. Some people
benefits to society, fairness, or people. But ethics applies as accept abortion but many others
specific virtues. much to the behavior of the do not. If being ethical were
atheist as to that of the devout doing whatever society accepts,
Some years ago, sociologist religious person. Religion can set
Raymond Baumhart asked one would have to find an
high ethical standards and can agreement on issues which does
business people, "What does provide intense motivations for
ethics mean to you?" Among not, in fact, exist.
ethical behavior. Ethics, however,
their replies were the following: cannot be confined to religion What, then, is ethics? Ethics is
nor is it the same as religion. two things. First, ethics refers to
"Ethics has to do with what
my feelings tell me is right or well-founded standards of
Being ethical is also not the right and wrong that prescribe
wrong." same as following the law. The what humans ought to do,
law often incorporates ethical usually in terms of rights,
"Ethics has to do with my
standards to which most citizens obligations, benefits to society,
religious beliefs."
subscribe. But laws, like feelings, fairness, or specific virtues.
"Being ethical is doing what can deviate from what is ethical. Ethics, for example, refers to
the law requires." Our own pre-Civil War slavery those standards that impose the
laws and the old apartheid laws reasonable obligations to refrain
"Ethics consists of the of present-day South Africa are from rape, stealing, murder,
standards of behavior our society grotesquely obvious examples of assault, slander, and fraud.
accepts." ETHICS laws that deviate from what is Ethical standards also include
ethical. those that enjoin virtues of
"I don't know what the word honesty, compassion, and loyalty.
means." Finally, being ethical is not the And, ethical standards include
same as doing "whatever society standards relating to rights, such
These replies might be typical accepts." In any society, most as the right to life, the right to
of our own. The meaning of people accept standards that are, freedom from injury, and the
"ethics" is hard to pin down, and in fact, ethical. But standards of right to privacy. Such standards
the views many people have behavior in society can deviate are adequate standards of
about ethics are shaky. from what is ethical. An entire ethics because they are
society can become ethically supported by consistent and
Like Baumhart's first corrupt. Nazi Germany is a good well-founded reasons.ETHICS
respondent, many people tend to example of a morally corrupt
society.
1
 Secondly, ethics refers to the the "proper" way of living, of planting rice, the "correct" way
study and development of one's acting, of doing. of constructing.the roof of a
ethical standards. As mentioned house, the "established" way of
above, feelings, laws, and social Norms of Morality dividing the work so that certain
norms can deviate from what is things are done by men, others
ethical. So it is necessary to Such a broad concept, by women. Because of this
constantly examine one's however, needs further precision technical norm certain
standards to ensure that they are for we see immediately that there community members are
reasonable and well founded. are various meanings of the considered "good," meaning
Ethics also means, then, the expression what is proper," or good workers, industrious,
continuous effort of studying our "what is good and right." Hence efficient and productive. Others
own moral beliefs and our moral we talk sometimes of the "right are considered lazy, good-for-
conduct, and striving to ensure man for the job," or "the proper nothing, inefficient.
that we, and the institutions we political action to take." or "good
help to shape, live up to manners at table," or "a good and Second, there is what might be
standards that are reasonable and just man." What this means is called the societal norm. This
solidly-based. that, within the broad ethos or has to do with the need for group
mores of a community, there are, cohesion and for strengthening
MODULE II: ANG ETIKA, several different standards to be the bonds that keep the
BILANG PAG-UNAWA SA found. community together. In relation
MORALIDAD NG KILOS NG to this norm. for example, certain
TAO Upon closer analysis, we can manners or attire, certain ways of
distinguish at least four types of speaking or of conducting
(Mga Panimulang Konsepto) norms or standards within the oneself, certain rituals and
ethos or mores of a community. ceremonies, are considered
Introduction First, there is what may be called "proper and fitting."
the technical norm. This refers "appropriate," or
Preliminary Notions mainly to man's needs which "recommended," because they
come from his bodily space-time maintain and strengthen the
ETYMOLOGICALLY, THE limitations. This norm has to do bonds that keep the community
WORD "ETHICS omes from the with survival, health and well- together. Other ways of behavior
Greek word “ethos” meaning being. It 1s concerned with are proscribed or frowned upon
customs, usage, character. The problems of effecting change, of because they are unmindful of or
Roman language and culture, transforming the natural world, destructive of social relations.
which inherited the Greek the problems of coping with
culture, expressed the same natural forces, both within and Third is the aesthetic norm.
concept in the word mores, without the human organism. This refers to typical perceptual
which in turn is the root of the Thus, the technical norm is forms, regarding color, shape,
words "morality." "moral," and concerned with the techniques of space, movement, sound, feeling
"morals." We see then that relating means to ends and the and emotion, touch and texture,
"ethics" and "morals" are techniques of healing and health, taste, scent and odor, both in the
ordinarily used as equivalent of work, production, and natural and in the man-made
terms. In general, they mean the organization. Therefore, because environment, which are
traditional manners, customs, of its survival and well-being. considered by the community as
habits, or character of a every community prescribes "ennobling." "cathartic,"
community or group, which certain proper ways of working "heightening man's existence," or
pertain to the group's standards and doing things. For example, "beautiful," because they
or norms, or what is sometimes there are the "right" things to eat, represent a certain free play and
called the group's "system of the"accepted" way of performing celebration of the human spirit.
values" which determines what an appendectomy. the "right"
is considered "good," "right," or way of preparing the field for
2
 Fourth is the ethical or moral wrong mean literally being primarily- not absolutely-values
norm in the narrower or stricter straight or not, in tine with, in are objective. If values are
sense. In the life of the conformity or not. with the norm. construed this way, it can be
community, the ethical or moral Good and bad are often used as inferred that they have nothing to
norm combines with religion to equivalents of right and wrong. do with ethics. The contention
form what is sometimes referred However, in more precise can be justified in view of the
to as the "ethico- religious" norm. language, night and wrong refer fact that not everything which is
(We will see later how we can specifically to that which is good is moral or ethical. In other
differentiate more precisely the morally binding or obligatory. words, not all values (good) are
ethical or moral from the other Thus, the right action is that necessarily moral. The good in a
aspects of life.) The moral norm which we ought to do or ought to glass of water because it satisfies
refers to some ideal vision of have done, the wrong action that our thirst - does not qualify water
man, an ideal stage or perfection which we ought to refrain from as moral. The good in food -
of man, which serves as the or ought to have refrained from because it satisfies our hunger
ultimate goal and norm. In doing. On the other hand,. good does not make food moral as
relation to moral norm man and and bad have the con-notation of well. The good into watch -
his actions are judged to be right that which is in conformity or because it gives us accurate time
or wrong. good or bad. Because not with the goal. - does not make the watch moral,
of this ideal vision of man, a also. Neither can we say that a
community has what is Therefore. good and bad glass of water, a plate of food,
sometimes called the signify fulfillment, completion. and a piece of watch are immoral
"nonnegotiables," those things Perfection or not. Some moral if they don't serve their purposes.
which the community cherishes theories are considered to be
and considers of ultimate worth, "deon-tological. because they put So, admittedly, there is a
which give ultimate sense and more stress on the aspect of chasm between ethics and
direction to human existence. moral, duty and obligation. Other axiology (a discipline in
Therefore, all the other norms- theories are "teleological" (telos- philosophy that studies values),
technical, societal, aesthetic-are end. Fulfillment, realization), considering that the two are
to be subordinated to this moral because they put more emphasis different disciplines in
norm. on morality as the attainment of philosophy. Despite this
man's end, fulfillment and difference, there still exists an
Definition of Morality happiness. interplay between the two.
Through this interplay, we can
In a narrower and stricter MODULE III: VALUES speak clearly of moral values.
sense, therefore, ethics or
morality refers to that dimension A. Place and Significance of In principle, actions
of human existence whereby Values in Ethics presuppose values. The radix of
man confronts or finds himself, actions are the values of a person.
an ideal vision of man, or an Undeniably, there is a The kind or quality of an act
ideal state and goal of his metaphysical dependence of which a person performs is a
existence which he finds himself values in ethics, for values have manifestation of his values.
oriented toward. The ideal vision ethics as one of their Probably, this is the main reason
thus constitutes for him an indispensable carriers. True why Values Education in our
exigency, a demand to action n enough, ethics and values Philippine Educational System
accord with the ideal vision and support each other. An ethics receives a special treatment from
goal. By the same token, this without values is hollow and the Commission on Higher
1deal vision of man constitutes a shallow and, therefore, weak. Education (CHED).
fundamental norm in relation to Values without ethics are
which his life and actions are paralytic. Needless to say, values In the interplay of axiology
judged to be either right or are values even if they are not and ethics, axiology plays a
wrong. good or bad. Right and put into practice because substantial and dynamic
3
 character. Values (axiology) do Because values are our beliefs, act, the act has been existing
not exist in themselves because values affect our thoughts, already either as good or evil. As
by nature, they are parasitic. This decisions, and actions. to what action should be valued,
means that values embody morality requires that it should
themselves in another reality. (3) Values refer to things, be the good one. Why? Because
Thus values are values because persons, ideas, or goals which everybody wants to be moral.
they are attached to something are important to life; they enable
else. us to direct, understand, and 2.Values Are Objective
evaluate our lives. Thus, they
Values should necessarily refer to our ideals and our When we say values are
have carriers. In the interplay of principles by which we live. objective, we mean that the
values and ethics, it is the latter Further, values are those which existence and the nature of
that serves as the carrier of we like, approve, esteem, enjoy, values are independent of a
values. This is why we said and prize. subject. We cited earlier that for
earlier that values are rooted in the economists, a value is
ethics. Ethics or moral C. Properties of Values properly called a value in use if
philosophy is not the only carrier it (be it a thing, person, ideas, or
of values, however. Values are Values, generally, have five goals) has the ontological
also carried by culture, religion, characteristics or properties, capacity to satisfy a human
beliefs, and the like. namely: subjective, objective, desire or a need. Now, in trying
relative, bipolar, and hierarchical. to establish a nexus between the
B.The Meaning of Values economists' and axiologists'
1. Values Are Subjective views, can we say that the nature
1. Axiology and existence of values are
When we say values are independent of us (objectivism)?
The branch of philosophy that subjective, we mean that the Or should we say that the nature
studies value is called axiology' existence and the validity of and existence of values are
Accordingly, man's awareness of values are dependent on the dependent on us (subjectivism)?
values happened not too long feelings or attitudes of the
ago. The end of subject. But, this should not be The contention of the
interpreted literally. We should objectivists is that there is
2. Definition of Values not maintain an idea which holds nothing to value if there is
that values are purely subjective nothing to be valued. This
a. General Definition because our appraisal of a certain suggests that values exist first
thing does not make the thing a before they are apprehended,
The following are various thing. Our feelings or attitudes desired, or craved.
views concerning the meaning of act only as evaluators of a certain
values: value. We should always To arrive at a stand resolving
remember that evaluation is whether values are objective or
(1) Values are the object of always attached to a value. For subjective is not our intention.
human desire and striving; they how can we value anything if But, here we say that values are
are also the subjective there is nothing of value? We clearly both objective and
assessment of a particular object must know first what we must subjective and we insist in
insofar as it is good. value in order for us to value saying that values are primarily
what to value. If we will apply objective, not purely objective.
(2) Values are our beliefs,
this to ethics, this means that we Yes, values are primordial, not
those beliefs which we hold to be
do not perform any action which our feelings, apprehensions,
true. Thus values inspire us to
is not of value to us. However, craving or desires, but values
struggle towards our proximate
we should also remember that themselves need to be expressed
and ultimate (last) ends.
our performance of any action to be known. This is what we
does not make the action an
action, for before we perform an
4
mean in saying that values we cannot deny that there are good and bad, beautiful and ugly,
necessarily need carriers. values that can satisfy all, for just and unjust, health and
example truth, justice, equality, sickness, and life and death, etc.
Therefore, it is our firm love).
conviction that values are known, Further, bipolar values are
expressed, and carried by our To apply the relativity of also construed as not neutral,
actions. values in ethics we have to nothing is in itself value-free. A
understand that some actions that thing, a person, an idea, or a goal
3.Values Are Relative are of value to us cannot bear a is either positive or negative;
blanket-good for all. It is true good or bad.
This means that values have that some of our principles or
intrinsic limitation and actions are only good to us. 5.Values Are Hierarchical
imperfection. In themselves,
values are not limited and are not 4.Values Are Bipolar Hierarchy does not mean
imperfect. However, in the light classification since the latter
of the subject who values value, By this we mean that values means division while the former
value becomes limited and do not exist alone; they always means ranking. When we say
imperfect. We always have to exist with their counter values. values are hierarchical, we do
remember that values are relative Thus, values are either positive not classify values but rather we
only in the context of or negative. Positive and rank them. When we rank values,
subjectivism, not in objectivism. negative values are independent we establish order of importance
In other words, in understanding of each other. It does not mean among them. The closest
the relativity of values, we are that a negative value is negative meaning of ranking values is
viewing the actual interplay (or destructive) because it lacks a prioritizing values. To prioritize
between the properties of value positive element with itself. For values means to draw order of
as subjective and relative. example, unjust, ugly, and bad importance among values.
are negative values. In
Now, in considering values as themselves, they are The bone of contention in the
relative, we have to raise two ontologically and morally evil hierarchy of values is that no two
substantial questions: First, what and are negative. A bad act like values are similar in degree or
are values good for? And second, abortion, murder, etc. Is evil in level. One value is better than
for whom are they good? In the itself and therefore is a negative another. This means that if one is
case of eyeglasses, "Is it good for value. Ugly objects around us are a better value, the other is a
what? And it is good for whom?" ugly in themselves, not that they worse value.
The intrinsic value in eyeglasses lack beauty. In some other
cannot be imposed on all so that respect, we can say that positive Again, in understanding the
everybody should crave for them. values are good and negative hierarchy of values, we always
Considering this, eyeglasses are values bad. For example, in a have to remember that
for fixing or correcting defective battery, there are signs that establishing order of importance
eyesight. This.answers the indicate the positive and the or priority is dependent on a
question "good for what?" negative terminals. But, we subject. In principle, hierarchy is
Logically, it follows that know that the negative sign is disclosed in preference. Hence,
eyeglasses are good only for not a symbol of evil but of when we are confronted with
people who suffer eyesight complementariness, just like two values, we usually prefer the
defects. This answers the values, which are bipolar one which we think is higher
question "good for whom?" than the other.
Being bipolar, values exist
As a conclusion, the concept with their counter values. So, To relate this in ethics, a
on the limitation and every positive value exists with moral man is a man who prefers
imperfection of values is its corresponding negative value. positive values to negative ones;
anchored on the idea that they Values therefore have pairs: he prefers superior to the inferior
cannot satisfy all subjects (but values.
5
 D. Classification of Values values to which we feel we are absolute, objective and freely
called. In this context, it is chosen by us.
In general, values are possible to think. that behind
classified as intrinsic and "professional" or "vocational" Of all these classes of values,
instrumental, accidental and lives are religious values. We may they are the only grade of values,
natural, primary and secondary, say that our profession or that single out man towards
moral or ethical, religious, vocation is of great value because goodness.Non-moral values do
cultural, and social. this is God's call to us. In this not make us good; it is the moral
manner we try to encounter God values alone that make us good.
Among the foregoing values, in our vocations or professions. We may be good entertainers,
we will give more emphasis on good teachers, good businessmen,
the moral or ethical values. We 5. Cultural Values. They are those good scientists, good
will only define all the rest. values that embrace poetry, administrators, good students,
painting, architecture, music, good soldiers, good athletes, etc.
1. Intrinsic and Instrumental literature, society's model of and, yet, we may not be good
Values. Intrinsic values are those living, etc. men. On the contrary, we may
which are considered values in consider an entertainer, a
themselves. Instrumental values 6. Social Values. These are politician, an administrator, or a
are those construed as desired understood as perfect, attributed teacher a dead failure, and yet,
good because of their good to us to an object or attitude from the we may consider him a good
and to others. In comparing the standpoint of relationship between man. But, who is really a good
two, the former is called primary means and ends in society. man?
while the latter, secondary values. Examples of social values are
patriotism, economic productivity, In the context of the interplay
2. Accidental and Natural Values. politics, liberty, freedom of between ethics and values, a
The former is subject to communication, freedom of the good man does not become good
variability, temporality and press, fraternity, etc. because he drinks good wine,
impermanence while the latter eats good food, or reads good
(which is also called natural E. Moral Values books. In this interplay, a good
human values) are those that are man is good because he respects
permanent in human nature. In Through these values, actions the moral order, not because he
other words, natural human values are viewed as moral" only from values good non-moral values.
are essential in life. For example, the standpoint of conduct, not
food, work, life, education, etc. from the standpoint of attitude. Ethicists are one in saying that
In ethics, there are morally good we cannot demand more than
3. Primary and Secondary Values. and morally evil acts. Viewed in what is human. The moral order
The former refers to values that this perspective, moral values are is hooked in what is human. This
are chosen, acted upon, cherished, those values that go with either is why our moral values enable
and are necessary for human morally good and morally evil us to judge whether our actions
development while the latter acts. are either good or evil. Inasmuch
refers to those values that are as human nature per se is good,
obligatory in nature. For example, Accordingly, moral values then our moral values should aid
values in the family are obligatory refer to those qualities of an act us to determine whether we still
to the children. performed by man freely and are in the domain of the moral
knowingly. This entails that order or we still are in the
4. Religious Values. They are moral values involve our domain of what is human. In
those that enable us to encounter freedom to choose and the effect, we are saying that our
the Absolute: God. Hence, these indispensability of choosing. moral values are anchored in our
values aim for the Absolute Good. Thus, moral values are human nature.
Sometimes, religious values are characterized as basic values,
understood as our search for a more important than all other
transcendental determination of values, permanent, universal,
6
 Therefore, if moral values are the literature of social science: a volatile practice that bore little
anchored in human nature, it Different cultures have different resemblance to our custom.
follows that moral values are moral codes. What is thought
objective, good, permanent, and right within one group may But it was not only their
universal inasmuch as human horrify the members of another marriages and sexual practices
nature possesses the same group, and vice versa. Should we that were different. The Eskimos
intrinsic attributes. eat the bodies of the dead or burn also seemed to care less about
them? If you were a Greek, one human life. Infanticide, for
MODULE IV: The answer would seem obviously example, was common. Knud
Challenge of Cultural correct; but if you were a Rasmussen, an early explorer,
Relativism Callatian, the other answer reported meeting one woman
would seem equally certain. who had borne 20 children but
2.1. Different Cultures Have had killed 10 of them at birth.
Different Moral Codes There are many examples of Female
this. Consider the Eskimos of the
Darius, a king of ancient early and mid-20th century. The babies, he found, were especially
Persia, was intrigued by the Eskimos are the native people of likely to be killed, and this was
variety of cultures he met in his Alaska, northern Canada, permitted at the parents' discretion,
travels. He had found, for Greenland, and northeastern with no social stigma attached.
example, that the Callatians, who Siberia, in Asiatic Russia. Today, Moreover, when elderly family
lived in India, ate the bodies of none of these groups call members became too feeble, they
their dead fathers. The Greeks, themselves "Eskimos," but the we there seemed to be remarkably
of course, did not do that-the term has historically referred to little respect for life.
Greeks practiced cremation and that scattered Arctic population.
regarded the funeral pyre as the Prior to the 20th century, the Most of us would find these
natural and fitting way to dispose outside world knew little about Eskimo customs completely
of the dead. Darius thought that a them. Then explorers began to unacceptable. Our own way of
sophisticated outlook should bring back strange tales. living seems so natural and righ
appreciate the differences to us that we can hardly conceive
between cultures. One day, to The Eskimos lived in small of people who live so differently.
teach this lesson, he summoned settlements, separated by great When we hear of such people,
some Greeks who happened to distances, and their customs we might want to say that they're
be at his court and asked what it turned out to be very different "backward" or "primitive." But
would take for them to eat the from ours. The men often had to anthropologists, the Eskimos
bodies of their dead fathers. more than one wife, and they did not seem unusual. Since the
They were shocked, as Darius would share their wives with time of Herodotus, enlightened
knew they would be, and replied guests, lending them out for the observers have known that
that no amount of money could night as a sign of hospitality. conceptions of right and wrong
persuade them to do such a thing. Moreover, within a community, differ from the culture to culture.
Then Darius called in some a dominant male might demand- If we assume that our ethical
Callatians and, while the Greeks and get-regular sexual access to ideas will be shared by all
listened, asked them what it other men's wives. The women, cultures, we are merely being
would take for them to burn their however, were free to break naïve.
dead fathers' bodies. The these arrangements simply by
Callatians were horrified and leaving their husbands and 2.2. Cultural Relativism
told Darius not to speak of such taking up with new partners-free,
things. that is, so long as their former To many people, this
husbands chose not to make too observation-"Different cultures
This story, recounted by much trouble. All in all, the have different moral codes"-
Herodotus in his History, Eskimo custom of marriage was seems like the key to
illustrates a recurring theme in understanding morality. There
are no universal moral truths,
7
 they say; the customs of different 3. There is no objective culture itself. Thus, once the
societies are all that exist. To call standard that can be used to German soldiers entered Poland,
a custom "correct or "incorrect judge one society's code as better they became bound by the norms
would imply that we can judge than another's. There are no of Polish society-norms that
that custom by some independent moral truths that hold for all obviously excluded the mass
standard of right and wrong. But people at all times. slaughter of innocent Poles.
no such standard exists; every "When in Rome," the old saying
standard is culture-bound. The 4. The moral code of our own goes, "do as the Romans do."
sociologist William Graham society has no special status; it is Cultural relativists agree.
Sumner (1840-1910) put it like but one among many.
this: 2.3. The Cultural
5. It is arrogant for us to judge Differences Argument
The "right" way is the way other cultures. We should always
which the ancestors used and be tolerant of them. Cultural Relativists often
which has been handed down.... employ a certain form of
The notion of right is in the folk These five propositions may argument. They begin with facts
ways. It is not outside of them, of seem to go together, but they are about cultures and end up
independent origin, and brought independent of one another, drawing a conclusion about
to test them. In the folkways, meaning that some of them may morality. Thus, they invite us to
whatever is, is right. This is be true even while others are accept this reasoning:
because they are traditional, and false. Indeed, two of the
therefore contain in themselves propositions appear to be (1) The Greeks believed it was
the authority of the ancestral inconsistent with each other. The wrong to cat the dead, whereas
ghosts. When we come to the second says that right and wrong the Callatians believed it was
folkways we are at the end of our are determined by the norms of a right to eat the dead.
analysis. society; the fifth says that one
should always be tolerant of (2) Therefore, eating the dead
This line of thought, more other cultures. But what if the is neither objectively right nor
than any other, has persuaded norms of one's society favor objectively wrong. It is merely a
people to be skeptical about intolerance? For example, when matter of opinion, which varies
ethics. Cultural Relativism says, the Nazi army invaded Poland on from culture to culture.
in effect, that there is no such September 1, 1939, thus
thing as universal truth in ethics; beginning World War 1, this was Or:
there are only the various an intolerant action of the first
order. But what if it conformed (1) The Eskimos saw nothing
cultural codes, and nothing more.
to Nazi ideals? A cultural wrong with infanticide, whereas
Cultural Relativism challenges
relativist, it seems, cannot Americans believe infanticide is
our belief in the objectivity and
criticize the Nazis for being immoral.
universality of moral truth.
intolerant, if all they're doing is
(2) Therefore, infanticide is
The following claims have all following their own moral code.
neither objectively right nor
been made by cultural relativists:
Given that cultural relativists objectively wrong. It is merely a
1. Different societies have take pride in their tolerance, it matter of opinion, which varies
different moral codes. would be ironic if their theory from culture to culture.
actually supported the
2. The moral code of a society Clearly, these arguments arc
intolerance of warlike societies.
determines what is right within variations of one fundamental
However, their theory need not
that society; that is, if the moral idea. They are both examples of
do that. Properly understood,
code of a society says that a a more general argument, which
Cultural Relativism holds that
certain action is right, then that says:
the norms of a culture reign
action is right, at least within that supreme within the bounds of the
society.
8
 (1) Different cultures have such as our own, people believe beliefs of the cultures than with
different moral codes. that the earth is a sphere. Does it their values.
follow, from the mere fact that
(2) Therefore, there is no people disagree, that there is no 2. The moral code of a society
objective truth in morality. Right "objective truth' in geography? determines what is right within
and wrong are only matters of Of course not; we would never that society; that is, if the moral
opinion, and opinions vary from draw such a conclusion, because code of a society says that a
culture to culture. we realize that the members of certain action is right, then that
some societies might simply be action is right, at least within that
We may call this the Cultural wrong. There is no reason to society.
Differences Argument. To many think that if the world is round,
people, it is persuasive. But is it everyone must know it. Similarly, Here we must bear in mind the
a good argument-is it sound? there is no reason to think that if difference between what a
there is moral truth, everyone society believes about morals
It is not. For an argument to be must know it. The Cultural and what is really true. The
sound, its premises must all be Differences Argument tries to moral code of a society is closely
true, and the conclusion must derive a substantive conclusion tied to what people in that
follow logically from them. Here, about a subject from the mere society believe to be right.
the problem is that the fact that people disagree. But this However, that code, and those
conclusion does not follow from is impossible. people, can be in error. Earlier,
the premise-that is, even if the we considered the example of
premise is true, the conclusion This point should not be excision- a barbaric practice
might still be false. The premise misunderstood. We are not endorsed by many societies.
concerns what people believe in saying that the conclusion of the Consider three more examples,
some societies, people believe argument is false; for all we have all of which involve the
one thing; in other societies, said, Cultural Relativism could mistreatment of women:
people believe something else. still be true. The point is that the
The conclusion, however, conclusion does not follow from In 2002, an unwed mother in
concerns what really is the case. the premise. This means that the Nigeria was sentenced to be
This sort of conclusion does not Cultural Differences Argument stoned to death for having had
follow logically from that sort of is invalid. Thus, the argument sex out of wedlock. It is unclear
premise. In philosophical fails. whether Nigerian values, on the
terminology, this means that the whole, approved of this verdict,
argument is invalid. 2.8. Back to the Five Claims given that it was later over
turned by a higher court.
Consider again the example of Let us now return to the five However, it was overturned
the Greeks and Callatians. The tenets of Cultural Relativism that partly to appease the
Greeks believed it was wrong to were listed earlier. How have international community. When
eat the dead; the Callatians they fared in our discussion? the Nigerians themselves heard
believed it was right. Does it the verdict being read out in the
follow, from the mere fact that 1. Different societies have courtroom, the crowd shouted
they disagreed, that there is no different moral codes. out their approval.
objective truth in the matter? No,
it does not follow; it could be This is certainly true, although In 2005, a woman from
that the practice was objectively there are some values that all Australia was convicted of trying
right (or wrong) and that one of cultures share, such as the value to smuggle nine pounds of
them was simply mistaken. of truth telling, the importance of marijuana into Indonesia. For
caring for the young, and the that crime, she was sentenced to
To make the point clearer, prohibition against murder. Also, 20 years in prison an excessive
consider a different matter. In when customs differ, the punishment. Under Indonesian
some societies, people believe underlying reason will often
the earth is flat. In other societies, have more to do with the factual
9
law, she might even have 4. The moral code of our own lebel ng kilos pangmoral. Pagkat
received a death sentence. society has no special status; it is ang pangkulturang kilos ay
but one among many. It is true nakabatay sa apat na lebel, ang
In 2007, a woman was gang that the moral code of our Teknikal(Technical), Panlipunan
raped in Saudi Arabia. When she society has no special status. (Social), Pangrelihiyoso
complained to the police, the After all, our society has no (Religious), Estetika (Aesthetic),
police discovered in the course heavenly halo around its borders; at Pangmoral (Morality).
of their investigation that she had our values do not have any Masasabi natin na sa una,
recently been alone with a man special standing just because ikawala, at ikatalong lebel ay
she was not related to. For that they happen to be ours. However, umiinog ang mga ito sa materyal
crime, she was sentenced to 90 to say that the moral code of at kultural na pagpapahalaga.
lashes. When she appealed her one's own society "is merely one Subalit nakita natin na sa lebel
conviction, this angered the among many seems to imply that ng pangmoral, ay may mga kilos
judges, and they increased her all codes are the same-that they na tumatagos sa ibat-ibang
sentence to 200 lashes plus a six- are all more or less equally good. kultura kagaya ng pagpapatay o
month prison term. Eventually, In fact, it is an open question di kaya naman ay
the Saudi king pardoned her, whether a given code "is merely pagsisinungalin na mali para sa
although he said he supported one among many." That code lahat.
the sentence she had received. might be among the best; it
might be among the worst. Sa modyul na ito, layunin nito
Cultural Relativism holds, in na mabigyan ng pansin ang
effect, that societies are morally 5. It is arrogant for us to judge etikal na kilos sa pamamagitan
infallible-in other words, that the other cultures. We should always ng paglalahad ng deskripsyon
morals of a culture can never be be tolerant of them. nito mula sa ating mga karanasan.
wrong. But when we see that Sa partikular, makikita ito sa
societies can and do endorse There is much truth in this, but mga sitwasyon na kung saan
grave injustices, we see that the point is overstated. We are nakakapagmuni-muni tayo sa
societies, like their members, can often arrogant when we criticize ginagawa natin kung tama ba ito
be in need of moral improvement other cultures, and tolerance is o mali o nararapat ba o hindi ang
generally a good thing. However, ating mga ikinikilos patungo sa
3. There is no objective we shouldn't tolerate everything. ating sarili at sa iba. Dahil ito ay
standard that can be used to Human societies have done bumubukal mula sa tunay na
judge one society's code as better terrible things, and it is a mark of karanasan ng tao, kayat hindi
than another's. There are no progress when we can say that sapat ang mga depinisyon ng
moral truths that hold for all those things are in the past. mga termino para ganap na
people at all times. maunawaan ito. Nagiging bukas
MODULE V: DESCRIPTION ang ating isipan sa konkretong
It is difficult to think of ethical OF MORAL DIMENSION pagtukoy o pagkilala sa mga
principles that hold for all people aspeto na nagbibigay anyo sa
at all times. However, if we are B. Readings for the Topic ating moral na pagkilos bilang
to criticize the practice of slavery, kosiderasyon sa pagtaya o
or stoning, or genital mutilation, Excerpted from "Ground and
pagtantsa rito. Ang moralidad ng
and if such practice are really Norms of Morality: Ethics for
ating pagkilos ay inilalarawan ng
and truly wrong, then we must College Students" by Ramon C.
mga sumusunod: Kilos (Action),
appeal to principles that are not Reyes
Kalayaan (Freedom), Ang Kilos
tethered to any particular society. bilang Mabuti o Masama (Action
Earlier I suggested one such Introduksyon:
as Good or Bad), Pangkalahatan
principle: that it always matters (Universality), Obligasyon
whether a practice promotes or Sa naunang modyul, sa
Relatibismong Kultural, (Obligation). kaya mula sa mga
hinders the welfare of the people deskripsyong ito, ang moralidad
affected by it. ipinakita roon ang kahihaan at
kapintasan nito na umiinog sa ay nagisisimula sa malayang
10
kilos ng tao, na isinaalang-alang knowledge preceding the action. future state of things and
ang kakanyahan nito bilang It is not something that one includes both himself and the
tamao mali, karapat-dapat o possesses for its own sake or world. In view of this goal he
hindi, na ipinatutupad at Something that one possesses takes up means. He, moves
sumasakop sa lahat ng tao (laban whether one acts or not. It is himself initiates a course of
sa Relatibismong Kultural) rather a kind of lived truth, a sort events, or intervenes in the
bilang obligasyon nating isagawa. of light that goes ahead of itself, natural course of events,
It is a kind of knowledge which beginning with himself and
Description of Moral 1s not in full possession of itself, moving into the outside world
Dimension but somehow comes only with toward the attainment of the goal.
man's orientation and tendency Insofar as morality is essentially
Action toward this future end. Hence, action, it requires man to take the
the man who is usually looked means and to set into motion a
The moral dimension or moral upon as a morally good man is course of events, starting from
experience in general reveals not necessarily one who has himself and moving into the
man to himself as being under expert knowledge about things, world, toward what ought to be,
some kind of constant tension but one who expectedly acts with toward some future state of
between what is at present and firmness and constancy being. which eventually includes
what must be in the future, according to some kind of 1ived both himself and the world. This
between what he is now and sense of humanity. It is the lived moral end or goal needs to be
what his being somehow must sense of what man must be, made more precise, but in any
ultimately be, what his being which the ancients called case, morality 1s primarily man
ought to realize as its proper practical wisdom. taking up action, doing
immanent telos or end. something. realizing something
Telos- salitang Griyego na ang which ought to be.
Because there is this tension ibig sabihin ay hantungan,
between what is and what ought papupuntahan. Sa Ingles, ito ay Freedom
to be, morality or man as moral "end". sa kasabihang ito, "Take
being is, properly speaking. others as an end, not as means. Morality therefore requires
action. Action is the moving of "turing mo ang iba bilang han- man to act, to realize what he
oneself and taking concrete tungan ng iyong kilos, hindi isang must be and what his very being
means in view of the goal or end, kaparaanan lamang. (para ought to be. This means that
which is not yet but which makamit ang ibang bagay na morality addresses man as a
somehow ought to be. Hence, minimithi). being who can truly act, who can
morality, essentially, is not a set truly be the cause, the origin and
of rules and prohibitions to limit Oughtness- pagiging initiator of action, and in this
man. Nor is it primarily some kinakailangan sense free.
kind of theoretical knowledge
about man and the world. First Ought to do -kinakailangan It is under the aspect of
and foremost, morality is action, gawin. kumpara sa 'should', "must, morality, therefore, that we see
the doing and the realizing of "need, ang antas ng pag-uutos o man properly as an I, as a person,
what man ought to be. It is true obligasyon ay pinakamahigpit, a being who is in some way
that this action cannot be purely walang negosasyon, o usapan pa, present to himself. Thus he has
arbitrary or blind, and that for it talagang dapat mong gawin. Kaya and is called to determine and to
to be truly moral, it must karaniwang ginagamit ito sa realize his being. Therefore man
somehow be valid action. It must usapin ng moralidad ng kilos. has will and freedom. As person,
be justifiable reasoned, and done man has the power to be the
in the light of truth. But even this Action in general refers to origin and to be the self-
light of truth, as we shall see man insofar as he takes up or initiating source of his action.
later, does not seem to be the presents to himself an end or His actions are to a certain extent
cool, tranquil Ight of theoretical goal. This goal is an envisaged his own. They are within his
11
control and he is responsible for Viewed in ts embodied these physical and external
them. reality, human action lends forces affords man a degree of
itself to the basic distinction, predictability of the
Man, however, is finite, and so made by traditional moral consequences of his acts. But,
too is his action. Human action philosophy, between what are given the infinite number of
can only take place within the properly speaking human acts physical and external variables,
context of the concrete embodied and acts o man. Human acts are there will always be an element
individual and the circumstances voluntary acts, acts that man of uncertainty and risk in
of the world. Viewed in the knowingly and willingly does. human action. Hence, with
concrete, human action means They are acts he does freely and regard to the commanded phase
man choosing a concrete goal for which he is responsible. On of the act, a man is responsible
among the alternatives made the other hand, acts of man are only for those external aspects
possible by the situation. N view acts proceeding iron man, but within his control and those
of his chosen goal he takes up due to lack of knowledge or normally foreseeable
certain means. He sets into lack or consent and control, consequences of his acts.
motion a certain course of events, they are involuntary acts. They
chosen among several possible are not properly speaking Action as Good or Bad
alternative courses, starting from human acts, and thus are not
within himself and his bodily imputable to man. As we have Just seen, morally
powers and extending to the Furthermore, a distinction is speaking, the very being of man
external world. 1nus man, within made between the elicited act calls upon him to act in order to
his embodied situation, chooses and the commanded act. The realize his telos, that which his
means toward goals. More elicited act is the internal aspect being can be and ought to be. It
precisely, man chooses of the act which is not is this telos, this final end of man,
intermediate goals, win turn are vulnerable to the forces of the which is somehow referred to
chosen in view of some ultimate physical and external world, for when man talks of good and bad:
moral goal, which man in his example the act of deciding and
very being is necessarily oriented. choosing one's goal. On the We have already seen that
In morality, therefore, other hand the commanded act people make moral judgments
freedom means basically is that aspect of the action regarding one another and
freedom of action. This is more which involves man with the themselves. There are actions
precisely means, first, freedom outside world, where man which are considered good, and
of choice of the means, somehow takes hold of his others bad. Such Judgments are
secondly, freedom of choice of physical powers, moves himself, not quite the same as judgments
intermediate goals, and thirdly, and initiates a chain of cause referring to pleasure or,
freedom to follow or not man's and effect in the outside world practicality or social expediency.
necessary ultimate end, which with a view to realizing his There is a big difference in
whether he chooses it or not, intended goal. While the ordinary language between
remains his ultimate end to elicited phase of the act remains saying that such an action gives
which he is necessarily oriented. under the full control of man (a us pleasure or pain, or that such
As Thomas Aquinas says, man man cannot be forced to will an action is efficient or wasteful,
necessarily or naturally tends something against his own will), or that such an action is socially
toward his ultimate end. In this the commanded phase, which expedient or unwise and saying
third sense, freedom means not has to reckon with physical and that such an action is morally
so much the completely free external forces endowed with good or bad. One is wont to say
option to take up or leave the their own proper nature and that he derives a lot of pleasure
end, for there is no other tendencies, is subject to drinking a mug or two of ice
ultimate end, but the freedom of contingencies not within man's cold beer after a hard day's work.
man ultimately to determine full control. Even without full Or we often hear it said that it
himself to be truly man or not. control, common knowledge of would be more practical and
the nature and propensities of efficient in the long run to divide
12
the work into several find out about it? How will my some natural or organic or
components, each to be assigned best friend take it? And then, of socially-required condition. The
to a different individual, rather course, there is the moral norm seems to be something
than to let everybody do all question. Independently of those immanent in man himself. It is
things alike, all at the same time. other considerations, is the act of an ideal vision that man truly and
Or there is the saying that it is cheating in a final examination deeply aspires for, which in a
not very wise or expedient to morally right or wrong, good or sense represents the fulfillment
prove your point and win the bad? What makes it right or and end of all his yearnings.
argument but lose a friend. But wrong, good or bad? If truly Thus it is called "the good, that
then there is that other type of wrong and bad, how the could I which I, or at least the better part
Judgment which says, for really bear myself acting so of me, would really like to do
example, that the torture of dishonestly? How could I ever and be. On the other hand, the
fellow human beings is an accept myself in the right of my good does not seem to represent
immoral, dastardly act. being as related to fellowmen? In simply a particular good for man.
the light of my conscience? In It is not something that he may
We also see that the same the light of the ultimate meaning arbitrarily assume or discard.
action could lend itself to all of my existence? In this sense, in The good does not seem to
these different types of the light of all being? represent simply a particular
judgments. The act of cheating in good for me in accordance with
an examination, for example, It can be seen that there is a my tastes and preferences. This
could lead to different different norm or standard good, as intimated in our moral
considerations. What pleasure corresponding to each of these experience, seems to represent
will I get out of ft? Putting one judgments. As we have seen in precisely the good." It not simply
over the teacher perhaps and the section on the introductory that which will be for my
getting away with it? Passing the notions, there is the norm of individual pleasure or interest or
course without having to labor pleasure and pain which refers to advantage, but that good which
too much for it? How practical man's physical well-being and somehow transcends particular
and efficient would cheating be? man's inclination to physical or goods. It is the good that must be,
Could I do it smartly and sensual satisfaction. There is the the telos, the good of my very
intelligently so that there is no norm of efficiency or practicality, being as man and the good of all
possibility of being caught? I see which refers to the use of others with whom I share my
all kinds of cheating going on suitable means in view of humanity.
around me, so is it practical that I previously chosen goals or
go on plodding along honestly objectives. There is the norm of To say, therefore, that a man
while my neighbors go their social expediency which refers to is morally good or bad is not
merry cheating way? Granted our relations with others and simply to assert something about
that I am bright and smart and I more specifically, to the his being happy or miserable,
do what I see others around me advantages or disadvantages to bright or dense, successful or
do and I cheat my way through be obtained from our social unfortunately lost and frustrated.
college, getting by without much relations. Moral goodness or badness
study, what would that make of signifies something more
me in the long run in view of my Finally. there is the moral profound and ultimate which
career or profession? How good and bad. We shall have to concerns the whole point and
expedient and wise would go into this in more depth later. sense of all existence. Thus,
cheating be in case I get caught? For the moment, in this when by remorse of conscience,
As they say, 1if things can go descriptive phase, let it suffice to know that I have done something
wrong. they will go wrong. What say that the norm for the bad, something immoral, I am
the if I get caught cheating?What judgment on the moral goodness deeply disturbed since I know
will that do to my self-image or badness of human action does and feel somehow that by this
What will people say? How will not refer to some norm which immoral act I have perverted the
my parents take it should they comes from outside, such as whole sense and direction of my
13
existence, at least as of that aboriginal tribe, for example, perspective, of its very nature, is
moment in my life. In this light, auto isolation. limited knowledge, infinitely open and inclusive of
the good seems to be some kind lack of means of communication any and every human person,
of ultimate norm, or some kind and travel. could have a very placing man in the context of the
of measure of the ultimate limited extension for concept of community of all fellow human
meaning and worth of man's all humanity. But formality, beings.
existence. because of the moral dimension
or the moral structure of human Obligation
Universality existence, each individual and
each human community has a We have seen that the moral
Universality refers to that concept of a common humanity structure of human existence
aspect of the moral dimension by which shares a common dignity calls upon man to act in view of
which man experiences himself by virtue of a common moral end a certain telos and in view of the
as answerable to an end and a and a common moral norm of good, which is not merely a
norm common to all human good and bad. In moral particular good for man, but
beings. Morality orients man experience, therefore, man which seems to present itself as
towards a certain end and norm invariably sees himself gather "the good" and the end of all
and places man in relation to all with his fellow human beings as human existence. However, "the
other human persons. In a sense, oriented to one common end and good" does not only present
to view things morally is to view subject to one common, itself as being the good for all
things in the eyes of all humanity. universal norm. and universal.It presents itself as
The moral attitude is the universally binding and
willingness to accept that one is The universal norm, of course, obligatory. In this sense, the
subject to a norm or a rule must be applied in the con of the telos or "the good" has an
common to all. individual particular, concrete imperative or binding demand on
situation. Nonetheless each one man so that his being is an
Contrariwise. particularly in in his or her particular situation "ought-to-be, and an ought-to-
our contemporary world, moral is perceived to be answerable to act" in view of the end or "the
visions and moral systems use one, common, universal good. I am, therefore, not at total
abound, varying from culture to norm and end. When in a moral liberty to take up or forego this
culture and from human group to judgment, I come to the ultimate end of man, for there is
human group. Such material conclusion that I ought to do no other. I am free, of course, to
differences, however. salient as such and sucn, the implication is consent or not to this end. But
they might be. appear more that any man in my place ought that simply means I am free to
serious than they really are, If we to act as now judge I should act, determine myself as being truly
look at each of these different or that any man, knowing the man or not, and being ultimately
moral visions and systems from conditions under which I now good or bad. Nonetheless, I
within, we see that each o them am, should come to the same remain obliged vis-a-vis the end,
invariably has in view the notion judgment as I now make. whether I consent to or not.
of all humanity, and each of Hence, in moral experience, man
them formally holds that the In moral experience, then, experiences himself. Somehow
moral ideal and the moral norm man experiences himself or necessarily bound and
are incumbent on all universally. herself as being one among necessarily oriented to this final
many in a community of all end, in view of which he ought
Because of human limitations, human persons. For this reason, to act. This sense of being bound
certain specific elements equality and justice are the direct or required, beyond mere
regarding man's self- corollaries of moral experience. I inclination or preference, to act
understanding may vary. The must respect and recognize the in view of the necessary ultimate
material extension of the concept other as a human person like end or "the good" is precisely
of all mankind may be relatively myself. I must render to the other what is meant by moral
restricted or open. Thus, an what is his or her due. The moral obligation.
14
 Obligation, in general, means Usually consequent upon a "good. et, On the other hand, the
the state of being bound or contract between two parties, the moral good seems to connote
required to do or not do legal obligation requires that an something that goes beyond
something. Obligation signifies act be done or not done. merely being that which is good
some fund of ought or otherwise a penalty or some I or me, or even being that which
imperative. There are, however, other sanction is imposed by the is good for all. Rather, it seems
many different kind of nuances legal authority. Thus, for to signify what I and all other
of obligation by which man may example, I must pay the agreed fellow human beings must seek
be bound. There is, first, what upon monthly installment to the and act upon unconditionally,
we might call technical store with which I signed a apart from any advantage or
obligation. This refers to the contract to buy my encyclopedia good that I individually or
requirement of relating suitable set on installment. Any undue together with my fellow human
means to chosen ends or goals. delay in the installment beings stand to gain by it. In this
Thus, once an engineer has payments would incur legally sense, moral obligation is
decided to build a bridge. he is sanctioned penalties, such as absolute. In other words, it is
obliged or bound to follow a extra interest imposed or even absolved of any relation to
whole set of physical and repossession of the books. conditions, terms, or provisos.
engineering laws governing As one sometimes says in a
building materials and geological Fourthly, there is the religious moral situation, I do this for the
formations in the design and in that represents obligation, by principle of the thing. not in
the construction of the bridge. which man feels bound to do or view of any interest or gain.
Otherwise it would never hold. not do certain things by virtue of
Or for example in certain games the relation man is believed to What then is this absolute
like chess, there are, at certain have with God and to the good, this unconditional telos
moments of the game, "forced" divinely sanctioned church or binding on all? What does it
or "obligatory" moves. In other congregation he belongs to. Thus, signify in the end? What is its
words, if I intend to win at all. there is the duty to pray, to love nature so that it can demand of
given a certain configuration of one another, to attend Mass on us to act unconditionally in view
the pieces, I must move in some Sundays, to fast and abstain on of it? We shall have to face this
specific way. Any other move Good Friday. question again later on. At this
would mean that I lose the game, point when we are simply trying
or that I will be at a very great Lastly, there is moral to describe that which is given in
disadvantage. Secondly, there is obligation. Good and bad do not moral experience, we can say
the social obligation. (We are not present themselves as free that there seems to be no specific
talking here of moral social alternatives for man, like object given whose formal
obligations which are moral choosing to have dessert or not, structure is clearly delineated.
obligations regarding my relation or choosing to be a nuclear For the moment when we talk of
to society or the community.) physicist or not. In a sense, to be "the good" or the telos what is
The social obligation refers to all good is something every man meant is that what is absolutely
sorts of things one must do if he ought to not simply for the binding is a certain general
or she would like to maintain reason that it will make him direction, a kind of pointing-
smooth relations with others or happy, or or popular, or self- toward, or a certain orientation
with the group. Thus, for actualized and fulfilled. I must toward a horizon that somehow
example, one is obliged to greet be good unconditionally, englobes us, rather than a
people on their birth anniversary, independently of personal specific object that we can grasp
to attend social functions, to inclinations preferences. It 1s fully, or a specific goal and
conform to certain customary true that the good seems to objective that we can project as a
practices. Otherwise, he ends up represent something that is the well-conceived. Fully controlled
being isolated from and fulfillment of my being. It is target.
ostracized by society. Thirdly, something that object of my
there is the legal obligation. deepest yearnings. Hence is
15
 As we have already seen, cannot be clearly delineated as a nature of man which opens up
morality is not primarily a kind specific object, the question his being. As were, freeing him
of theoretical knowledge in full naturally arises how such an from thee enclosed, limited
possession of itself. Rather, undetermined thing or principle existence of purely material life
morality is essentially action, can serve as the ground and and establishing him in his self-
where man is always ahead of norm of morality? if only to determining existence of
himself and turned away from point toward a certain direction, spiritual freedom. It is this
himself toward that which is it would seem that what is tension of being between'" which
ahead which is beyond his full required is at least some general endows human existence with its
grasp and control. Morality then idea or framework in function of moral dynamism. In other words,
is not just any action. We see a which we might chart our path the ideal of greater and greater of
big difference between a purely toward where we must tend spiritual freedom presents itself
technical or socially expedient absolutely. Otherwise, we would to man as "the good life. It is a
action and moral action. In the be left with an absolute desirable, worthy ideal, nay, it is
former instance, the goal and obligation to act, but with no the very fulfillment a end of
objective is something conceived effective direction or norm as to human existence, The good then
and posed by man and thus where we should go or what we seems to present his as the
remains under his control. As should do. We would thus be left horizon of spiritual freedom, the
Kant would say, such actions are with an empty tautological ideal of life in the nous which
commanded by hypothetical imperative that we must do represents the fulfilment of man's
imperatives precisely because absolutely what we must do. very being.
they are dependent upon goals
that man may either assume or If we consult the way the Listening to the experience of
discard. On the other hand the thinkers of antiquity described ancient thinkers, we feel its
goal of moral action presents moral experience, we find that resonance and corroboration in
itself as something which they experienced mans being as our own moral experience. The
ultimately transcends man's a kind of "in-between (metaxu), good, the end toward which man
grasp and control, On the situated between the material life is necessarily oriented, lies on
contrary, seems to be the moral of non rational beings and the the horizon of spiritual freedom
goal which commands man spiritual world of reason and the itself, or what we would call
imperatively and unconditionally. good. This "in-between" is not today personal existence. To put
only in reference to man's natural it in another way, we cannot
Hence, man experiences place in the hierarchy of beings, describe and know the good" in a
himself n some way related to a but more properly., in reference purely theoretical way. We can
kind of order which is not simply to man's very being as precisely have a practical view of "the
of his whim or design, like a set this very tension between the good" only as we act and as we
of self-imposed rules or closed existence of an animal, tend and strive towards it. We
resolutions or a targetted goal he physical, sensient life and the can have a lived, practical
poses for himself. The moral free existence of the spirit open knowledge of the good only in
structure seems to place man vis- to the Logos and to the good." terms of our active open being as
a-vis some kind of order of spiritual freedom or personal
transcendence, something other It is precisely this structural existence. We can only know the
than man, which is beyond man's tension situating him in between good as being that which
pure discretion. It is something the animals and the gods, as the approaches somehow toward the
that presents itself ancient Greeks would say, that limit and horizon of spiritual
unconditionally and absolutely. establishes man in his being as freedom. Hence, we seem to
man, in whom the Logos resides. have gained, if only a little, some
Granted then that because it 1s He is thus rational animal," clarity regarding this absolute
beyond man’s full grasp and being open to the Logos, later good and this unconditional
control, that which binds us referred to more precisely as the ultimate end of man. The good
unconditionally and absolutely nous. It is this in-between" lies in the fulfilment of man's
16
nature as spiritual freedom or defer till later the attempt to  Gave emphasis on reason as
personal existence. tackle this difficulty. For the the highest faculty of a
moment, we are simply trying to person (same with Socrates
At this point we seem to come describe the elements of our and Plato)
upon a kind of aporia or moral experience or of the moral
perplexity. We seem to be faced structure of human existence as  Founded his own school,
with opposing elements in our faithfully as we can, avoiding the Lyceum because of his
moral experience. On the one temptation of simplifying the intellectual differences with
hand, the good seems to present problem by glossing over one or Plato
itself as the good for man and the other of the two opposing terms,
fulfillment of his being as open and leaving for later the matter Nicomachean Ethics
existence or spiritual freedom. of theory and explanation. Let us
On the other hand, the good then at this stage simply register  Aristotle departs from the
presents itself as absolutely what is given, explore its Platonic theory that the real is
obligatory, and imposes itself on ramifications, and leave it at that. outside the realm of the
man, not merely as the exigency sensory experience and is in
of his being as rational nature, PART I1: THE 4 MAJOR the world of forms.
but as something to which man ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS
as moral being finds himself  Aristotle: real as matter and
subject. It is something which Ang ikalawang bahaging ito form
comes from some strange order ay tatalakay sa apat na
pangunahing etikal na kaisipan,  The good does not exist
of transcendence beyond man's
ang mga sumusunod ay, Virtue independent of the person's
mere inclination, demand or
Ethics ni Aristotle, Natural Law experience in the world
option.
Ethics ni Santo Tomas de
BCE Before Christian Era
But if the good is truly the Aquino, Deontology ni
good for man, how then does it Immanuel Kant, at ang Si Aristotle ay sinasabing isa
acquire the aspect of something Utilitariyanismo nina Jeremy sa pinakamahusay na mag-aaral
absolutely or unconditionally Bentham at John Stuart Mil. Ang ni Plato sa paaralan na kanyang
obligatory? How can that which bawat isa ay nagpapakita ng itinayo, ang Academy. Dahil sa
is man's proper good be anything struktura at sistematikong pag-lihis ng kaisipan ni Aristotle
more than that which man in his kaisipan upang bigyan ito ng sa kanyang guro, umalis siya at
freedom takes up and imposes makatuwirang batayan na nagtayo ng sariling paaralan na
upon himself in fidelity to his sumasaklaw sa pangkalahatang tinawag nyang Lyceum.
own being? On the other hand, if kilos ng tao bilang moral.
the good indeed is absolutely Tinalakay ni Aristotle ang
obligatory, how can it impose MODULE 7: VIRTUE kanyang kaisipan ukol sa Etika
itself on man without violating ETHICS (ARISTOTELIAN sa kanyang aklat na
his very being as reason, as ETHICS) pinamagatang Nichomachean
spiritual freedom and personal Ethics. Ang pamagat na ito ay
existence? Besides, what does it B. Readings for the Topic
hango sa pangalan ng kanyang
really mean to have an anak na lalaki na si
experlence of an unconditional VIRTUE ETHICS
(ARISTOTELIAN ETHICS Nichomachus na sivang pinag-
or absolute obligation? How aalayan ng isinulat na aklat.
does the experience of such a
Historical Background
peremptory demand differ from Para kay Plato, hindi
that of the human spirit's own  Aristotle: 384-322 BCE mararanasan ang mabuti(good)
immanent exigency to be true to sa pisikal o materyal na mundo.
itself? We shall have to  Student of Plato in the Sa halip ito ay mararanasan
Academia, Athens lamang sa mundo ng
Porma(world of forms/ideas)
17
 Taliwas sa kaisipan ni Plato,  "Activity of the soul in Mararanasan nya lamang ito
sinasabi ni Aristotle, ang mabuti, accordance with virtue" kung isasagawa nya ang gawain
ang reyalidad, ang katotohanan ng kan- yang pagiging tao (by
ay hindi hiwalay sa mundo na  Achieved by fulfilling a performing ones function)
nararanasan ng ating katawan, person's ergon (function).
ang materyal na mundo. Ibig What is the function of a
sabihin, maaabot at mararanasan Telos -salitang Griyego na ang person?
natin ang perpeksyon ng ating ibig sabihin ay hantungan,
sarili dito sa mundo na kung saan papupuntahan. Sa Ingles, ito ay  Function is what
ang paggawa ng mabuti ay 'end'. sa kasabihang ito, "Take distinguishes or characterizes
bahagi nito. others as an end, not as means. the thing from other beings
Ituring mo ang iba bilang (ex. umbrella used as
Bukod pa rito, dagdag pa ni hantungan ng iyong kilos, hindi protection from heat and rain)
Aristot le, na ang reyalidad ay isang kaparaanan lamang. (para
binubuo ng materyal (matter) at makamit ang ibang bagay na  Function of a person which
porma (forms), magkasama ito minimithi). sets her apart from the rest:
na umiiral sa lahat ng bagay, activity of reason
may buhay man o wala May Antas (Hierarchy) ang
hantungan (end), layunin  To be a person is to act in
What is the ultimate purpose (purpose) ang ating mga accordance to reason.
of a person? ikinikilos. Tinatawag din itong
intermediary means. Kapag  To be a good person is to
 There is a purpose in every naabot nati ito, kasangkapan perform her rational activity
action of a person which is lamang ito para maabot ang mas well.
perceived as something good. mataas na hantungan o layunin.
halimbawa, ang pagkamot sa  In a good or excellent way:
 There is a hierarchy of balat na kinagat ng lamok ay arête (virtue, birtud,
purpose daan lamang para maalis ang kati kagalingan, maayo)
na dulot nito, nang sa ganon ay
 Criteria for the ultimate telos Arete: Virtue
makatulog ka ng maayos, para
hindi ka mapuyat, kinabukasan. "But we must add "in a
a. Final Kung hindi ka puyat, complete life". For one swallow
makakapagaral ka ng mga aralin does not make a summer..Also a
b. Self-sufficient
sa skul para makakuha ng mataas happy man needs the external
c. Attainable na grades, para makatapos ng goods as well; for it is
pag-aaral na siyang mas mataas impossible, or not easy, to do
What is the ultimate purpose na hantungan na gusto mong noble acts without the proper
of a person? maabot, subalit hindi pa ito dito equipment...as good birth,
nagtatapos. goodly children, beauty..."(Bk. I,
Answer: Eudaimonia 1098a19)
Eudaimonia -salitang Grieyo
Eudaimonia: highest purpose na nangangahulugang, Ganap na  Virtue cannot be
and highest good Kaligayahan (Absolute/Perfect accomplished by a single act
Happiness). Dahil ganap ito, o
 Not an emotion which is perpekto, kaya wala ka nang  Conditions in order to be
temporary hahanap-hanapin pa. Ito ang happy
pinaka hantungan, pinaka
 Not nirvana (state of layunin ng tao, ang maabot ang Ayon kay Aristotle, ang gawain
liberation from samsara) nor ganap na kaligayahan na kung ng pag-iisip at katwiran (activity
stoicism (rejection of emotion) saan nararanasan niya ang of reason) ang siyang
kaganapan ng kanyang pagkatao. naghihiwalayo nagbibigay
18
kaibahan ng tao sa mga hayop at a. vegetative: growth, nutrition Sa Rasyonal na bahagi,
mga bagay. Ito ang gawain na tumutukoy ito sa pagkapit natin
natatangi lamang sa tao kung b. appetitive: desire sa katotohanan, at sa
kayat naisasagawa nya ang pagsasagawa ng tama at
kanyang pagiging  Not dictated by reason mabuting kilos. Unang elemento
tao(performance of one's function nito ay ang Moral. Idinidikta
as human being), at dito makikita  Desire: does not arise from nito na gawin natin ang tama at
na ang tunay na kaligayahan ay the rational faculty of the soul mabuting kilos. Sa bahagi ng
mararanasan lamang kung but is subject to reason Intellectual. Una, ito ang
isinasagawa natin ang gawain ng pagsisikap natin na malaman ang
2. Rational:
pagiging tao na kung saan ang tama at maling kilos(practical
kaganapano perpeksyon ng a. Moral (acting) wisdom ophronesis), pangalawa,
pagiging tao ay naabot. ito din ang pagsisikap natin na
b. Intellectual (knowing) malaman ang katotohanan ng
Ang gawain ng pag-iisip at mga bagay-bagay(philosophic
katwiran ay aspeto ng ating i. Practical wisdom (phronesis) wisdom o sophia) Kaya ang
kaluluwa.(para kay Aristotle, pagkapit natin rasyonal na aspeto
ang kaluluwa ang siyang ii. Philosophic wisdom (sophia) ng ating kaluluwa nahuhubog
nagpapakilos sa sa lahat ng ang birtud o moral na
bagay na may buhay. Ang  Dictated by reason birtud(moral virtue) sa
kaluluwa ng tao ay hindi pamamagitan, una, sa pag-alam
maaaring humiwalay sa katawan  Aspect of the soul where natin kung ano tama at mali,
ng tao. Ibig sabihin, hindi na ito virtue, that is, where human pangalawa, kasunod nito ang
umiral pag namatay ang excellence can be attained: pagsasagawa nito ng paulit-ulit
katawan tao) moral and intellectual virtues hanggang sa maging bahagi ito
ng ating buhay : pagkakataong
Ang birtud(virtue, sa Griyego, Sa bahaging ito, tinatalakay ni ito lamang masasabi na mabuti
Arete) ay produkto ng Aristotle ang mga aspeto ng kang tao(a person of virtues).
pagsasagawa ng pag-iisip at kaluluwa (psyche or soul) na kung saan, sa pagkakataong ito
katwiran ng tao (activity of siyang nagpapagalaw o lamang masasabi na mabuti kang
reason) sa lebel ng moral na nagbibigay buhay sa katawan. Sa tao (a person of virtues).
kilos. Ito ang tama at mabuting Irasyonal na bahagi. Sa antas ng
kilos na kinakailangang maging vegetative, ipinahihiwatig ng Moral Virtue
bahagi ng isang sarili sa termino na ang kilos na
pamamagi tan ng paulit-ulit na ibinibigay ng kaluluwa sa Determining the good and
pagsasagawa rito hanggang sa ito paglaki, paglusog, at pagyabong doing the right actions
ay nagiging bukal sa ating na pare-parehong nagaganap sa
pagkilos, ibig sabihin, ang taong mga halaman, hayop, at tao. Sa Acquired through habit
gumagawa nito ay masaya at appetative, galaw na ibinibigay
hindi nahihirapan sa lahat ng ng kaluluwa ay nasa aspetong Formation of one's character:
pagkakataon. (Taliwas ito sa pagnanais(desire) ng katawan habitually willing and doing the
paniniuwala ni Plato na kung kagaya ng pagnanais sa pagkain, good (mabuting pag-uugali)
alam mo ang tama at mabuting sekwal na kilos at iba pang nina
kilos, awtomatik na gagawin mo nais ng katawan para mabuhay at What comprises moral virtue?
ito, pero sa tunay na buhay, makapagpatuloy ang lahi.
kinapapalooban ito ng hayop at Acting out the right
hindi sa lahat ng pagkakataon
tao. Ito ay nyutral (neutral), hindi feelings/passions?
nangyayari ito.)
mabuti o hindi masama, subalit
 Most feelings/ passions are
Psyche: soul of a person kinakailangang gabayan ng
neutral. Neither good nor bad
rasyonal na aspeto.
1. Irrational: (ex. being angry)

19
 Moral virtue is the excellent sophia), maaari nating Phronimos (virtuous person)
management of one's feelings matutuhan ito mula sa kaala-
and passions man ng ibang tao o sa pag- a virtuous person does not
aanalisa at pag-oobserba sa ating even have to control oneself
 Ex. Being angry with the kapaligiran at ating mga because one's resolution has been
right person, time, reason, ginagawa. Kaya sa so habituated to always rightly
manner, circumstance pagsasabulhay naman ng act self-possessed
intelektwal na gawain ay
 Right measurement: mesotes nahuhubog sa atin ang tinatawag Definition of Moral Virtue
(mean) na Intelekwal na Birtud
(intellectual virtue). "Virtue, then, is a state of
Intellectual Virtue character concerned with a
Ayon kay Aristotle, sa choice, lying in a mean, i.e., the
Act of knowing pagdetermina o pag-aalam kung mean relative to us, this being
ano ang tama o maling kilos, determined by a rational
 Intellectual virtue is seen in principle, and by that principle
nakasalalay ito sa paghusga ng
wisdom by which the man of practical
praktikal na aspeto ng
karunungan. Ang batayan ng wisdom would determine it. "(Bk
 Acquired through teaching, II, 1106b36-1107a2)
learning paghusga o panukat ay ang
tinatawag niyang, Mesotes
(salitang Griyego na ang ibig Virtue is the mean in between
 Phronesis: excellence of two vices.
knowing what to do sabihin ay mean, middle o gitna).
Ang gitna na tinutukoy nya ay
Deficiency------ Virtue-----
 Phronesis: necessary for ang bahagi sa pagitan ng
Excess Mesotes
moral virtue dalawang sukdulan ng isang
nyutral na kilos (middle part Table of Virtues and Vices
Moral na Birtud (moral between 2 extremes ina neutral
virtue) - bilang bahagi ng action). Halimbawa: sa kilos na Class Excess Mean Deficie
rasyonal na aspeto ng kaluluwa paggasta, ang dalawang of ncy
(psyche or soul), ang moral o sukdulang kilos nito ay magarbo, action
ang rasyonal na kilos ay magastos, at sa kabilang dulo or
nahuhubog sa pagsasabuhay nito naman ay kuripot. Kaya ang feeling
sa lahat ng sandali hanggang sa gitnang bahagi nito ay matipido
ito ay maging likas (nature) natin praktikal sa paggastos. Fear rashne coura cowardi
ayon kay Aristotle. Ang kilos na and ss ge ce
isasabuhay natin ay nakabatay sa Mesotes confid
karunungan na pinagnilayan ence
nang malalim ng Intelektwal Hence it is hard work to be
bahagi ng rasyonal na aspeto, virtuous, since in each case it is Giving prodig libera meanne
ang praktikal (pangkilos) na hard work to find what is the and ality lity ss
karunungan. mean (mesotes)..So also getting getting
angry, or giving and spending small
Kaugnay nito, mapapansin money, is easy and anyone can amoun
natin na dalawa ang do it; but doing it to the right ts
pinagmumulan ng ating person, in the right amount, at
karunungan sa ilalim ng the right time, for the right end, pagtiti Uto- kabai mapagh
intelektwal na bahagi, una, ang and in the right way is no longer wala uto tan inala
praktikal na karunungang easy, nor can everyone do it.
practical wisdom o phronesis), Hence, (doing these things) well Moral Virtue: mesotes
pangalawa, ang karunungan ng is rare, praiseworthy, and fine.
reyalidad(philosophic wisdom o (Bk. II, 1109a24)
20
 Exactness of mesotes, or as Aquinas wrote an incredible and what God commands and
the maximum act (ex. Not amount in fact one of the forbids is what is called the
sobrang bait, not over sa miracles accredited to him was Divine Command Theory (DCT).
tapang, not medyo the amount he wrote! His most
palakaibigan) famous work is Summa There is a powerful and
Theologica and this runs to some influential challenge to such an
 Wrong actions have no three and half thousand pages account called the Euthyphro
mesotes (ex. Murder, adultery, and contains many fascinating dilemma after the challenge was
spite) and profound insights, such as first raised in Plato's Euthyphro.
proofs for God's existence. The The dilemma runs as follows:
Bisyo (vice)- kasalungat ng birtud book remained a fundamental Either God commands
o virtue. Tinutukoy nito ang mga basis for Catholic thinking right something is right because it is,
hindi mabubuting kilos bilang up to the 1960s! But do not or it is right because God
sukdulan ng isang nyutral na kilos worry we will only be focusing commands it. If God commands
na kung saan nagpapakita ito ng on a few key ideas! Specifically something because it is right,
sobra o kalabisan (excess) at books -I, questions 93-95. then God's commands do not
kakulangan (defeciency) make it right, His commands
Santo Tomas de Aquino- only tell us what is right. This
MODULE VII: NATURAL (1225 A.D.-1274 A.D)- isang means God simply drops out of
LAW ETHICS Italyanong prayle, pilosopo the picture in terms of explaining
(philosopher), at teyolohiko why something is right.
They show that the requirements (theologian)
of the law are written on their If on the other hand something
hearts, their consciences also -masugid na tagasunod ng is right because God commands
bearing witness, and their pilosopiya ni Aristotle it then anything at all could be
thoughts sometimes accusing right; killing children or setting
them and at other times even -bumuo ng isang komprehensibo fire to churches could be morally
defending them. at sistematikong kaisipan sa acceptable. But if a moral theory
pamamagitan ng pagsasama ng says this then that looks as if the
Grace does not destroy nature pananampalatayang Kristyano at theory is wrong.
but perfects it. Gryegong pilosopya (plosopiya
niAristotle). Most theists reject the first
1. Introduction to Aquinas option and opt for this second
-para sa kanya, ang pilosopiya option that God's commands
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) at pananampalatayang Kristiyano make something right. But they
was an intellectual and religious ay hindi magkakontra. then have to face the problem
revolutionary, living at a time of
that it make morality haphazard.
great philosophical, theological 2. Motivating Natural Law This "arbitrariness problem as it
and scientific development. He Theory: The Euthyphro is sometimes called, is the reason
was a member of the Dominican Dilemma and Divine that many, including Aquinas,
Friars, which at that time was Command Theory give up on the Divine Command
considered to be a cult, and was
Theory.
taught by one of the greatest The likely answer froma
intellects of the age, Albert the religious person as to why we So for Aquinas what role, if
Great (1208-1280). In a nutshell should not steal, or commit any at all, does God have when it
Aquinas wanted to move away adultery is: "because God forbids comes to morality? For him,
from Plato's thinking, which was us": or if we ask why we should God's commands are there to
hugely influential at the time, love our neighbour or give help us to come to see what, as a
and instead introduce money to charity then the answer matter of fact, is right and wrong
Aristotelian ideas to science, is likely to be "because God rather than determine what is
nature and theology. commands it". Drawing this link right and wrong. That is,
between what is right and wrong
21
Aquinas opts for the first option na kahit ang pagpatay ay its purpose/plan then it is
in the Euthyphro dilemma as magiging tama kung ito ay following the Eternal Law.
stated above. But then this raises kanyang iniuutos. Ito ay
the obvious question: if it is not humahantong sa tinatawag na Aquinas thinks that something
God's commands that make "arbitrariness problem," o kilos is good in as far as it fulfils its
something right and wrong, then na ayon lamang sa kung ano ang purpose/plan. This fits with
what does? Does not God just maisipan at magustuhang gawin common sense. A "good' eye is
fall out of the picture? This is ng Diyos. Ang puntong ito ang one which sees well. an acorn is
where his Natural Law Theory tinututulan ni Santo Tomas de a good if it grows into a strong
comes in. Aquino upang ihain ang kanyang oak tree. But what about humans?
Natural Law Ethical theory. Just as a good eye is to see, and a
Divine Command Theory- good acorn is to grow then a
ipinahahayag nito na ang tamang 3. Natural Law Theory good human is to...? Is to what?
kilos ng tao ay naka-ayon sa How are we going to finish this
kung ano ang ipinag-uutos sa Aquinas's Natural Law Theory sentence? What do you think?
atin ng Diyos na gawin at ang contains four different types of
maling kilos ay kung ano ang law: Eternal Law, Natural Law, Aquinas thinks that the answer
Kanyang ipinagbabawal na Human Law and Divine Law. is reason and that it is this that
gawin. The way to understand these four makes us distinct from rats and
laws and how they relate to one rocks. What is right for me and
Dilemma- ito ay 2 o higit another is via the Eternal Law, you as humans is to act
pang mga pagppilian na kaisipan so we'd better start there.. according to reason. If we act
o bagay na pare-parehong may according to reason then we are
negatibong katangian o resulta. By "Eternal Law'" Aquinas partaking in the Natural Law.
means God's rational purpose
Euthyphro Dilemma - isang and plan for all things. And If we all act according to
pagtutol o hamon sa kaisipan ng because the Eternal Law is part reason, then we will all agree to
Divine Commad Theory. Una of God's mind then it has always, some overarching general rules
itong binanggit ni Plato sa and will always, exist. The (what Aquinas calls primary
kanyang aklat na Euthyphro. Eternal Law is not simply precepts). These are absolute and
Ipinahahayag nito na alin man, something that God decided at binding on all rational agents and
na ang isang bagay na ipinag- some point to write. because of this Aquinas rejects
uutos ng biyos ay tama, o di relativism.
kaya naman, na tama ang isang Aquinas thinks that everything
kilos dahil ito ay ipinag-uutos has a purpose and follows a plan. The first primary precept is
ng Diyos. He, like Aristotle, is a teleologist that good is to be pursued and
(the Greek term "telos' refers to done and evil avoided. He thinks
Para ipaliwanag ito, Sa unang what we might call a purpose, that this is the guiding principle
salaysay, na ang isang bagay na goal, end/or the true final for all our decision making.
ipinag-uutos ng Diyos ay tama. function of an object) (see
Kung tatanggapin natin ito, to ay Chapter 3; not to be confused Before unpacking this, it is
nagsasabing, ang ipinapakita nya with a telelogical ethical theory worth clarifying something about
lamang sa kanyang mga iniuutos such as Utilitarianism) and what "law" means. Imagine that
sa atin ay kung ano ang mga believes that every object has a we are playing Cluedo and we
tamang kilos. Ibig sabihin, hindi telos, the acorn has the telos of are trying to work out the
nakadepende ang pagigingg tama growing into an oak; the eye a identity of the murderer. There
ng isang kilos sa kanyang telos of seeing: a rat of eating are certain rules about how to
agsasagawa ng pag-utos sa atin. and reproducing etc. (notice this move around the board, how to
Sa Ikalawang kaisipan, anuman links to his view on sex, see deal out cards, how to reveal the
ang Kanyang iniuutos ay tama. Chapter 10). If something fulfils murderer etc.These rules are all
Kaya maaari natin sabihin dito written down and can be
consulted.
22
 Ayon kay Aquinas: both be true and false; if it is always wear helmet when riding
Professor Plum who is the a bike, do not hack into
Eternal Law (Batas na Walang murderer then it cannot be true someone's bank account.
Hanggang)-ito ang pag-isip ng that it is not Professor Plum who Secondary precepts are not
Diyos, ang plano ng Diyos sa is the murderer. These are generated by our reason but
lahat ng bagay. Ito rin ang telos o internal rules which any rational rather they are imposed by
layunin o hantungan ng lahat ng person can come to recognize by governments, groups, clubs,
bagay na iniukit Nya rito nang simply thinking and are not societies etc.
likhain nya ito. Ang anumang external like the other rules such
umiiral ay maituturing natin na as you can only have one guess It is not always morally
mabuti (good) kung tinutupad as to the identity of the murderer. acceptable to follow secondary
nito ang kanyang layunin o When Aquinas talks of Natural precepts. It is only morally
gagampanin ng kanyang Laws, he means internal rules acceptable if they are consistent
pagiging (function). Halimbawa, and not external ones. with the Natural Law. If they are,
ang mata ay mabuti kung then we ought to follow them, if
nakakakita ito. Natural Law does not generate they are not, then we ought not.
an external set of rules that are To see why think through an
Ang kakayahan ng tao na written down for us to consult example.
mag-isip ang nagbibigay sa tao but rather it generates general
ng kaibahan nito sa mga bagay, rules that any rational agent can Consider the secondary
hayop at halaman. come to recognize simply in precept that "if you are a woman
virtue of being rational. For and you live in Saudi Arabia
Kung pagbabasehan natin ang example, for Aquinas it is not as then you are not allowed to drive'.
ating katwiran sa maayos na if we need to check whether we Aquinas would argue that this
paraan, sino man ay hahantong should pursue good and avoid secondary precept is practically
sa iisang pagtingin sa evil, as it is just part of how we irrational because it treats people
katotohanan. Hindi tayo already think about things. differently based on an arbitrary
hahantong sa relatibismong Aquinas gives some more difference (gender). He would
kaisipan na nagsasabing ang examples of primary precepts: reason that if the men in power
katotohanan ay nakadepende sa in Saudi actually really thought
tumitingin at nag-isip. 1. Protect and preserve human hard then they too would
life. recognize that this law is morally
Ang katwiran ang matuturo sa wrong. This in turn means that
atin sa Batas ng Kalikasan 2. Reproduce and educate Aquinas would think that this
(Natural Law) na nakaukit sa one's offspring. human law does not fit with the
sang nilikha. Kaya ang kumilos Natural Law. Hence, it is
ayon sa katwiran (reason) ay 3. Know and worship God. morally wrong to follow a law
pakikibahagi natin sa sang that says that men can, and
kalikasan. sa paggamit natin ng 4. Live in a society. women cannot, drive. So
ating katwiran, nalalaman natin although it is presented as a
ang mga batas ng kalikasan, These precepts are primary
secondary precept, because it is
kagaya ng pagnanais natin sa because they are true for all
not in accordance with Natural
mabuti at maisagawa ito at pag- people in all instances and are
Law, it is what Aquinas calls an
iwas natin sa mga bagay na consistent with Natural Law.
apparent good. This is in contrast
masama. with those secondary precepts
Aquinas also introduces what
he calls the Human Law which which are in accordance with the
However, in playing the game Natural Law and which he calls
there are other rules that operate gives rise to what he calls
"Secondary Precepts'. These the real goods.
which are so obvious that they
are neither written down nor might include such things as do
And katwiran ang kumikilos
spoken. One such rule is that a not drive above 70mph on a
sa tao ay may sariling panloob na
claim made in the game cannot motorway, do not kidnap people,
23
 panuntunan( internal rules) na that what we ought to do is talk introduce the Divine Law at all?
isinusunod na naghahatid sa atin and interact with people. To It certainly feels we have
upang mailala ang mga batas ng discover our real goods our enough Laws. Here is a story to
kalikasa( natural laws) kung secondary precepts which illustrate Aquinas's answer.
kaya hindi ito bumabase sa accord with Natural Law -we A number of years ago I was
panlabas na panuntunan need to be part of a society. For talking to a minister of a church.
(external rules) na atimg example, we might think that He told me about an instance
isinisulat para pagbasehan ng iba "treat Christians as secondary where a married man came to
para makilala ang mga batas ng citizens" is a good secondary ask his advice about whether to
kalikasan (nayural laws). precept until we talk and live finish an affair he was having.
Mapapansin ito sa ating with Christians. The more we The man's reasoning went as
pagkiling o likas na pagkilos can think and talk with others in follows"I am having an affair
( natural tendency) sa mga society the better and it is for which just feels so right, we are
sumusunod na gawain. Ang ilan this reason that "live in society" both very much in love and
sa mga ito ay: is itself a primary precept. surely God would want what is
But looking at what we have best for me! How could it be
1. Proteksyon at pangalagaan said already about Natural Laws wrong if we are so happy?
ang ating buhay and primary and secondary
precepts, we might think that Divine Laws -batas na
2. Magkaanak at turuan ang there is no need for God. If we ipinahayag ng Diyos (divine
mga ito can learn these primary precepts revelation) at ito ay mababasa
by rational reflection then God sa Bibliya. Ang halimbawa nito,
3. Kilalanin at sambahin ang simply drops out of the story ang 10 Utos ng Diyos.
ating Diyos (recall the Euthyphro dilemma Ginagabayan nito ang batas ng
above). tao. Bilang tugon ni Aquinas sa
4. Mabuhay at makibahagi sa
Just to recap as there a lots Euthyphro Dilemma, partikular
lipunan
of moving parts to the story. We sa Divine Command Theory,
Human Laws- batas na gawa ng now have Eternal Law (God's binibigkas lamang ng Dyos sa
tao na ipinapatupad ng ating plans/purpose for all things), bibliya ang kanyang mga utos
gobyerno. Hindi lahat ng batas ng Natural Laws (our partaking in na dapat lamang sundin ng tao,
tao kung ito ay hindi the Eternal Law which leads to at hindi ang kung anuman na
sumasalungat sa batas ng primary precepts), Human Laws Kanyang gugustuhin
kalikasan (natural laws) (humans making specific laws
to capture the truths of the In response, the minister
Natural Laws which lead to opened the Bible to the Ten
Unlike primary precepts, secondary precepts) and now Commandments and pointed out
Aquinas is not committed to finally Aquinas introduces the the commandment that it says that
there being only one set of Divine Law. it is wrong to commit adultery.
secondary precepts for all The Divine Law, which is Case closed. The point of this
people in all situations. It is discovered through revelation, story is simple. We can be
consistence with Aquinas's should be thought of as the confused and mistaken about
thinking to have a law to drive Divine equivalent of the Human what we think we have most
on the right in the US and on Law (those discovered through reason to do and because of this
the left in the UK as there is no rational reflection and created we need someone who actually
practical reason to think that by people). Divine laws are knows the mind of God to guide
there is one correct side of the those that God has, in His grace, us, and who better to know this
road on which to drive. seen fit to give us and are those than God Himself. This then is
It is clear that on our own we "mysteries", those rules given precisely what is revealed in the
are not very good at discovering by God which we find in Divine Law.
primary precepts and scripture, for example, the ten
consequently Aquinas thinks commandments. But why
24
 Or consider another example. reflect our apparent goods. When
We recognize that we find it hard they are right they reflect our
to forgive our friends and nearly real goods.
always impossible to forgive our
enemies. We tell ourselves we Finally, however good we are
have the right to be angry, to because we are finite and sinful,
bear grudges, etc. isn't this just we can only get so far with
ourselves we have the right to be rational reflection. We need
angry, to bear grudges, etc. Isn't some revealed guidance and this
this just human? However, these comes in the form of Divine Law.
human reasons are distortions of So to return to the Euthyphro
the Eternal Law. We need some dilemma. God's commands
guidance when it comes to through the Divine Law are ways
forgiveness and it is where the of illuminating what is in fact
Divine Law which tells us that morally acceptable and not what
we should forgive others determines what is morally
including our enemies. acceptable. Aquinas rejects the
Following the Human Laws and Divine Command Theory.
the Divine Laws will help us to
fulfil our purposes and plans and COMMON STUDENT
be truly happy. MISTAKES

4. Summary of Aquinas's  Thinking that Aquinas is a

Natural Law Theory Divine Command Theorist.

For Aquinas everything has a  Thinking that Eternal Law is

function (a telos) and the good something that God decided
thing (s) to do are those acts that to write.
fulfil that function. Some things
such as acorns, and eyes, just do  Thinking that Natural Laws
that naturally. However, humans are laws of science-e.g. law
are free and hence need guidance of thermodynamics.
to find the right path. That right
 Thinking that all the "laws"
path is found through reasoning
are absolute.
and generates the "internal"
Natural Law. By following the  Thinking that it is always
Natural Law we participate in morally required of us to
God's purpose for us in the follow secondary precepts.
Eternal Law.
 Thinking that Aquinas is
However, the primary precepts committed to there being only
that derive from the Natural Law precepts for all people in all
are quite general, such as, pursue situations set of secondary
good and shun evil. So we need precepts for all people in all
to create secondary precepts situations.
which can actually guide our
day-to-day behaviour. But we
are fallible so sometimes we get
these secondary precepts wrong,
sometimes we get them right.
When they are wrong they only
25