Ethics rev her wider world of social roles, which can come into

conflict with one another or even with her own

 4 major ethical theories or frameworks: system of values.

1. Utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill - "community" does not only refer to the human
2. natural law ethics - Aquinas groups that one belongs to, but also refers to the
3. Kantian deontology - Immanuel Kant nonhuman, natural world that serves as home and
4. virtue ethics - Aristotle source of nurturance for all beings.

- None of them is definitive nor final - Applying rational deliberation to determine one's
 Reason - is the power that identifies the ethical responsibility to one's self, society, and
situations in which rules and principles environment is the overall goal of a college course in
sometimes conflict with one another. ethics.
- hopefully, will allow one to finally make the best
decision possible in a given situation of moral choice. - Ethical thought and decision-making are done by
- Reason enables us to distinguish between human an agent who is shaped and dictated upon by many
situations that have a genuinely moral character from factors within her and without.
those that are nonmoral (or amoral).
 The Moral Agent - human man lang
 aesthetic considerations and questions of
etiquette are important facets of human life, but  Human individual - The one who is tasked to
they do not necessarily translate into genuine think about what is "right" and why it is so, and to
ethical or moral value. choose to do so.

 The ethical or moral dimension compared to the ancient Greeks even had a famous saying for it:
realms of the aesthetic or of etiquette is "Epimeleia hë auto," usually translated into English
qualitatively weightier, for the ethical or moral as "Know thyself."
cuts to the core of what makes one human.
 Reason, through proper philosophizing, will aid  Ramon C. Reyes in his essay "Man and
an individual (and hopefully her wider Historical Action, succinctly explained that "who
community) to make such potentially crucial one is" is a cross-point.
distinctions.
- one's identity, who one is, or who I am, is a product
 Si reason makaka help para I distinguish si of many forces and events that happened outside of
moral dimension compared sa aesthetic one's choosing.
consideration lang.
 4 cross-points:
 Levels of moral valuation
1. Physical - events in the past and material factors
1. Personal - can be understood to mean both the in the present that one did not have a choice in.
person in relation to herself, as well as her relation to
other human beings on an intimate or person-to- Ex: Homo sapiens, inherited genetic material of
person basis. parents. nor to be born in and/or grow up in such a
- right way to act in relation to other human beings physical environment (i.e., for Filipinos to be born in
and toward self. an archipelago with a tropical climate
- also refers to one's intimate relationships with other
persons 2. Interpersonal - cross-point of many events and
factors outside of one's choosing.
2. Societal - Society in this context means one's Ex: parents afecting personality, affected by the
immediate community (one's neighborhood, people surrounding her: siblings, relatives,
barangay, or town), culture classmates, playmates, and eventually workmates.
- shaped by one's relationships, as well as the
 Culture - is a wide term: it may include the physical factors that affect how one thinks and feels.
beliefs and practices a certain group of people
considered valuable, and can extend to such 3. Societal - "who one is" is shaped by one's society.
realms as art, laws, fields of knowledge - "society" here pertains to all the elements of the
human groups as opposed to the natural
- Ethics serves to guide one through the potentially environment that one is a member of.
confusing thicket of the individual's interaction with - "Culture" in its varied aspects is included here.
-molded in large part by the kind of society and - first, that cultural relativism confuses a statement of
culture which, for the most part, one did not choose- fact (that different cultures have different moral
that one belongs to. Filipinos have their own way of codes), which is merely descriptive, with a normative
doing things (e.g., pagmamano) statement (that there cannot be objective truth in
- system of beliefs and values morality).
- own notions of right and wrong - Rachels provides a counter-argument by analogy:
- This third cross-point interacts with the physical Just because some believed that the Earth was flat,
and the interpersonal factors that the individual while some others believe it is spherical does not
and her people are immersed into or engaged in. mean that there is no objective truth to the actual
shape of the Earth.
4. Historical - which is simply the events that one's
people has undergone. In short, one's people's  reductio ad absurdum argument. It is an
history shapes "who one is" right now. argument that first assumes that the claim in
question is correct, in order to show the
- ex: the Philippines had a long history of colonization absurdity that will ensue if the claim is accepted
that affected how Philippine society has been formed as such
and how Philippine culture has developed.
- ex: christianity  3 absurd consequences of accepting the claim
of cultural relativism.
 being a product of all these cross-points is just
one side of "who one is." 1. One cannot criticize the practices or beliefs of
 According to Reyes, "who one is" is also a another culture anymore, as long as that culture
project for one's self. This happens because a thinks that what it is doing is correct.
human individual has freedom.
 This freedom is not absolute: one does not 2. One cannot even criticize the practices or bellefs
become something because one chooses to be. of own culture
 "who one is" is a cross-point, but in an
existential level. 3.one cannot even accept that moral progress can
happen.
 What one ought to do in one's life is not dictated
by one's physical, interpersonal, social, or  Rachels - recognizing and respecting differences
historical conditions. What one ought to do is between cultures do not necessarily mean that
also not abstracted from one's own specific there is no such thing as objective truth in
situation. One always comes from somewhere. morality. He argues instead that though different
- The human individual, thus, always exists in the cultures have different ways of doing things,
tension between being conditioned by external cultures may hold certain values in common.
factors and being a free agent.
- someone can recognize and respect cultural
- The moral agent is not a calculating, unfeeling differences and still maintain the right to criticize
machine that produces completely objective and beliefs and practices that she thinks are wrong, if she
absolutely correct solutions to even the most performs proper rational deliberation.
complex moral problems.
- The cultural differences between one society and
What is the relationship between ethics and one's another in terms of norms, practices, and beliefs are
own culture? not trivial matters that one can disregard.

 Culture and Ethics - the challenge of ethics is not the removal of one's
- opinion many people hold is that one's culture culture because that is what makes one unique.
dictates what is right or wrong for an individual. - one must dig deeper into her own culture in order to
- one's culture is inescapable, discover how her own people have most
meaningfully explored possibly universal human
 James Rachels - provided a clear argument questions or problems within the particularity of her
against the validity of cultural relativism in the own people's native ground.
realm of ethics.
 cultural relativism - as the position that claims  Ethics, therefore, should neither be reduced to
that there is no such thing as objective truth in one's own cultural standards, nor should it
the realm of morality. different cultures have simplistically dismiss one's unique cultural
different moral codes, there is no one correct beliefs and practices.
moral code that all cultures must follow.
 The latter can possibly enlighten her toward  Moral Development
what is truly ethical.
one does not wander into ethical situations blindly,  Maturation in moral reasoning
with the naive assumption that ethical issues will
be resolved automatically by her beliefs and  Lawrence Kohlberg - who theorized that moral
traditions. development happens in six stages that he
divided into three levels.
 Religion and Ethics
- Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism are
four of the largest religious groups in the world today,
based on population.

- religion in essence represents a group's ultimate,

most fundamental concerns regarding their
existence.
- the question of morality for many religious followers
is reduced to following the teachings of their own
 Level 1 : Pre-conventional
religion.
- corresponds to how infants and young children
think.
- "What exactly does sacred scripture (or religious
- reasoning is centered on the consequences of
teaching) command?" This is a question of
one's actions, is divided into two stages.
interpretation since even the same passage from a
particular religious tradition, can have many different
1. 1st stage of reasoning - centers around obedience
interpretations from religious teachers even from
and the avoidance of punishment:
within the same tradition.
- action is "good" if it enables one to escape from
- any reading or interpretation has a historical
punishment; "bad" if it leads to punishment.
particularity affected by the situatedness of the
reader.
2. 2nd stage of reasoning - act according to what she
- This implies that the moral agent in question must
thinks will serve her self-interest;
still, in full responsibility, challenge herself to
- "good" at this age is what the child thinks can bring
understand using her own powers of rationality, but
her pleasure.
with full recognition of her own situatedness, what
her religious authorities claim their religion teaches.
 Level 2 of moral development: Conventional
- learn to conform to the expectations of society.
- one must determine what justifies the claim of a
-one learns to follow the conventions of her group.
particular religious teaching when it commands its
- divided into two stages:
followers on what they "ought to do" (whether in
general or in specific situations).
3. 3rd stage - is when one begins to act according to
 Plato's philosophical question in his dialogue
what the larger group she belongs to expects of her.
Euthyphro, which was mentioned in an earlier
- assumes that what will benefit her best is when the
unit: "Is it holy only because it is loved by the
other members of her group approve of her
gods, or is it holy in itself and that is why it is
actions.
loved by the gods?"
- conform, first to the values of one's immediate
group, such as her family, playmates, or later on,
- a critical-minded follower might ask for reasons as
barkada.
to why sacred scripture says that.
- religious extremists use religion to justify acts of
4. 4th stage - is achieved when a person realizes that
violence they perform on fellow human beings.
following the dictates of her society is not just good
for herself, but more importantly, it is necessary for
- The problem here is not that religion misleads
the existence of society itself.
people; the problem is that too many people
- values most the laws, rules, and regulations of her
perform heinous acts simply because they
society, and, thus, her moral reasoning is shaped by
assumed they were following the teachings of
dutifulness to the external standards set by
their supposed religion, without stopping to think
society.
whether these actions are harmful.
- follow the rules and regulations of their institution,
- The philosophical- minded individual therefore is
the laws of their community or state, the doctrine of
tasked to be critical even of her own set of beliefs
their religion-even are trapped in this second,
and practices, and to not simply follow for the sake of
conventional, level, which is still not yet the highest.
blind obedience.
 The point of Kohlberg's theory is not to - for Kohlberg, the full maturity of post-conventional
ascertain what defines the goodness or thinking since this stage recognizes that in the end,
rightness of the act. the question of what one ought to do goes back to
 Kohlberg's idea is not an ethical theory; instead, the individual moral agent and her own rationality.
it is a psychological theory that attempts to
describe the stages of a person's growth in - ultimately, one must think for herself what she
moral thinking. ought to do.

The morally mature individual, for Kohlberg, must  ethical thinking is not a completely intellectual
outgrow both (1) the pre-conventional level, whose task, but one that also involves the feelings.
pleasure-and-pain logic locks one into a self-
centered kind of thinking, an egoism, as well as (2)  Feelings in Moral Deliberation - not possible trail
the conventional level, which at first glance looks like human choice can be purged of all feelings; the
the sensible approach to morality. The second level moral agent, after all, is neither robot nor
might, de facto, question of following the right rules. computer.

 Level 3: highest level of moral development: - appreciate the indispensable role emotions have on
post-conventional an agent's act of choosing.
- morally responsible agent recognizes that what is
good or right is not reducible to following the rules of  Aristotle precisely points out that moral virtue
one's group. goes beyond the mere act of intellectually
- using one's free will, to act accordingly. identifying the right thing to do.
- individual's realization that the ethical principles she  condition of one's character by which the agent
has rationally arrived at take precedence over even is able to manage her emotions or feelings.
the rules or conventions that her society dictates.

 Moral maturity - therefore, is seen in an agent - it is possible that there can be a disconnect
who acts on what she has understood, using her between intellectual knowledge of the good and the
full rationality, to be what is right, regardless of actual ability of an individual to perform accordingly.
whether the act will bring the agent pleasure or The latter is mainly a function of character formation,
pain and regardless even of whether the act is in that is, of habituating the proper management of
accordance with her community's laws or not. one's feelings.
- Aristotle accepts that feelings cannot be set aside,
 An agent has attained full moral development if in favor of some illusory, purely intellectual
she acts according to her well-thought-out acceptance of the good.
rational principles. - Instead, he sees moral virtue as a matter of
habitually managing one's feelings in the rightful
5. 5th stage - the moral agent sees the value of the manner.
social contract as that which she ought to honor and
follow.  The mature moral agent realizes that she is both
- Social contract - refers to the agreements that a product of many forces, elements, and events,
rational agents have arrived at whether explicitly or all of which shape her situation and options for a
implicitly in order to serve what can be considered decision. She also realizes that she is not merely
the common good. a puppet of external causes.
- the moral agent binds herself to what this
theoretical community of rational agents has  Steps in Moral Deliberation and the Role of
identified as morally desirable, whether the agent Ethical Frameworks
herself will benefit from doing so or not.
- what is good of right is what honors the social Moral Problems Steps of deliberation:
contract; what contradicts it is bad.
1. Determine her level of involvement in the case
th
6. 6 highest stage - of moral development that at hand.
exists even beyond the fifth stage of the social moral judgment - if di naman sya involve sa case
contract is choosing to perform actions based on pero inisiisip nya ano chocie.
universal ethical principles that one has determined - must be able to distinguish between making a
by herself. judgment on a particular ethical situation and coming
- all the conventions of society are only correct if they up with a morally responsible decision for a
are based on these universal ethical principles; situation that she is actually a part of. Being a
moral agent specifically refers to this latter situation.
2. Make sure of the facts - The first fact the  A moral individual - is always a human being
individual needs to establish is whether she is faced whose intellect remains finite and whose
with a moral situation or not. passions remain dynamic, and who is always
- Is she truly confronted with a genuinely moral placed in situations that are unique.
situation, or one that merely involves a judgment in
the level of aesthetics or of etiquette and therefore, is  The Value of Studying Ethical Theories or
just an amoral or nonethical question? Frameworks

- must also identify whether an item in consideration - These ethical theories or frameworks may serve as
is truly factual or merely hearsay, or anecdotal, or guideposts, given that they are the best attempts to
merely an unfounded assumption, and thus, understand morality that the history of human
unsupportable. thought has to offer.

3.Identify all the people who may potentially be 1. Utilitarianism - greatest good for the greatest
affected by the implications of a moral situation or by number of those affected by the action, and
her concrete choice of action. each one of those affected should be counted as
one, each equal to each.
- These people are called the stakeholders in the - puts every single stakeholder at par with everyone
particular case. else, with no one being worth more than any other.
- obliged to recognize all the other people potentially - puts more value on the notion of "common good
concerned with the ethical problem at hand, and compared to any of the other ethical frameworks we
thus, must think of reasons aside from her own self- have covered
serving ones
- must also determine how they may be affected by 2. Natural law theory - on the other hand, puts
whichever choice she makes in the given ethical more emphasis on the supposed objective,
situation, as well as to what degree. universal nature of what is to be considered
morally good, pasing its reasoning on the
4.Identify the ethical issue at hand- There are theorized existence of a "human nature."
several types of ethical problems or issues:
- advantage of both objectivity and a kind of
a. clarify whether a certain action is morally right or intuitiveness.
morally wrong. - Intuitiveness - pertains to the assumption that
- ex: why murder unethical whatever is right is what feels right, that is, in the
innermost recesses of one's being, of one's
b.determining whether a particular action in question conscience (and not just in some shallow emotional
can be identified with a generally accepted ethical or level) what is good is imprinted in our very being in
unethical action. the form of natural inclinations.

- An example would be the issue of the ethical value 3. Kantian deontology - puts the premium on
of the death penalty. rational will, freed from all other considerations,
as the only human capacity that can determine
c.Presence of an ethical dilemma - Dilemmas are one's moral duty.
ethical situations in which there are competing - one's autonomy as constitutive of what one can
values that seem to have equal worth. consider as moral law that is free from all other ends
and inclinations-including pain and pleasure
- individual must try to find the best balance possible - Kant's disdain for these rules as being authorities
that may honor the competing values. external to one's own capacity for rational will.

5.Individual to make her ethical conclusion or  From valuing all human beings to intuiting what
decision is universally good and to practicing one's
- The moral agent must be able to learn how to avoid autonomy in determining what one ought to do,
the seduction of surrendering to blind simplification. all of these explore the possible roles of
reason and free will in identifying what one
 Aristotle notably recognizes the importance of ought to do in a given moral situation.
continuous habituation in the goal of shaping
one's character so that the individual becomes 4. Aristotle's virtue ethics - in the end indicates is
more used to choosing the right thing. the need for the habituation of one's character to
make any and all of these previous
considerations possible. To weigh the collective
 happiness of human beings, to choose to act on - Aquinas, thus, specifies that taking care of one's
what one's innermost nature dictates, being is a moral duty that one owes to herself and
- to practice one's autonomy regardless of all other to God.
considerations - Making sure that one lives a healthy life

- to continuously test the cogency and coherence of - third natural inclination that says that part of human
the ethical theory or framework in question against nature is to promote the truth and cultivate a
the complexity of the concrete experience at hand. harmonious life in society with other humans.
- In such a spirit of experimentation, the moral
individual is able to play off the theories against one - Aquinas teaches that a person cannot remain within
another, noting the weakness in one for a particular her own selfish desires since doing so might lead her
case and possibly supplementing it with the to harm herself, or to dispense with the truth, or to
strengths of another. destroy harmony in her community.
- Thus, the moral philosophy of Aquinas calls on a
 LESSON 5 Self, Society, and Environment person to go beyond what she thinks she wants
THINK and to realize instead what her innermost nature
Individual/Self inclines her to do, which is the promotion of life, of
the truth, and of the harmonious co-existence with
- one has to pay attention not just on how one deals others.
with oneself, but also on how one interacts with other
individuals in personal relations. One may respond to  Kant's deontology - celebrates the rational
the demand for an ethically responsible "care for the faculty of the moral agent, which sets it above
self" by making full use of the four ethical theories or merely sentient beings.
frameworks.
- universalizability challenges the moral agent to
 John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism, though think beyond her own predilections and desires, and
seemingly a hedonistic theory given its to instead consider what everyone ought to do.
emphasis on maximizing pleasure and
minimizing pain, elevates the human element - There is nothing intrinsically wrong with using a
above the animalistic and above the merely human being as a means or a tool for one's own
selfish. purposes, because human interaction is not possible
- Greatest happiness for Bentham then means without that happening. What Kant is concerned with
quantity, but not just for oneself, since the other half is when someone merely uses a human being,
of his maxim refers to "the greatest number," which whether another person or herself, and forgets to
points to the extent or number of people affected by treat that human being as the goal or purpose of an
this happiness. Thus, there is no selfishness even in action in and of herself.
Bentham's version.
- Kant's principle of autonomy teaches one that no
- Mill additionally stresses the difference between one else can tell her what she ought to do in any
kinds of pleasures particular situation;
- what is good or right does not simply reduce to - highest authority, that which is self-legislating in
what "I feel is good for me." It instead puts premium the realm of moral law, is none other than the
on the higher kinds of pleasure rational individual herself.
- She cannot be the follower or the slave of her own
- One's moral or ethical responsibility to herself then selfish desires or of external authority.
is to make sure that everything she does will be for
the greatest happiness, not just in number but in  Aristotle's virtue ethics - teaches one to
kind, and not just for herself but for everyone cultivate her own intellect as well as her
affected by her acts. character to achieve eudaimonia in her lifetime.

 Thomas Aquinas's natural law theory - states as - For Aristotle, one's ethical or moral responsibility to
its first natural inclination, the innate tendency herself is one of self-cultivation.
that all human beings share with all other
existing things, namely, the natural propensity to - learning from one's own experiences so that one
maintain oneself in one's existence. Any becomes better as a person. But make no mistake
action, therefore, that sustains and cultivates about this, one must become a better person, and
one's biological or physical existence is to be not just live a series of endless mistakes.
deemed good
- Utilitarianism's recognition of the greatest  Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the
happiness principle shows that even in interpersonal Global Village
interaction, what must rule is not one's own, - ethical question arise when expectations of a
subjective notion of what is pleasurable. Instead, it is society come into conflict with one’s most
the greatest happiness of everyone affected by fundamental values.
this particular set of relationships that must take - ex: indigenous people claiming land since they lived
precedence in one's choice of actions. there for years but don’t have a legal title for it.

 Natural law theory, through its recognition of the  Mill's utilitarian doctrine will always push for the
inviolable value of human life whomever it greatest happiness principle as the prime
belongs to, immediately offers an ethic of determinant of what can be considered as good
interpersonal relationships. action, whether in the personal sphere or in the
- Coupled with this, the value that Aquinas gives to societal realm.
the production and care for offspring (the second
natural inclination), - Thus, Filipinos cannot simply assume that their
- as well as to the promotion of the truth and of action is good because their culture says so. Instead,
peaceful and orderly social life (the third natural the fundamental question ought to be, "Will this
inclination), provide guidance on how one ought to action bring about the greatest happiness for the
relate with her close relations. greatest number?"
- An individual must therefore think carefully whether
 Kant's deontology recognizes the principle of her action, even if her culture approves of it will truly
humanity as end-in-itself as a cornerstone of benefit everyone affected
ethical decision-making because this theory
recognizes the full autonomy of every single  Thomas Aquinas, natural law theory has clear
rational agent. conception of principles that should guide the
individual in her actions.
- Everything else in the universe can be used by the
rational agent as mere means; only a rational agent - the promotion of truth and harmonious social living
herself can never be reduced to mere means, but should be in the mind of an individual when she
must always be treated as "end-in-itself." performs actions directed to the larger whole
- For Aquinas, no harmonious social life will be
- Kant reminds one to never reduce a human being possible if individuals that comprise such a society
to the level of the instrument or tool. do not value human life, telling the truth, and
peaceful co-existence.
 Aristotle's virtue theory - teaches that one must
always find and act on the mesotes whether in - the demand of the natural law for a peaceful and
treating oneself or any other human being. orderly social life can be put in danger by acts of
criminality and terrorism.
- This mesotes points to the complexity of knowing - The morally responsible agent must, therefore,
what must be done in a specific moral situation (a guard against committing any act that can go against
measure that does not necessarily apply to a this twofold requirement of the third natural
different situation), which involves identifying the inclination of human nature.
relevant feelings that are involved and being able to
manage them.  Immanuel Kant argues for the use of the
principles of universalizability and of humanity
- "Familiarity breeds contempt," which refers to the as end-in-itself to form a person's autonomous
tendency of many people to lapse into an attitude notion of what she ought to do.
that tends to be hurtful to others one is closest
to. - Thus, no manner of heteronomous rules and
- This attitude is a compound of feelings that one expectations should dictate one's choice of actions,
has, but these are feelings one most probably has
not yet sifted through. - According to Kant's framework, if a person is to
follow any of these heteronomous laws, it must be
- "Temperance," therefore, is one Aristotelian virtue because such a law is in accordance with her
that clearly applies to treating oneself and other understanding of her moral duty, but must not be
people close to oneself fairly and with much in any way contrary to it.
circumspection.
 Aristotle's virtue ethics - prescribes mesotes as
the guide to all the actions that a person has to  Thomas Aquinas - certain actions should be
take, even in her dealing with the larger avoided because they do not produce a
community of people. harmonious, peaceful society.

- Virtues such as justice, liberality, magnificence, - neglecting the physical environment because of
friendliness, and rightful indignation suggest that they shortsighted economic goals ex: over-fishing will
are socially-oriented Aristotelian virtues. eventually lead to disasters such as flooding or
- none of these virtues are fixed points; rather, each famines
one will have a mesotes that is determined by the
particular context.  Aristotle's virtue ethics - neo-Aristotelian vice
here: the vice of
- Temperance once again presents itself as one
Aristotelian virtue that will be vital here. In the name  Myopia. - This is a nearsightedness, not a
of other virtues such as justice, much temperance is physical one, but in one's understanding of the
needed in dealing with the other participants in social implications of her actions.
intercourse. - connected to a lack of intellectual virtue, to a
deficiency in foresight.
 The Nonhuman Environment
- better person, therefore, if she learns to expand
 environmental ethics, of the ethical or moral her vision to see beyond what is merely at close
responsibilities human beings have toward the hand. Thus, seeing beyond the immediate is a
nonhuman world, only appeared in the twentieth virtue.
century.
- 4 frameworks - They are not to be seen as options
- some argue that using any of the four ethical to dictate on what one is supposed to do in a
theories or frameworks may be an exercise in particular situation.
anachronism, that is, in forcing together elements - This is the cynical way these frameworks are
that belong to different time periods. sometimes employed: use them as needed to
justify what one wants to do in a particular
 one of the sources of animal ethics is situation.
utilitarianism. -more productive use of these frameworks rather
is to employ them as beginning guides to one's
 animals themselves cannot become moral further exploration into the topic of morality.
agents because they do not seem to have
reason and free will.

 since the greatest happiness principle covers the

greatest number of creatures that experience
pleasure and pain, then that number should
include animals.

 What is good then is not only what is good for

the greatest number of human beings affected,
but also for the greatest number of creatures
that can feel pleasure or pain.

 Since Kantian deontology focuses on the innate

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

Can one accept the following maxim as something

that everyone ought to follow: "one ought to not
worry about environmental destruction, as long as it
produces economic wealth for my society"? Such
thinking is short-sighted, and, in the end, does not
produce universalizable maxims.