Week 1 (Lesson 1): Introduction to Ethics

Introduction:
This introductory lesson focuses on the basic definition of philosophy as the starting
point of the whole course.  It moves further into enumerating the main branches of philosophy
which include Ethics, the main topic of this course.  It ends by distinguishing ethics from the
other disciplines or fields of study.
Lesson Proper:
 

1. Basic Definition of Philosophy

 

The Greek scholar, Pythagoras (c. 580-497 B.C.),

coined the term philosophy and came up with the
term into two Greek words “philein meaning love or
friendship and sophia meaning wisdom” (Babor, E.,
2001).   The literal definition of philosophy is
therefore, “love of wisdom” (Zulueta, 2010).
According to Babor, love is an urge, or a drive of the
will towards a particular object.   As a drive, love
always seeks unity with its object, and it desires to
possess its object. And wisdom means the good
exercise or application of knowledge (Babor, E.,
2001)..  Hence, loving and seeking wisdom require
the individual to be intimately passionate,
responsible of his/her reflections or actions, and
must enjoy what he/she does.

Philosophy is also understood in the context of the Cagayanos’ term siribayat.  This
Itawit indigenous vernacular term signifies love of wisdom.  The term siribâyat is a fusion of
two words “sirib,” which means wisdom, and “ayat,” love.  Etymologically, sirib means an
active peering through reality.  And “ayat” adds a personal note to the passion to go beyond
what one has already previously seen or understood (Siribâyat, 2013).   Hence, to be wise or
siriban means to be keen towards reality, that is, allowing the “panono” (the Itawit term for
“reflection) to extend its capacity to unveil and rediscover the true meaning of a reality.   In the
struggle to rediscover the true meaning of an experience, the lover of wisdom should be
responsible to understand reality practically in a significant way, not just theoretically.

 
Philosophy is a search for meaning and truth.
The kind of search related to philosophy is more intense than that of the ordinary kind of search.
This seeking, looking, and finding wisdom and truth is a passionate search where we surrender
ourselves to it.  That’s why searching for meaning is a personal act.  But what distinguishes a
philosophical search from an ordinary search is through the emphasis of the three elements:
 1. The object of the search is of real value to the subject. In philosophy, broadly speaking,
“object” refers to a thing, “subject” refers to the person philosophizing (Cruz, C.,2004).
Meaning, the object of our experience or investigation must be within our interest and
concern like a student taking a course that he is passionate about.
2. It “consumes” the whole person- his attention, concentration, interest, effort
(Cruz, C.,2004).  Meaning, a person becomes part of the object of investigation, thus,
leading oneself into submission towards the goal.  To quote Cruz, he said that “A
philosopher can hardly afford distractions as he goes on his ‘search’.”  He observes,
reads, reflects, writes on what to him is the most important aspect in his life
(Cruz, C.,2004).  
3. It is continued without let-up until (a) the answer is found or (b) the answer is not yet
found, but the conviction is reached that for the moment at least this is the best possible
although still imperfect answer (Cruz, C., 2004).  Meaning, a person must not give up on
something he seeks and must not surrender until the problem is solved.  It is like the
common notion of saying:  Try and try until you succeed.  A human person is considered
to be a homo viator (traveler).  As a traveler, along the way, despair, frustrations, and
problems are always expected.  But philosophy tells us that one must be challenged of it
and must never surrender himself in searching for meaning.
The attainment of truth cannot be the goal of philosophy and “the search for truth, not the
possession of it, is the true aim of philosophy” (John-Terry, C., 1994).  What really matters for
philosophical search is not to focus oneself towards the result or end, but rather on the process
of searching.   The journey, not the destination, is what matters.  

Philosophy is also defined as the science that by the natural light of reason studies the
first causes or highest principles of all things (Ramos, C.C., 2010).
  Philosophy, as science, is an organized body of knowledge that involves a systematic
investigation of reality through the natural capacity of man to think (light of reason).  The
endeavor of understanding the prima causa of everything is not purely experimental nor it has a
divine intervention, but rather it is purely an experience of the self to the life-world.

 Main Branches of Philosophy

 

1. What is Metaphysics?  
   
According to Timbreza, metaphysics “is the Anything that we can think about that has an
study of being in its general aspect.” active participation in the ESSENCE of
(Timbreza, F., 2005).  The term “being” refers beings is the concern of metaphysics. It has
to the realities that we see and don’t see.  To sub-topics like teleology, ontology, theodicy,
make simple to understand, it is the study of psychology and cosmology
realities in life.
 
 
 
It deals with human reality and system of
human thought that seeks to explain the
fundamental concepts of man (Cruz, C.,2004)
 
2. What is Epistemology?
Epistemology (from the Greek word episteme
“knowledge”) is a philosophical theory that
deals with the truth-value of human
knowledge.  It asks the question: “is it possible
to know?  Can man ever know anything?  Is it
possible to attain certain knowledge?  Where
does knowledge come from? (Timbreza,
F., 2005). This branch of philosophy deals with all the
aspects concering the nature of knowledge.
 The branch of philosophy that investigates the Epistemology has sub-divisions like
nature, sources, limitations, and validity of agnosticism, skepticism, a posteriori and a
knowledge (Ramos, C.C., 2010).  priori.  
 It concerns the nature and scope of
knowledge. It asks the question “what does it
mean to know (the truth), and what is the
nature of truth? What sort of things can be
known?  Is there knowledge beyond the reach
of science and what are the limits of self-
knowledge? (Articulo, A., 2008)

3. What is Logic?
Logic is the study of the methods and
principles used to distinguish correct reasoning
from incorrect reasoning (Copi and Cohen, I. & This branch of philosophy focuses on
C., 1998). developing the mind to be critical and
 Logic is the study of the methods and logical.  Logic is divided into sub-topics
principles used to distinguish correct from namely: Induction, Deduction, Syllogism,
incorrect reasoning.  Logic does not only help and Dialectic.
us adequately to interpret facts and other
people’s perceptions or views, it also develops
in us the habit of clear and critical thinking
(Timbreza, F., 2005).

4. What is Ethics?  
Ethics is also called moral philosophy which
 Ethics is a practical and normative science, tries to understand the goodness and
based on reason, which studies human acts badness of a human act.  Ethics is divided
and provides norms for their goodness or into three general subject areas namely:
badness (Timbreza, F., 2005).. metaethics, normative ethics and applied
Ethics is the branch of philosophy that ethics.
explores the nature of moral virtue and
evaluates human actions (Ramos, C.C., 2010).
Metaethics investigates where our ethical
principles come from, and what they mean.
 It focuses on the issues of universal truths,
the will of God, the role of reason in ethical
judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms
themselves.
 It studies on the morality (goodness or
badness) of human actions (Conduct) Normative ethics is concerned with the
(Cruz, C.,2004). criteria of what is morally right and wrong.  It
includes the formulation of moral rules that
 Ethics takes up the meanings of our moral have direct implications for what human
concepts- such as right action, obligation and actions, institutions, and ways of life should
justice- and formulates principles to guide be like.
moral decisions, whether in private or public
life (Articulo, A., 2008). Applied ethics refers to the practical
  application of moral considerations.  It is
ethics with respect to real-world actions and
their moral considerations in the areas of
private and public life, the professions,
health, technology, law, and leadership.

 
  Definition of Ethics
Etymological meaning

The term ethics is derived from the Greek

word ethikos which itself is derived from the Greek
word ethos,  meaning custom or
character.  In philosophy, ethical behavior is that
which is “good.”  The field of ethics or moral
philosophy involves developing, defending, and
recommending concepts of right and wrong
behavior.  These concepts do not change as one’s
desires and motivations change.  They are not
relative to the situation.  They are
immutable. (Mintz, S., 2010)

 
Functional Definition

Ethics is a practical and normative science, based on reason, which studies human acts and
provides norms for their goodness or badness (Timbreza, F., 2005).  Ethics is the branch of
philosophy that explores the nature of moral virtue and evaluates human actions
(Ramos, C.C., 2010).  It studies on the morality (goodness or badness) of human actions
(Conduct) (Cruz, C.,2004).  Ethics takes up the meanings of our moral concepts- such as right
action, obligation and justice- and formulates principles to guide moral decisions, whether in
private or public life (Articulo, A., 2008).   
 Ethics as the ‘general inquiry into what is good’ poses some questions concerning what sort of
actions can bind humans. What constitutes ‘good’ or what is an unacceptable action in a given
situation is tantamount in saying that the subject matter of Ethics is essential. Teaching Ethics in
College Education as a New General Education Core Course under the New Curriculum
explores some of the important theories on the constitution of what is an ethical action,
acceptable and binding in all societies which call for impartiality in decision making (CMO 20 S
2013).
In a general sense, ethics (or moral philosophy) addresses fundamental questions such as:
How should I live my life? That question leads to others such as: What sort of person should I
strive to be? What values are important? What standards or principles should I live by? There
are various ways to define “ethics.”  The simplest may be is to say that ethics deals with “right”
and “wrong.”  However, it is difficult to judge what may be right or wrong in a particular situation
without some frame of reference (Mintz, S., 2010).
The Material Object of Ethics (What does Ethics study?)
- The Human Act/Action
 What are other things that we can moralize or we can judge if they are good or bad?
- Custom, cultures, traditions, and other practices of a certain community or society.
 The Formal Object of Ethics (What does Ethics want to see in Human Acts?)
- The goodness or badness of the human act.

The material object or the subject matter of Ethics poses some questions in relation to
answering moral judgment, like ‘What is our criteria or standard of morality'?, 'What can account
actions as ‘good’ and ‘right’ or ‘good’ as ‘pleasurable’ or ‘pleasurable’ as ‘good actions’?, 'Who
has the right to determine what is moral or ethical'? 'With regard to the applicability of action,
when can we consider it as good or moral? and the like.
So if Ethics is a branch of Philosophy, how did it find out the norms which it uses to
judge if the action of a certain person is good or bad?  It is based purely on thinking,
reflecting, and reasoning on the different moral standards to be used.
Society’s morality calls for a standard which serves as a ‘guiding principle’ of all actions
which answers the question of what is ‘good’ and ‘right’ or ‘bad’ and ‘unacceptable’. Actions are
good or acceptable when they satisfy the standards or ethical codes of a society while they are
unacceptable when they fail to follow its principles.  We call these principles, codes or standards
as moral standards.
Standards of Behavior
Ethics must be based on accepted standards of behavior.  For example, in virtually all societies
and cultures it is wrong to kill someone or steal property from someone else.  These standards
have developed over time and come from a variety of sources including:
(A)The influence of religious writing and interpretations.
(B) The influence of philosophical thought.
(C) The influence of community (societal) values. (Mintz, S., 2010)

Norms, Values, and the Law

Ethics deals with well-based standards of how people ought to act.  Ethics does not describe
the way people do act.  It deals with the way people should act. Ethical people always strive to
make the right decision in all circumstances.  They do not rationalize their actions based on their
own perceived self-interests.  Ethical decision-making entails following certain well-established
norms of behavior. The best way to understand ethics may be to differentiate it from other
concepts. (Mintz, S., 2010)
Values are basic and fundamental beliefs that guide or motivate attitudes or actions. Values are
concerned with how a person will behave in certain situations whereas ethics is concerned with
how a moral person should behave.  A person who values prestige, power, and wealth is likely
to act out of self-interest whereas a person who values honesty, integrity, and trust will typically
act in the best interests of others.  It does not follow that acting in the best interests of others
precludes acting in one’s own self-interest.  Indeed, the Golden Rule prescribes that we should
treat others the way we want to be treated. (Mintz, S., 2010)

Week 2: Module 2
Introduction:
            This lesson focuses on the comparison of ethics and morality, compares
ethics from other disciplines, and explicates the importance of ethics. It characterizes
human acts, a comparison between human acts and acts of man, and the constituents
of human acts.  Likewise, it describes the notion of freedom and responsibility from the
perspective of Heidegger and Sartre.  In the last part, it explicates the impediments to
human acts, explains the elements in determining the morality of a human act,
elaborates the three types of ethics, and defines Natural law, positive law, and
conscience.
Lesson Proper:
 

1. Ethics vs. Morality

Ethics

Etymological meaning
The term ethics is derived from the Greek word ethikos which itself is derived
from the Greek word ethos, meaning custom or character.  In philosophy,
ethical behavior is that which is “good.”  The field of ethics or moral philosophy
involves developing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and
wrong behavior.  (Mintz, S., 2010)
Functional Definition

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that explores the nature of moral virtue and evaluates
human actions (Ramos, C.C., 2010). 
 
It studies on the morality (goodness or badness) of human actions (conduct)
(Cruz, C.,2004).
 
Ethics is a practical and normative science, based on reason, which studies human acts
and provides norms for their goodness or badness (Timbreza, F., 2005).
 
Ethics is the branch of philosophy that explores the nature of moral virtue and evaluates
human actions (Ramos, C.C., 2010).  It studies the morality (goodness or badness) of
human actions (Conduct) (Cruz, C.,2004).  Ethics takes up the meanings of our moral
concepts- such as right action, obligation, and justice- and formulates principles to guide
moral decisions, whether in private or public life (Articulo, A., 2008).  
 

Morality
Morality is an encompassing concept that serves as the underlying force for every action of an
individual, even of society.  Morality takes the crucial role of formulating, establishing, and
setting ethical norms of conduct that govern behaviors and actions of an individual or group of
individuals in order to achieve harmony, unity, and order within a society (Living a Christian
Moral Life, 2013).
Defining morality, as to its intent and purpose, clarifies the essential features that everyone, who
is subject to moral judgment, determines what kind of actions are normally acceptable.  Morality
establishes the fundamental framework on the true intent and motive behind every action and
decision.  Human intelligence can be a powerful guide in working out moral problems. 
However, Christians have more than a reason to guide them and this is the person and life of
Jesus Christ our Lord, the perfect norm of morality. (Living a Christian Moral Life, 2013).
To compare therefore Ethics and Morality, they both study human acts and their goodness or
badness; they both lay moral norms or principles as guidelines as to how one ought to act and
ought to be; they both use reason in analyzing, interpreting, and deciding proper conduct in
situations concerning moral dilemma; they both aim to form a moral person with mature
character and create a just and humane society. But what differentiates them is the fact that
aside from using reason as the source of evaluating the validity of choice amidst a moral
decision making, only morality also uses Divine Revelation or the use of the Bible and other
Church doctrines to support the validity of its moral claims. It draws its inspiration for such moral
stand from the person and life of Jesus Christ our Lord. Thus, aside from a temporal goal of
creating a better society in the present life, morality also aims for the more lasting goal which is
to build the Kingdom of God and to attain Eternal life.
 

1. Ethics and the other disciplines

1.  Ethics and Psychology

"Ethics has something to do with what my
feelings tell me is right or wrong."
Many people tend to equate ethics with their feelings.  But being ethical is clearly not a matter of
following one's feelings.  A person following his or her feelings may recoil (withdraw) from doing
what is right. In fact, feelings frequently deviate (departs) from what is ethical.  But it does not
mean that the feeling of empathy, joy, anger, disgust and other feelings are totally not related to
making moral decisions.  According to Aristotle, the very goal of human life is happiness. To
reach this is moderation or the avoidance of extremes which includes the use of his reason and
his passion (extreme emotions).  For example:  Using inordinate passion (concupiscence) in
acting may result in bad actions.  But without the feeling of empathy, I may not also be moved to
do a good act like helping people who are in need.  Without the feeling of anger, I may not also
be pushed to fight in defense of what is right.

2.Ethics and Law

“Being ethical has something to do with following the law.”

The law often incorporates ethical standards to which most citizens subscribe.  But
laws, like feelings, can deviate from what is ethical. Simply abiding or following with
what the Constitution says does not necessarily constitute an ethical act.  For example,
there are laws that might have been adopted but are not necessarily ethical, but that
they promote the interest of some people like the lawmakers themselves (Example:
Rice Tarrification Law in the Philippines and Divorce Law in America). 
Being ethical is not the same as following the law.  While ethical people always try to be law-
abiding, there may be instances where your sense of ethics tells you it is best not to follow the
law.  These situations are rare and should be based on sound ethical reasons. Here’s one
example:
Assume you are coming home from the store one day and see a
fast-moving fire approach your neighbor’s house. You notice that the
neighbor’s car is in the garage. The garage door entrance to the
house is locked as is the main entrance. You bang on the door and
no one answers. You call the neighbor on your cell phone and no
one answers. You don’t think there is enough time to call the fire
department ten miles away before serious damage is done to the
house. If you break into the house to save your neighbor, you break
the law. But if you opt not to break into the house, you will not break
the law but you will not be able to save your neighbor.  What would
you do next and why?

If you choose to break into the house to save your neighbor, then you break the law.
However, you have acted out of concern for the safety of your neighbor in a life-
threatening situation thereby acting ethically (Mintz, S.,2010).  However, if you choose
not to break into the house, then you will not break the law but you failed to be ethical
towards your neighbor.

 
3.  Ethics and Sociology

"Ethics has something to do with the standards of behavior our society accepts."

Ethical standards are sometimes based on social norms but social norms are not the
sole basis of ethical standards.  Being ethical is not the same as doing "whatever
society accepts."  In any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical. 
But standards of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical.  An entire society
can become ethically corrupt. Moreover, if being ethical were doing "whatever society
accepts," then to find out what is ethical, one would have to find out what society
accepts.  To decide what I should think about abortion, for example, I would have to
take a survey of Filipino society and then conform my beliefs to whatever society
accepts.  But no one ever tries to decide on an ethical issue by doing a survey. Further,
the lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics with
whatever society accepts. Some people accept abortion but many others do not.  Yet
even if everybody does, the issue of abortion may still remain to be unethical.
 
4.  Ethics and Religion
"Ethics has something to do with my religious beliefs.“
No one should identify ethics with religion.  Most religions, of course, advocate high
ethical standards.  Religion can set high ethical standards and can provide intense
motivations for ethical behavior.  Yet if ethics were confined to religion, then ethics
would apply only to religious people and that particular ethical standard only apply to the
members of a particular religion.   But ethics applies as much to the behavior of the
atheist as to that of the devout religious person.  Thus, ethics cannot be confined to
religion nor is it the same as religion.

"I like your Christ, but not your Christianity." In the words

of Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. J.H. ... Holmes said, "I believe in the
teachings of Christ, but you on the other side of the world do not, I
read the Bible faithfully and see little in Christendom that those who
profess faith pretend to see.
"The Christians above all others are seeking after wealth. Their aim
is to be rich at the expense of their neighbors. They come among
aliens to exploit them for their own good and cheat them to do so.
Their prosperity is far more essential to them than the life, liberty,
and happiness of others.
"The Christians are the most warlike people. CHRISTIAN NATIONS
SEEK WEALTH AND FIGHT MOST WARS.”

 
This article shows that membership to and beliefs in a particular religion does not
necessarily imply that one is ethical. I may believe in Christ and maybe baptized into
Christianity but I may remain to be living in an unethical way of life. On the other hand, I
may not have known Christ and his teachings or may not have been baptized as a
Christian (Or I may even be a total Atheist) but I can still be ethical by the kind of life I
live in relation to myself, others and my environment.

Ethics is very significant

in the following aspects
namely:  Individual,
Company, and
Profession.  Ethics
deals with the principles
of ethical behavior in
modern society at the
level of the society
(community and
environment), individual
(personal relationship
with others), and
profession (company).

- Personal sense of right and wrong in order to make good decisions

Individual
- Helps employees gain the trust of the people with whom they work
Ethics affect this aspect personally because an individual has his/her own point of reference, view, and
opinion in dealing with personal situations and occurrences.  It helps the individual develop a sense of
obligation in decision-making.  Ethics is very crucial in the person’s inner development since it involves
the improvement of oneself, developing a sense of proper disposition as he/she situates himself/herself
from society.  It develops the person to become better by being prudent, just, courageous, and
moderate.  It aims to make the person have good and proper decisions.  Also, it develops a sense of
trust among people in the working setting.  As a result, there will be a good human relationship.  But
this is only possible when actions become habitual and are developed as a good habit (virtue).
-Businesses develop ethics to help them determine how  to behave
- These ethics reflect a company’s belief about what actions are
Company
appropriate and fair among people
- Helps businesses gain the trust of customers, suppliers, and others
With respect to the company environment, ethics play a crucial role in the working setting.  It “controls
business malpractices among workers (employee and employer), creates a better relationship between
employees and employers, improves customer satisfaction, service and issues by having fair and
reasonable business activities, increases profitability, improves business goodwill, better decision
making, and protects business’ reputation.
- Outlines professional responsibilities, values, standards, and rules of
Profession
behavior

This aspect focuses on the ethical conduct of a profession.  Ethics reminds the person of his
 responsibility and obligation in relation to his profession.  As the professional disposes of
his/her duties, he/she establishes a strong corporate ethical culture.  It helps the person
conform to the standards and conduct of his profession.  So, the person’s disposition of his
professional duties with others, in work and society shows what kind of profession he/she
manifests.
 
 
HUMAN ACTS

Introduction:
            This lesson focuses on the nature of human acts.  It distinguishes human
acts from acts of man.  It enumerates the constituents of human acts that are very
essential in determining the morality of an action.  It enumerates the three elements in
determining the morality of an action. And it ends by identifying the impediments to
human acts.
Lesson Proper:
 
In studying ethics, it is necessary to consider its material object and its formal object
(the goodness or badness of an act).  But what is it that we seek to study in ethics?  For
the material object of ethics, we seek to study the nature of a human act.  While for its
formal object, we seek to study the goodness or badness of a human act. But first let us
examine the nature of a human act through its definition.
 
Human Acts
are actions that are proper to humans, thus the crucial element of willful consent and
knowledge of the action must be present.  One must freely use his/her intellect and free
will when acting. Human acts reveal the value of responsibility or accountability (Living a
Christian Moral Life, 2013).

Human Acts and Acts of Man

Human Acts Acts of Man

Acts that we do with the use of free will and intellect.

Acts that we do without free will and
intellect; some are done by instinct.
They are done freely, deliberately, and voluntarily.

These are actions that are proper to humans, thus

the crucial element of willful consent and knowledge
The actions are performed without
of the action must be present (Living a Christian conscious deliberation or
 knowledge and with the absence of
a free will. Acts of man constitute
unconscious and involuntary
actions.

Moral Life, 2013). Example: breathing,

digestion, circulation of air in the
 
body
Example: studying, working, eating healthy
These are natural processes within
foods
the body that continue to function
without the use of free will and
reason. They just happen naturally
as automatic responses to
situations (Living a Christian Moral
Life, 2013).

Determinants  Human Act Act of Man

Knowledge/Use of Intellect Yes No

Presence of Free Will Yes  No

Conscious Process/ Voluntariness Yes No

This clearly shows the differences between human acts and acts of man. As an object
of morality, the human action is done with full knowledge of the action, performed with
the use of free will, and acted upon voluntarily. The absence of these three crucial
determinants renders the action as a mere act of man (Living a Christian Moral Life,
2013).

Human actions are qualified as good or right (moral), bad or wrong (immoral), or
indifferent (nonmoral).  The quality and standard of a human act depend on the
relationship of the act with the norms of morality (Law: Eternal law; Natural law; and
Positive law (divine or human)).  Both Divine and human positive laws are specific
applications of the Eternal Law or the Natural Law. If a Positive Law does not adhere to
or respect the Natural Law, then it ruins or damages the development of the human
person. 
 
An act is good when it agrees with the dictates of the right reason. (Living a Christian
Moral Life, 2013).
An act is bad when it disagrees with the dictates of the right reason. (Living a Christian
Moral Life, 2013).
 
An act is indifferent when it stands no relation to the dictates of the right reason (Living
a Christian Moral Life, 2013) (acts or actions that are neither good nor bad).
Please take note that we do not moralize the acts of man, but the human acts.
 
 
 
Constituents of Human Acts

1.   Human acts must be known and deliberate.

An individual, as the moral agent, has full knowledge of doing a certain action. There
is prior knowledge and a deliberate evaluation of whether to fulfill an action or not (Living a
Christian Moral Life, 2013).  It asks the questions:  Do you know exactly what you are
doing? or Do you do the act intentionally?  He/she must have full knowledge and consent
of his/her action.
2.   Human acts must be free.
An individual as the moral agent is free from any external factors as well as internal
pressure to do an act.  He/she is neither forced nor intimidated to do or not to do
something (Living a Christian Moral Life, 2013).
There is an obvious absence of constraint from within and outside of the individual. 
He/she is free to do the act without the influence of an outside factor and personal
pressure from within. He/she does the act so independently and not because of
shame, request, or control from someone else nor from emotional disturbance.
3.  Human acts are voluntary.
The action proceeds from the willingness of an individual to perform an action with a
perceived knowledge of the end. (Living a Christian Moral Life, 2013).  It asks the
question:  Are you willing to do the act? and do you know what you are doing and where
your action is leading into?  He/she wills to perform the act with the understanding that
he/she knows consciously where his/her actions are leading into.
 
Freedom and Responsibility
 
Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
Man is condemned to be free, because there is no God, according to
Sartre.  “Isinumpa ang tao na maging Malaya.” Whether he likes it or not,
 man is doomed to freedom, as he himself is freedom. “Ang tao mismo ay
kalayaan.”  This follows from Sartre’s perception that man is the only
being whose existence precedes his essence.  There is no such thing as
God-given essence or nature of man, insofar as man alone has to create
himself and develop his own essence through his freedom (Timbreza, F.,
2005).

Sartre is telling us that man is condemned to be free, because once thrown into the world, he is
responsible for everything he does.  It is up to you to give (life) a meaning.  Sartre believes
that existence precedes essence (Ramos, C.C. 2010).  Meaning, Sartre believes that “existence
precedes essence.”  Man is nothing else but what he makes of himself (Nabor-Nery, M.I., 2007). 
 
There is no such thing as God-given essence or nature of man, insofar as man alone has to
create himself and develop his own essence through his freedom (Timbreza, F., 2005).  Sartre,
as an atheist, tells us that the human person becomes responsible for the projection of one’s life. 
Since you are a free being, it is up to you to how you use your freedom to make your life
meaningful.  Remember that, for Sartre, the essence of man is freedom.  So, freedom should
make or create your life.
 
Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)

Heidegger contends that this emphasis on freedom enables us to

understand philosophy as a “going-after-the-whole” that is at the same
time a “going-to-our-roots.” In other words, we must search for the
essence of human freedom in the constant presence of being-in-the-
world that precedes and grounds philosophical thinking (Heidegger,
M., 2005). 
 

This is manifested in Martin Heidegger’s idea on “Dasein” (Da-means there, Sein-means

being).  Heidegger challenges us to understand the meaning of Dasein (of what it means to
be there.).  He claimed that man is Dasein (being-there) but Dasein does not necessarily
mean man.  This means that being-there has to be made.  “Ginagawa ang pagiging tao.”  
We have to create our being as persons.  Our mere existence does not presuppose that we
are living as a person already.  Like Sartre, we are responsible for projecting our lives.  So,
we must see to it that we are the gardener of our own lives.  This is what makes Heidegger
“very interested in the problem of being rather than merely in the problem of human
existence” (Ramos, C.C. 2010)
Other Factors which Affects the Morality of Human Acts
 
          My dear children, if you have noticed, observed, or experienced, while norms or
laws are general, most often, in their implementation, there are many factors to consider
especially in judging the acts committed in relation to the law. Example: If two people
committed the same crime, how come that their punishments are not the same? Even in
the school setting, sometimes a student would complain that how come that my
classmate was allowed to enter or do such things while I am not? 
         Aside from the purpose and circumstance that affect the judgment of a certain act,
there are other factors to consider. Other authors would call these Impediments to
Human Acts.  (Impediment means hindrance).

Impediments to Human Acts

Human actions, though naturally a product of will and reason, are sometimes influenced by
certain factors, which are called impediments to human actions. These factors intervene and
bar one’s actions from being human or contribute to the reduction of the quality of a certain
action.  The impediments affect the quality of human acts.
 
1.  Ignorance pertains to the lack of pertinent information, as to the nature,
  circumstances, and effect of a certain action. Ignorance takes
  place when an individual consciously proceeds to act on a
  certain matter without due consideration of the relevant or
  necessary information related to it.
  Ignorance is classified into:
  There is invincible ignorance when one is
  totally ignorant of the things surrounding
  his/her action and there is no way to
  a.  Invincible remove/dispel it. In situations like this, the
  Ignorance culpability of the individual is negated. A good
  example of this kind is a person who is
  illiterate -- one who does not know how to
  read and write, who is caught jaywalking.
 
  There is a lack of required knowledge to
  determine the goodness or badness of a
  certain action, but this can be dispelled or
  learned through ordinary efforts,
  conscientiousness, and proper diligence.
  b. Vincible             Mistakes or wrong actions out of
  Ignorance vincible ignorance lessens one’s culpability.
  An example would be committing a mistake
  without totally knowing that what you are
  doing is really wrong.
 
  There are two forms of vincible ignorance:
  i.  Affected One is pretending to be ignorant since he/she
  vincible just wants to gain the approval of the other for
  ignorance his/her wrong action. (In your ordinary
 language children, you call this “agpalusot”.) 
Naturally, any action, performed under
affected or pretended ignorance, does not
excuse a person from his/her action. In fact, it
actually increases his/her culpability. An
 
example would be a student who pretends
not to know the school’s policy on a proper
haircuts to excuse him/her when confronted
by the guards.
It happens when a person exerts little effort to
know something. Giving the wrong medicine
ii.  Supine or to a sick person may result in the sickness of
 
crass ignorance the person getting worse.

2.  A situation where one’s inordinate passion hinders one to

Concupiscence exercise correct reasoning, thus also affects his/her action.
           Passions mean our emotional elements like anger, pride,
  envy, love, joy, etc. Not all passions are bad. Some are innately
  bad, but some become bad only when they are excessive or
  called inordinately. An example is a pride and anger, these two
  becomes bad only when they become excessive that they
  already control one’s mind and even push him/her to do a
  certain action. Still, on pride, you must be proud of your parents;
  you need pride, or else you will be contented with your grades
  even if they are all line of seven or even all 75%.
           The morality of actions done out of concupiscence
  depends on how the passions affected the action of the doer.
  The culpability may increase or decrease or can be negated.
 
 
 A spontaneous/sudden inordinate passion
influences an action before it has been
 
controlled by the will. Example: Juan was
 
already running late for his class. When he
 
entered the school campus, the guard
 
confiscated his ID for no apparent reason.
 
Antecedent Out of his anger, he unconsciously cursed the
 
concupiscence guard. (In ibanag, you call this “gavva lang”,
 
like gavva kang nanampal dahil sa gulat, etc.)
 
         The culpability of bad actions done out
 
of Antecedent Concupiscence can be
 
lessened or even negated depending on how
 
it happened.
 
 This happens when one is aware of the
inordinate passion and the will chooses to
arouse the said passion to perform the bad
action. The passion has already passed
through the intellect and controlled by the will,
but still, the individual performs the human
act. In other words, you know that you are
very angry at that person, but you still push
through with the bad actors like punching or
kicking or slapping him/her. You did not do
anything to calm down or to cool your anger.
Since the passion is deliberately and
voluntarily acted upon, the culpability of the
Consequent
  action increases. Gluttony is a very good
concupiscence
example. Pedro is obese. During a town
fiesta, he had visited the houses of his four
friends, eating to his satisfaction. On his way
back home, he decided to drop by a fast food
restaurant for more food, and later on, he
vomited. Clearly, it is within his control to limit
his food intake; however, despite being full
from the feast, he deliberately decided to eat
more on his way home. His moral
responsibility increases since it is within his
will, reason, and disposal to decide to stop,
but failed to do so.
 

3.  Fear affects the performance of a human act since the individual is
  threatened by the impending dangers (ginawa or nagawa mo yung
  isang bagay kasi tinakot ka) The presence of danger and
  intimidation affects his/her thought-processes in determining the
  goodness or badness of his/her actions.
            A human act done with fear is considered voluntary,
  therefore it will be culpable if it is a bad act. The act is still culpable
  because one can still choose not to act despite the fear or danger.
  Example: They forced a woman to remove her clothes with a gun
  pointing at her, the woman can still choose not to do the act.
          However, the culpability of a bad act done out of fear can be
  lessened, increase, or even negated depending on the gravity of
  the threat and the circumstance surrounding the action especially
  in a situation where one just follows his/her instinct to survive.
          While walking in a dark alley, Pedro was accosted by a
robber pointing at his head a gun. Trapped and in danger of being
killed, Pedro has no alternative but to fight back. As a result, the
 
robber was terribly hurt. In this case, Pedro does not have moral
 
responsibility for hurting the robber because he had performed
 
self-defense to protect himself from a very clear and present
 
danger. Acts done from fear or through fear, in certain cases are
 
involuntary because the agent is obligated to choose to avoid the
 
greater evil. This kind of situation lessens voluntariness and thus,
 
decreases moral responsibility.
 
 
 
3.1 Light Fear: The threat/imminent danger confronting a person is
 
not so serious or grave to influence or force one to do a certain act.
 
  -  So, a seriously bad act done under light fear is culpable.
 
  3.2. Grave Fear: The threat is so serious or grave that it can really
  influence or force one to do a certain act.
  - Examples of this are the cases of hold-ups wherein people are
  forced to give their money or belonging to another just out of fear;
  and other similar circumstances.
  - The culpability of a bad act done under grave fear can be
lessened or negated.
 

4.  Violence - I will not discuss this in detail since it is very much related to the
  cases of fear.
  - The direct message of this is, you must exert all the efforts
  needed to defend yourself in extreme cases where your life or your
  dignity is at stake. Again, this is in the cases of rape or hold-ups
  wherein the hold uppers even want to kill their victims.
  - The morality here is that one is culpable if he/she will not exert all
  the necessary efforts to defend herself/ himself from the aggressor
  if needed if his life or dignity is at stake. Although, the culpability
  can be lessened depending on the circumstance. 
   
                On another angle, if a woman is defending herself from a
  rapist and accidentally, the head of the rapist hits a wall or stone or
  hard object and died. In this case, the woman’s action is not
  culpable since she was just defending herself and there was no
  intention to kill the aggressor.
   
  Self-defense is a classic example in the face of aggression wherein
  one has to protect himself/herself from the attacker.
  
Conditions for Self-defense:
  1. The aggression must be unjust.
  2. The aggression must be actual.
  3. Use minimum violence/it must be proportional
   
  Problems come when people just kill someone without being attack
  physically. There was no actual aggression done. For example,
  one is just looking at you intently then suddenly you spank or even
  kill him with a gun or any other hard objects. Remember in self-
  defense, there is no intention to kill but only to defend oneself or
  run away from the trouble. For example, you have a gun and one is
  running after you with a knife. Which part of the aggressor’s body
  should you hit with your gun?  The head? Stomach? Neck? 
  Chest?  None of the above my dear children. It should be the
  F…… oot or feet. 
 
 

is a firm and stable behavior pattern of acting. An individual

naturally and consciously performs an action, as a result of
its repetitive performance through time. One acts based on
his/her repeated responses to situations.

Good moral habits are called virtues while bad habits are vices.

People are expected to exert utmost effort to free themselves from
vicious habits.
           
5.  Habit
Some examples of your bad habits children are: speaking bad
words when you are mad, always coming late, not attending mass,
copying during quizzes and exams, etc. 
            
How do we moralize vices or bad habits?
Vices or bad habits are culpable. The culpability is lessened only
when one is exerting effort to correct or stop his/her vices. 
 
 

 
Elements in determining the morality of Human Acts
 Elements Description

This is the action itself.  This answers the question

WHAT.  It refers to the Human Act itself.  For an act to be ethically
and morally good, the object must be good in itself, otherwise, it is
1.  The Object/Act bad. (Living a Christian
Moral Life, 2013).
 

This refers to the persons involved, the time, place, and occasion
that surround an object/act.  In other words, it answers the
questions: WHO, WHEN, WHERE and HOW.
This can change or completely alter the moral quality of a human
act.
2.  The Circumstance
The circumstance is a condition modifying human actions,
either by increasing or diminishing the moral responsibility. (Living a
Christian Moral Life, 2013).
 
3.  The Intention or
End or Purpose

Every human act, no matter how trivial or significant, is done with an

intention or purpose – the reason behind
the act.  This answers the question WHY.  For a human
act to be ethically and morally good, the agent or doer must have a
good intention.  Many such activities are
said to be morally indifferent in themselves but when performed,
their moral quality lies in the intention and circumstance behind
these activities. The end or intention
can modify human action in four ways:
 
a. An indifferent act may become morally good or bad.
b. An objectively good act may become morally bad.
c.  An objectively good act can receive added goodness.

An objectively bad act can never become good in

spite of the good motive (Living a Christian Moral
 Life, 2013).

1. Act /Action – There are

actions that we can easily
see if they are good or bad.
 

2. Purpose/Intention - There
are actions that morality can
only be seen upon
examining the purpose of
the doer.

3. Circumstance – (who,
what, when, where, how or
person/doer, action/thing,
time, place, and
                               
manner)
 

 
 
Other Principles/application of the Act, Purpose and Circumstance criteria:

1. The Act is good if the three (Act, Purpose, and Circumstance) are good.

2. If one of the three (Act, Purpose, and Circumstance) is bad, then the act is bad.

3. An indifferent act may become morally good or bad. (depending on the

     intention/purpose of the doer)

4. An objectively good act may become morally bad. (Purpose?)

    Example: when a person gives alms to a poor girl with the intention of seducing her.

5. An objectively bad act can never become good in spite of the good motive. Example: to
steal money with the good intention of giving it to charitable institutions or to the poor, as
the legendary Robin Hood did. As the principle says, “The end does not justify the means.”
 
 
Types of Ethics

1.  Deontology Deontology (or Deontological Ethics) is an approach to Ethics that

focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as
opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those
actions (Consequentialism) or to the character and habits of the actor
(Virtue Ethics).

Deontology may sometimes be consistent with Moral Absolutism (the

belief that some actions are wrong no matter what consequences follow
from them), but not necessarily. 

The deontological class of ethical theories states that people should

adhere to their obliga-tions and duties when engaged in decision
making when ethics are in play.

Deontology is the ethics of doing and action.

The word deontology derives from the Greek words for duty (deon) and
science (or study) of (logos). In contemporary moral philosophy,
deontology is one of those kinds of normative theories regarding which
choices are morally required, forbidden, or permitted. In other words,
deontology falls within the domain of moral theories that guide and
assess our choices of what we ought to do (deontic theories), in
contrast to those that guide and assess what kind of person we are and
should be (aretaic [virtue] theories). And within the domain of moral
theories that assess our choices, deontologists—those who subscribe
to deontological theories of morality—stand in opposition
to consequentialists (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2016)
 Character-based ethics

A right act is the action a virtuous person would do in the same

circumstances.
Virtue ethics is person rather than action based: it looks at the virtue or
moral character of the person carrying out an action, rather than at
ethical duties and rules, or the consequences of particular actions.

Virtue ethics not only deals with the rightness or wrongness of

individual actions, it provides guidance as to the sort of characteristics
and behaviours a good person will seek to achieve.
2.  Virtue ethics
In that way, virtue ethics is concerned with the whole of a person's life,
rather than particular episodes or actions.

A good person is someone who lives virtuously - who possesses and

lives the virtues.

It is the ethics of being.  It asks the question: “what does it mean to be

human?”; “what is done repetitively?”  or “is it part of your character or
very being?”
 
It is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the
3. consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment
Consequentialism about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.
-What is the effect of the action? Is the effect good?
 
 
Natural Law

Natural law is the pattern, order, “rule” or “law” of nature. These are discovered through
observation, experience, common sense, thinking/reasoning, or reflecting.
Note: we are part of nature since we are living on earth/nature. We have a body that connects
us with mother nature.

So even our bodies have patterns or “rules” that it follows like we need to sleep at least 8 hours
a day, we use our feet to walk and not our hands, we need to eat at least three times a day, and
the other functions of the body. So there is order in our body that needs to be followed or
maintain or else you will get sick until you die, etc.
 
This is the same with our Mother Nature or mother earth. There are patterns or orders in it that
we need to maintain like how many trees can we cut, avoid so much air pollution, not polluting
our rivers so much, etc.
         
Important note: Once we do not follow Natural Law or these orders in mother nature or in our
bodies, it will lead to sickness, natural calamities until eventually to total destruction. Think my
dear children that most of the calamities we are suffering now are the result of not following the
Natural Law. People’s abuse of nature will come back to us in the forms of calamities like
sudden erosion, untimely typhoon, flashflood, global warming, etc. Even the Covid 19 that we
are facing now is a result of people trying to manipulate everything. They taught that they can
easily control everything.
        
So Natural Law asserts that moral standards that govern human behaviors are objectively
derived from the nature of human beings and the nature of the world.
 
Natural Law affirms that since humans are by nature rational beings, it is morally appropriate that
they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational nature.
 
In relation to human actions, Natural Law is defined as the light of human reason so we know
what to do and what to avoid.
 
Natural Law is a natural disposition of the human reason ordaining the person to do good and to
avoid evil.
Natural Law could be summed up as the law of human conduct which arises from human nature
as ordered to its ultimate natural end and which is recognized by the natural light of reason.

 
Characteristics of Natural Law
1.        Universal. This law is applicable to all creatures.

2.        Recognizable. It can be noticed through observations, interactions with

others, and deeper reflection.

3.      Obligatory. Since this is the very law that will lead to our well-being there
is no other choice or better choice than to obey it. Not obeying it would lead
to the things that the human person would like to avoid in life which are
destruction and damnation.

4.       Immutable. it will never be changed or is not subject to change.

 
Moreover, the contents of the Natural Law are classified into:
1.      Fundamental moral principles in their general applications such as “Good
is to be done and evil is to be avoided”, “Never do unto another what you
would not want him to do unto you,” “the end does not justify the means,”
etc.;
2.     General moral principles sustain and preserve the basic relations of the
human person to God, to himself/herself, and to neighbors. Examples: “honor
your parents;” “preserve your own life;” “do not murder;” and others;
 3.     Applications of the general principles of morality to specific situations in life
and society which come in the form of specific  laws to govern specific
situations and circumstances; and
4.      Remote conclusions derived by a process of reasoning which requires
good education and deeper reflection. Examples of this content are moral
problems such as mercy killing, the indissolubility of marriage, contraceptive
practices, and others.

 
So I hope Natural Law is now clear to you my dear children.

          So these are the rules, guides, norms in nature that you will discover through common
sense, observations, and thinking/reasoning or reflecting. In fact, the Ten Commandments
except for Commandments Number 1 and 2 are basically Natural Laws. You do not need to
read the Bible before you discover that you need to honor your parents, not kill, not steal, etc.
Sorry if I will say one is too slow to think/learn if he/she does not know these rules by nature or
experience or observation since we are rational by nature.

 
Positive Law. The word “positive” means being promulgated or “published” or announced. a
law enacted should not take effect unless it is promulgated or announced.

Why is there a need for positive laws when in fact there is already the existence of the Natural
Law?
            The Natural Law has the tendency to be recognized generally in terms of its aspects,
and not all people easily find the proper application of these laws and their deeper implications
in the life of the human person.
 
The Positive Laws are the specific formulations derived from the Natural Law. These are the
specific application of the Natural Law in different human or societal contexts. So the Natural
Law is seen, expressed, or applied through the Positive Law. A positive law that does not
respect the Natural Law contributes to the damage to the development of the human person
and of the whole creation. It is territorial or contextual, a law continues until it is changed by
another and it is promulgated by a public authority.

      So my dear children, the positive laws are just the laws that people formulate/specify from
the Natural Law and they impose it to community or society since a lot of people violate a lot of
aspect of the Natural Law or they just ignore it if they think it will not affect them personally
without considering the effect or the damage that it can do to others. Note that all our actions
will have an effect on others either directly or indirectly or affect us now or later. An example is
abuse to Mother Nature; before people just ignored it, and they are only alarmed now that we
are suffering from global warming and other calamities.   
 
Examples of Positive Laws are Constitution, Policies, ordinances, rules, and regulations, etc.
 
The Positive Law is an ordinance of reason promulgated for the common good by one in
charge of the community or by a competent authority.  Examples of human positive laws are the
ordinances of a certain place or the constitution of a certain country.
4. Ordinance. It is a decree or a command and not a request; it demands obedience. One
has to follow it.

5. Reasonable. It means a certain positive law is based on reason and not on mere
emotion. It must be useful or good which means it must attain its goal. Positive law is
also reasonable if it has the following characteristics: just or fair, honest, possibility of
fulfillment, relatively permanent, and must be promulgated.

6. Common Good. A law must serve the interest of the majority and not favor only a few
individuals.

7. Competent Authority. One who enacts or authors a law could be characterized as

someone who is knowledgeable, just, wise, and respectable.

Conscience

- the inner sense of what is right or wrong in one's conduct or motives, impelling one toward
right action.
- is a personal awareness of right and wrong that you use to guide your actions to do right.
- conscience is the practical judgment of reason allowing the person to recognize the moral
quality of an act. (CCC).
- Conscience would tell, one must abhor the evil/bad and embrace what is good.
 

The Two General Kinds of Conscience

Antecedent It is a conscience that judges an act before it is done.

conscience
 A typical example is during a quiz -- when a student has two options
whether to cheat or not to cheat. Before he/she cheats, the person knows
and is able to deliberate whether such action is pleasing to him/her or
not.
 
It judges an act after it is being done.

Consequent Going back to the example above, consequent conscience works after
conscience the
cheating has been executed by the student and so he/she starts feeling
guilty about the act that he/she committed.
 
Conscience is further classified into different forms such as correct conscience and false
conscience; scrupulous conscience and lax conscience; and certain conscience and doubtful
conscience.  These classifications fall either under antecedent or consequent conscience
depending on whether moral assessment happens before or after a human act is being done.
 
a. Correct conscience is a conscience that judges a good act as good and a bad act as
indeed bad.
b. False conscience - the opposite of correct conscience. One judges a good act as bad
and a bad act as good.
c. Scrupulous conscience - one is always afraid of committing errors; thus not following
rules/laws is tantamount to committing errors.
d. Lax conscience - a person keeps on excusing him/herself from every mistake committed.
It is as if, he/she does not commit any mistake at all.
e. Certain conscience is a firm judgment that one is not in error. It means, it is clear and
evident that what a person does is indeed right.
f. Doubtful conscience - judgment is always suspended because of the uncertainty of the
goodness and badness of human action. The word ‘doubt’ denotes the idea that one is not
sure of what he/she is doing.
 
General Principle: Always follow your conscience.
 

Week 3: Module 3
Introduction:
            Recognizing the notions of good and bad, and right and wrong are the
primary concern of ethics. In this module, we will focus on how to determine a moral
problem and how we reason out in is such a moral problem.
Lesson Proper:
           
Kinds of Valuation
Ethics speaks about matters of good things that we should pursue and bad things that we
should avoid; the right ways in which we should act and the wrong ways of acting. Ethics as
a subject for us to study is about determining the grounds for the values with particular and
special significance to human life. 
 
There are instances when we make value judgments that are not considered to be
part of ethics. Movies and music may be described as something to be good according to
the judgment of the senses. Moreover, we may say that the right sawsawan for my shanghai
is ketchup and not vinegar. These valuations fall under aesthetics. This refers to the
judgments of personal approval or disapproval that are dependent on what we see, hear,
smell, and taste. We also have a sense of approval and disapproval concerning certain
actions which are relatively more trivial in nature. For instance, I think it is ‘right’ to knock on
the door before entering it, and it is wrong to barge into one’s office. In a fine dining setup,
you should follow the correct usage of utensils, when to use the goblet, glass water, spoon,
and fork, etc. These examples belong to the category of etiquette which is concerned with
right and wrong actions, but they are not grave enough to be considered part of ethics.
 
Recognizing the characteristics of aesthetic and technical valuation allows us to have
a rough guide as to the discussion of ethics. They involve valuations that make the sphere
of human actions, characterized by certain gravity and concern the human well-being or
human life itself. Therefore, matters that concern life and death such as war, capital
punishment, abortion, and matters that concern human well-being such as poverty,
inequality, or sexual identity are included in the discussion of ethics.
 
We say that moral issues are issues that are included in ethics and non-moral issues
are issues that are not.
 
 
 
Moral Dilemma
           When you are in a difficult situation and each option looks equally bad, you are in a
dilemma.  Dilemma is a Greek word, which means “double proposition”.  It was originally a
technical term of logic, but we use it now for any time you have a problem with no
satisfactory solution.         
 
We may think that dilemma is synonymous with a problem of deciding among
options. College is a paradigm of being anxious because the decisions made during this
time are crucial for it may determine who we are in the near future. Some are hard up in
choosing a course to take. In choosing we may consider passion over wealth, fitted to one’s
personality or following barkada’s choice, personal dream, or parents’ dream. In these
consumeristic times, we may also experience a dilemma when we visit shopee, and was
compelled to decide whether to but it or not, or which among this product is most needed by
me. Thus, we say, a dilemma is a situation wherein an individual is forced to choose
between two or among many conflicting options neither of which is acceptable.
 
 Ectopic pregnancy is an abnormal pregnancy wherein the fetus is formed outside
the uterus. The mother is in a moral dilemma since she needs to choose whether to
abort the child or to let the pregnancy continue but her life may be endangered which
may lead to her death.  When dilemmas involve human actions which have moral
implications, they are called ethical or moral dilemmas. Moral agents are forced to
choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the situation
in a morally acceptable manner.

            In a dilemma, a person is in a situation where there is no one obvious right

choice or in a situation where the choice is especially difficult because no solution is
appealing.  It is very important to know that difficult choices need careful decisions.  It is
just appropriate to feel guilt no matter what course of action is taken.  This means that a
dilemma is a tough choice.

“What is common to the two well-known cases is conflict. In each case, an agent
regards herself as having moral reasons to do each of two actions, but doing both
actions is not possible. Ethicists have called situations like these moral dilemmas. The
crucial features of a moral dilemma are these: the agent is required to do each of two
(or more) actions; the agent can do each of the actions, but the agent cannot do both
(or all) of the actions. The agent thus seems condemned to moral failure; no matter
what she does, she will do something wrong (or fail to do something that she ought to
do).”
Three Conditions of Moral Dilemma
           

1. If the agent of moral action is obliged to make a decision about which course of action is
best.
2. There must be different courses of action to choose from.
3. No matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are always compromised.
 
 
Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Reasoning
 
            Lawrence Kohlberg is considered the first psychologist to do heavy research into
human ethics and how people reacted to dilemmas.  The comprehensive stage theory of
moral development was based on Jean Piaget’s theory of moral judgment for children
(1932) and this was developed by Lawrence Kohlberg in 1958.  Cognitive in nature,
Kohlberg’s theory focuses on the thinking process that occurs when one decides whether a
behavior is right or wrong.  Thus, the theoretical emphasis is on how one decides to respond
to a moral dilemma, not what one decides or what one actually does.
 
The theory asserts that moral reasoning as the basis for ethical behavior, has six
identifiable developmental stages, each more adequate at responding to moral
dilemmas than its predecessor. Kohlberg followed the development of moral judgment
far beyond the ages studied earlier by Piaget, who also claimed that logic and morality
develop through constructive stages. Expanding on Piaget's work, Kohlberg determined
that the process of moral development was principally concerned with justice, and that it
continued throughout the individual's lifetime.

For his studies, Kohlberg relied on the Heinz dilemma.  The Heinz dilemma was a

hypothetical situation that Kohlberg used to see how individuals would justify their
actions if placed in a moral dilemma. He then analyzed the form of moral reasoning
displayed, rather than its conclusion, and classified it as belonging to one of six distinct
stages.

The Heinz dilemma, as used in Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development, is

stated as follows:

“A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the
doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town
had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was
charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He
paid 200fortheradiumandcharged2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick
woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could
only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his
wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist
said: “No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it.” So Heinz got
desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz
have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?”

From a theoretical point of view, it is not important what the participant thinks that Heinz
should do. Kohlberg's theory holds that the justification the participant offers is what is
significant, the form of their response. Below are some of many examples of possible
arguments that belong to the six stages:

 Stage one (punishment/obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he
will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person. Or: Heinz should
steal the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted
for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.
 Stage two (rewards): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier
if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Or: Heinz should not
 steal the medicine because a prison is an awful place, and he would more likely languish
in a jail cell than over his wife's death.
 Stage three (good intention): Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife
expects it; he wants to be a good husband. Or: Heinz should not steal the drug because
stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he has tried to do everything he can without
breaking the law, you cannot blame him.
 Stage four (obedience to authority): Heinz should not steal the medicine because the
law prohibits stealing, making it illegal. Or: actions have consequences.
 Stage five (moral versus legal right): Heinz should steal the medicine because
everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the
medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it
does not make his actions right.
 Stage six (individual principles of conscience): Heinz should steal the medicine
because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of
another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the
medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.

From the responses to the Heinz dilemma and responses to other similar hypothetical
dilemmas, Kohlberg developed the six stages of moral development.  These stages are
summarized in the diagram below.
 
Level 1: Pre Conventional Morality

In Pre-conventional level, right and wrong are determined by rewards or punishment.

Reasoners judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences.
 
Stage One: Punishment/Obedience Orientation
            This is the stage that all young children start at.  Rules are seen as being fixed and
absolute.  Obeying the rules is important because it means avoiding punishment.  The
individual will obey in order to avoid punishment.  Behaviour is determined by
consequences.  Whatever leads to punishment is wrong.  Morality is based on punishment.

Heinz should not steal the medicine, because he will consequently be put in prison.
Individuals focus on the direct consequences that their actions will have for themselves.
 
Stage Two: Rewards/Self Interest
            As children grow older, they begin to see that other people have their own goals and
preferences and that often there is room for negotiation.  Decisions are made based on the
principle of “what’s in it for me?”  For example, an older child might reason: “If I do what
mom or dad wants me to do, they will reward me.  Therefore, I will do it.”  Morality is based
on rewards.   The right way to behave is the way that is rewarded.  Behaviour is determined
again by consequences.  The individual focuses on receiving rewards or satisfying personal
needs.
Right behavior is defined by what is in one’s own best interest.
 
Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even
if he will have to serve a prison sentence.

Level 2: Conventional Morality

In this level, views of others matter, there is avoidance of blame, and it seeks approval. 
Conformity to social rules remains important to the individual.  However, the emphasis shifts
from self-interest to relationships with other people and social systems.  The individual
strives to support rules that are set forth by others to win their approval or to maintain social
order.  People who reason in a conventional way judge the morality of actions by comparing
these actions to social rules and expectations.
 
Stage 3: Interpersonal Concordance/Good Intentions/ Social Conformity Orientation/
Good boy/ Nice girl orientation
            In this stage, it is behaving in ways that conform to “good behaviour”.  There is a
sense of what “good boys” and “nice girls” do and the emphasis is on living up to social
expectations and norms because of how they impact day-to-day relationships.  Behaviour is
determined by social approval.  The individual wants to maintain or win the affection and
approval of others by being a “good person”.
 
Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it.
Individuals seek approval from other people.
Evaluation of the consequences of the actions is based on person’s relationship.
 
Stage 4: Law and order/Obedience to authority
            Social rules and laws determine behavior.  The individual now takes into
consideration a larger perspective, that of societal laws.  All people have the duty to uphold
laws.  Moral decision-making becomes more than consideration of close ties to others.  The
individual believes that rules and laws maintain the social order that is worth preserving.  By
the time individuals reach adulthood, they usually consider society as a whole when making
judgments.  The focus is on maintaining law and order by following the rules, doing one’s
duty, and respecting authority.  The focus is on maintaining social order by doing one’s duty,
obeying laws, and following the rules.
 
Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits it.
The individual thinks it is important to obey the law and conventions of society.
 
Level 3: Post Conventional Morality

The individual moves beyond the perspective of his or her own society.  Morality is defined
in terms of abstract principles and values that apply to all situations and societies.  The
individual attempts to take the perspective of all individuals.  There is an abstract notion of
justice.  The rights of others can override obedience to laws/rules.
 
Most people do not reach this level of moral reasoning.
 
Stage 5: Human Rights/Social Contract
            Individual rights determine behavior.  The individual views laws and rules as flexible
tools for improving human purposes.  That is, given the right situation, there are exceptions
to rules.  When laws are not consistent with individual rights and the interests of the
majority, it does not bring about good for people and alternatives should be considered. 
This stage is defined not by what is legally right but by what is morally right.  Saving the
most amount lives is always the best decision.
 
Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to live, regardless of the law;
or Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation
 
Stage 6: Universal Human Ethics
According to Kohlberg, this is the highest stage of functioning.  However, he claimed
that some individuals will never reach this level.  At this stage, the appropriate action is
determined by one’s self-chosen ethical principles of conscience.  These principles are
abstract and universal in application.  This type of reasoning involves taking the perspective
of every person or group that could potentially be affected by the decision.
 
Heinz should steal the medicine because saving a human life is a more fundamental value
than respecting the property of another person.
Moral reasoning is based on the use of abstract reasoning using universal principles.
 
 
Filipino Culture and the Universal Values
 
Introduction:
People make culture, culture would also inevitably make people. We are products of our
own particular culture. Our moral development therefore also lies in the kind of culture that we
have.  Culture is responsible for setting standards in the moral/ ethical development of a person.
It is, therefore, necessary to understand our culture to be able to understand our moral/ ethical
standards, norms, and stands which we need in moral decision making. In this lesson, we look
into our culture as Filipinos, our value system, and how these values work.
Lesson Proper:
Man, as living in a society, possesses culture and responds to issues with a background of
his environment. Societies not only create a collective way of life reflected in the community’s
beliefs, values, and moral standards of which we call culture. Culture also becomes a dynamic
medium through which these values are passed and shared. With the growing influence of
globalization, culture is no longer just shared by members within a particular community but is
also adopted by other groups as well. Nonetheless, despite the reality of enculturation and
acculturation, there are some values that are identified to be consistently Filipino.
Filipino moral identity constitutes the Filipino value system that the majority of
Filipinos have historically held important in their lives. This Philippine values system
includes the ideologies, moral codes, ethical practices, etiquette, and personal values
that are promoted by the society but slightly different individually due to religion, family,
school, community, and other factors. Filipino values center on maintaining social
harmony and are motivated by the desire for acceptance and a sense of belongingness
within a group. Social approval, group acceptance, and belongingness are major
concepts that help build Filipino moral character. Sanctions to deviation from these
would bring about “hiya”, roughly translated as “sense of shame, “amor propio” or self-
esteem. Concern about what others might think, say or do to how people act or say, are
strong influences on the social behavior among Filipinos. Filipino values are mostly
social, interpersonal, and natural. Among them are the following:
1. Pakikipag-kapwa tao - This is the shared sense of identity and consciousness of the
“other”. It means treating others with respect and dignity as an equal, not someone
below the individual.  Filipinos are open to others and feel one with others, regard
others with dignity and respect, and deal with them as fellow human beings. 
Pakikipag-kapwa tao is a foundation of unity.  This is manifested in being helpful and
generous in times of need (pakikiramay); the practice of Bayanihan or mutual
assistance and Filipino hospitality.
2. Family Orientation - Filipinos possess a genuine and deep love for family. The basic and
most important unit of a Filipino’s life is the family.  The Filipinos put a great emphasis on
the value of family and being close to one’s family members.  Family orientation is a
source of personal identity, emotional and material support, and one’s main commitment
and responsibility.  There is honor and respect given to parents; care given to the
children; generosity towards kin in need; and in great sacrifices, one endures for the
welfare of the family.  The sense of family results in a feeling of belongingness and
rootedness in a basic sense of security.
 
3. Joy and Humor - Filipinos have a cheerful and fun-loving approach to life and its ups
and downs.  It is a pleasant disposition, a sense of humor, and a propensity of
happiness that contribute not only to the Filipino charm but also to the indomitability
of the Filipino spirit.  This famous trait is the ability of Filipinos to find humor in
everything.  It sheds light on the optimism and positivity of Filipinos in whatever
situation they are so as to remain determined in going through struggles or
challenges.  It serves as a coping technique, the same way a child who has fallen
and laughs at himself/herself to hide his/her embarrassment.

4. Flexibility, Adaptability, and creativity - Filipinos can adjust and adapt to

circumstances and the surrounding environment, both physical and social. Also,
Filipinos adjust to whatever happens even in unplanned or anticipated events.  We
possess a tolerance for ambiguity that enables us to remain unfazed by uncertainly or
lack of information.  Studies show that Filipinos often have an aversion to a set of
standardized rules of procedures.  They are known to follow a Natural Clock or
Organic sense of time - doing things in the time they feel is right.  They are present-
oriented, which means that one attends to a task or requirement at the time it is
needed and does not worry much about future engagements.  This allows the Filipino
to adapt and be flexible in doing the tasks at times not bound to a particular schedule
 or timeframe.  This allows them to think on their feet and be creative in facing
whatever challenge or task they have even when it is already right in front of them.

5. Faith and religiosity - The Philippines is approximately 85% Christians (Mostly Roman
Catholic Christians), 10 percent Muslims, and 5 percent “other Religions”, including the
Taoist-Buddhist religious beliefs of Chinese and the “Indigenous” animistic beliefs and
some people in upland areas that resisted 300 years of Spanish and colonial rule. This is
a reflection of the Filipinos’ strong faith in God as seen in their various practices.  This
includes the numerous Church Holidays they observe, the customary (and obligatory)
Sunday Mass, the individual’s basis of their moral standpoint, the influence of the
Church on the minds, actions, and opinions of the majority, importance of the
Sacraments, praying at almost any possible time of the day, the extreme practices
during Holy Week.

6. Ability to Survive (resiliency) - Filipinos have an ability to survive.  Filipinos make do with
what is available in the environment.  The Filipinos as a people who have been
constantly under the rule of numerous powerful countries have over time, developed a
sense of resourcefulness or the ability to survive with whatever they have.  They have
the extraordinary ability to make something out of almost nothing.  If a Filipino was given
just a screwdriver, plastic bags, and some tapes, he would still be able to build a bird
tree, especially for the sake of survival, provided that he be allowed to hunt for some
needed surrounding material

7. Hard work and Industry - With resourcefulness comes hard work. Filipinos are very
determined and persevering in accomplishing whatever they set in their minds.  We have
the capacity for hard work given proper conditions; to raise one’s standard of living and
to possess the essentials of a decent life for one’s family.  We are willing to take risks
with jobs abroad and, while there, to work at two or three jobs.  The result is productivity
and entrepreneurship for some and survival despite poverty for the family

8. ospitality - Filipinos are very hospitable and friendly people. They always smile no matter
how they feel. This is the common terminology that describes how Filipinos welcome
foreigners or tourists who visit the country.  For Filipinos, it is a pleasure and the
country’s honor to accept foreigners as visitors and build genuine relationships and
friendships with them.   
But aside from these values, we also have those long-held values to include:

1. Bahala Na - Bahala Na is a phrase Filipinos use most often. It can mean “living it all up
to God”, “come what may”, “whatever will be will be”, and the list goes on. It is a way of life, an
attitude, a perspective. It is embedded in the Filipino culture and it will never go away. It is not
for everyone, especially for those who like to be in control at all times.
Bahala na- From Bathala na, there is no direct translation but more or less means
“Leave it to God” or “Come What May”. When I was in school this was taught to me as a
negative character trait of ours- it meant we were defeatist in our attitude to life and
were only willing to do as much as was necessary, preferring to leave the rest up to
God’s will. In fact, during my time here, I’ve been thinking that my Grade One teacher
was really right. The Bahala Na attitude got us nowhere.

2. Utang na Loob - Obligation and responsibility are often viewed in terms of reciprocity
(utang na loob), comprised of debts (utang), and inner-self-free will (na-loob). The process
begins with an unsolicited gift and continues going often into to the next generation. According
to Wikipedia: Utang-na-loob (pronounced “u-tang na lo-ob”) is also sometimes translated as a
"debt of gratitude." In the study of Filipino psychology, utang na loob is considered an important
"accommodative surface value," along with hiya (shame) and pakikisama (togetherness). That
is to say, it is one of the values by which the Filipino accommodates the demands of the world
around him, as opposed to confrontative values like "lakas ng loob" and "pakikibaka".
 The essence of utang na loob is an obligation to appropriately repay a person who has
done one a favor. The favors which elicit the Filipino's sense of utang na loob are
typically those whose value is impossible to quantify, or, if there is a quantifiable value
involved, involves a deeply personal internal dimension. This internal dimension, loob,
differentiates Utang na Loob from an ordinary debt("utang"); being an internal
phenomenon, utang na loob thus goes much deeper than ordinary debt or even the
western concept of owing a favor. Filipino psychology explains that this is a reflection of
the "kapwa" orientation of shared person-hood or shared self, which is at the core of the
Filipino values system.

3. Hiya - The Filipino concept of hiya, often translated as ‘shame’ or ‘embarrassment’, has

often received ambivalent or negative interpretations. In this article I make an important
distinction between two kinds of hiya: (1) the hiyathat is suffered as shame or
embarrassment (a passion) and (2) the hiyathat is active and sacrificial self-control of
one’s individual wants for the sake of other people (a virtue). I borrow and reappropriate
this distinction from Aquinas’ virtue ethics. This distinction not only leads to a more
positive appraisal of hiya, it also leads to a new understanding of associated concepts
that are often confused with hiya such as amor propio, pakikisama and the infamous
‘crab mentality.
4. Palabra de Honor - Another value of the Filipinos is the lack of a “Palabra de Honor”
which means a verbal commitment by one person to another agreeing to do (or not to
do) something in the future.

5. Kupadrino System - Padrino system, or patronage in Filipino culture and politics, is the
value system where one gains favor, promotion, or political appointment through family
affiliation (nepotism) or friendship (cronyism), as opposed to one's merit. The Padrino
System in the Philippines has been the source of many controversies and corruption. It
has been an open secret that one cannot join the political arena of the Philippines
without mastery of the Padrino System. From the lowest Barangay official to the
President of the Republic, it is expected that one gains political debts and dispenses
political favor to advance one's career or influence, if not wealth.
Some Values Are Shared by All Cultures. We cannot conclude that two societies
differ in values just because they differ in customs. We differ in our beliefs, not in our
values. These values shared with the same worth for all, or at least for almost all people
are called universal values. Some of these universal human values encompass
morality, aesthetic preferences, human endeavors, and the desire for social order.
These values are found and held in common across a great diversity of human cultures
in the vast majority of places and situations, at almost all times whether consciously and
explicitly or just expressed in their behaviors. The concept of human rights emerged
from the belief that basic values and principles are of universal character. Shalom
Schwartz (2014) proposed broad value domains that are universal and fairly
comprehensive. These universal values are:

1.       Power- This is the social status and prestige, control, and dominance over people
and resources.
2.       Achievements- Personal success demonstrating competence based on social
standards.
3.       Pleasure- Sensuous gratification for one’s self including the excitement, novelty
brought by the challenges in life.
4.       Self-Direction-This is the independent thought-action of choosing, creating, and
exploring.
5.       Benevolence-It is the preservation and enhancement of the welfare of the people
with whom one is frequently in contact.
6.       Tradition- it is respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that
traditional culture and religion provide.
7. Conformity- It is the restraint in action, inclinations, and impulses which are likely to
upset or harm others and violate social expectations and norms.
8. Security- It refers to the safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of
self and nature as well. It includes the understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and
protection of the welfare of people and nature.
But values are always bi-polar in nature. Just as there are always two sides to the coin,
there are also two poles of values. For you to think about, what could be the good and
bad sides of all these values mentioned above?
 
Culture and Ethics
 
 
Introduction:
A moral agent is a being who is capable of acting with reference to what is right
and wrong. Since man has the ability to make moral judgments based on some notion
of right and wrong, he is a moral agent who is to be held accountable for his actions.
But man is not a solitary being who was morally developed and has a morally upright
conscience from the very start. He gradually learned and assimilated moral
consciousness from his environment. He was basically a product of his culture. In this
lesson, we will discuss basic precepts of cultural and cultural relativism. Man as living in
a society who possesses culture responds to issues with a background of his
environment. However, how are we going to treat culture as regards ethics?
Lesson Proper:
 Culture and Moral Development
According to Pekarsky, the title of this discussion, "The Role of Culture in Moral
Development", points to two different, albeit inter-related, questions: first, what role does culture
play in moral development? and second, what is the proper responsibility of a culture in guiding
the moral growth of its members? Since culture influences the moral growth of children. Thus a
community needs to view itself as a responsible agent for the moral growth of its members. The
reasons for this view will emerge through our inquiry into the role that, intended or not, culture
does play in the moral development of its members.
The term "culture" is derived from the Latin word ‘Cultus’ which means care-a a care and
attention provided to a human person as s/he grows into a mature person. According to Allan G.
Johnson, culture is the sum of symbols, ideas, forms of experiences, and material products
associated with a social system. It can be used in a fairly intuitive and very broad sense to
denote the totality of the social environment into which a human being is born and in which
he/she lives. Culture in this sense includes the community's institutional arrangements (social,
political, and economic) but also its forms of art and knowledge, the assumptions and values
embedded in its practices and organization, its images of heroism and villainy, its various
systems of ideas, its forms of work and recreation, and so forth.
Culture then in ethical parlance is a dynamic medium through which societies create a
collective way of life reflected in their community’s beliefs, values, religion, and even moral
standards. It is a very powerful force that affects or influences the lives and moral behavior of
the members of society. It shapes their understanding of good and bad, moral character and
personality. Culture tells what individuals should do, what not to do, how things are to be done,
and how to relate with other people. Culture can either be material (concrete and tangible things
that man creates and uses like tools, weapons, clothing, artifacts, relics, and others) or non-
material (intangible products like knowledge, laws, teachings, customs, values, moral standards,
and moral behavior). It is with the latter which we would focus on. Although people make
culture, culture would also inevitably make people. It is responsible for setting standards in the
moral development of a person.
Moral development refers to the process through which a human being acquires
sensibilities, attitudes, beliefs, skills, and dispositions that render him or her a morally mature or
adequate human being. Of course, this definition is, at best, a mere shell, empty of content; for it
tells us nothing about what those sensibilities, attitudes, beliefs, skills, and dispositions are that
mark one as a morally adequate human being. The human person as a moral agent acquires
moral consciousness through culture. Culture could be acquired through imitating,
indoctrination, or suggestions and conditioning by culture providers such as family, school,
church, government, and workplace. But because different people come from different social
institutions which act as cultural providers, different cultures are produced. But the question is,
whose culture tells us what is true, what is good, what is beautiful, what is right, and what is
otherwise? This brings us to the idea that culture is relative.
 
Cultural Relativism

            Contemporary dilemmas would show the strong influence of cultural norms on
decision-making involving ethical considerations. Culture and ethics do not always
blend harmoniously. To avoid judging the cultural practices of groups that are different
from ours, we can use the cultural approach. As defined by Merriam- Webster
dictionary, cultural relativism is the idea that the person’s beliefs, values, and practices
should be understood based on the person’s own culture rather than be judged against
the criteria of another culture. It is very obvious that culture differs from one place to
another. Language, norms, and rituals are basic precepts of a society wherein a
group of people continues to exist and socialize. The identity of a person is immersed
in one’s culture and would suggest its place of origin. Thus, culture makes us distinct
and unique in how we perceive things. Moreover, there is a tendency that we judge
issues and become bias because at the back of our mind we are ruled by what we
know as true and correct as dictated by the culture where we belong.
            Relativism in general is the doctrine that knowledge is not always absolute
and that it is always dependent on the subject who endeavors to pursue the truth.
The maxim which is always associated with this is, “What is true to you may not be
true to me.” Thus in relativism, the truth varies and is plural.  There is no universal truth
in ethics. There are only customary practices specific to various cultures.  When we
speak of cultural relativism, we do not deny the reality of the diversity of culture.
Cultural Relativism suggests that an action is morally right if one’s culture approves of
it. Thus, in cultural relativism, moral rules are valid only for the society in which they
emerge, and it is the society’s approval or disapproval that makes something right or
wrong.
Is killing always wrong? Some cultures think so, while others sanction killing.
Those who do not agree with the death penalty by promoting their religious belief would
say that it is unethical. However, for those who kill others for money, their social group
would say that killing is permissible. Another example is suicide, it is condemned here in
the Philippines but for Japanese during the war, instead of conceding defeat, they would
rather commit suicide to uphold honor.
Cultural relativism is not judging a culture to our own standard of what is right or
wrong because what is practiced and valued as good in one place may not be good in
another.
We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to
our own. This is one of the main points stressed by Cultural Relativism—that we should
never condemn a society merely because it is “different.”

1.       We could no longer criticize the code of our own society. Cultural Relativism

suggests a simple test for determining what is right and what is wrong: All we need to do
is ask whether the action is in line with the code of the society in question.

2.       The idea of moral progress is called into doubt. But if Cultural Relativism is correct,
can we legitimately view this as progress? Progress means replacing the old ways with
new and improved ways.

3.      Some Values Are Shared by All Cultures. We cannot conclude that two societies
differ in values just because they differ in customs. We differ in our beliefs, not in our
values.
 
Five Claims of Cultural Relativism

1. Different societies have different moral codes.

2. The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is, if the
moral code of a society says that a certain action is right, then that action is right, at
least within that society.
3. There is no “universal truth” in ethics—that is, there are no moral truths that hold for all
peoples at all times. There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one
society’s code as better than another’s.
4. The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is but one among many.
5. It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures. We should always be tolerant of them.
Humanity is constantly evolving, developing, and adapting. Through cultural
relativism, situated in a very strong influence of globalization, we come to an
environment where people change and cultures change drastically. Cultural relativism
eliminates the rigidity that societies have in place regarding ethics, conduct, and
reasoning. The following gives us additional advantages and disadvantages of taking
this theory into consideration.
Strengths of Cultural Relativism
It is a system that promotes cooperation that creates potential stronger society while
preserving culture as well.
It creates a society where equality is possible because each person can set his own
standards.
It encourages people to pursue a genuine interest on their own options without
restrictions/ demand.
It encourages respect built into the process of having one’s own specific perspective
and learn from one’s own experiences in a way that works best for one’s self.
It stops cultural conditioning and creates societies that work without fear of judgment
and biases, thus a more authentic existence.
 
Weaknesses of Cultural relativism
 

1.       It creates a system that is fueled by personal biases. There would no longer be a

group perspective.
2.       It can create chaos and disorder as there would be no more absolute entities that
would hold people together in order. People would tend to find their own perspective of
what is right or wrong.
3.       It would bring back immorality and lack of discipline as the only standards in place
would be those which are set by the individual/s involved.
4.       It draws people away from one another that limiting moral and even the totality of
human progress.
5.       It turns mere perceptions into truths as each would beholders of their own