GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

MODULE 1
INTRODUCTION TO ETHICS

ABOUT THE MODULE

This module aims to introduce to students the study of ethics as well as the different
philosophical approaches within the discipline. This module provides tools for students to
better understand the essence of what really defines moral and non-moral actions.

LEARNING OUTCOMES
By the end of this unit, students should be able to:
• define the terms ‘philosophy’,and ‘ethics’
• outline the rationale for studying ethics, particularly in relation to peace education
• explain the difference between deontological and teleological ethics
• briefly explain some of the key philosophical approaches in Philosophy such as Kant`s.

1.0 OVERVIEW

The study of ethics belongs within the discipline of philosophy known as ‘moral
philosophy’, our discussion begins there. Philosophy involves the systematic and rational
understanding of human systems of belief. Meanwhile, Ethics is concerned with questions
concerning how human beings ought to live their lives, and about what is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’.
In this section we look at how philosophers attempt to answer such questions in a
systematic and rational way. Here, you will learn how to apply moral concepts into various
social issues. This will guide you to better understand the world we live in by using reason
and sound arguments rather than by simply relying upon the common ‘rules of thumb’. In
this course, you are expected to learn, recommend, and defend an ultimate basis of right
and wrong behavior. But first, let us explore what philosophy and ethics are.

1.1 What is ‘philosophy’?

What do you think philosophers do? How do they spend their time?
Try to write a brief definition of philosophy. What is the purpose of
‘doing’ philosophy? (5 points)

Human beings acquire a wealth of information about the world around them. They use
these ideas to build up their beliefs and hopefully to find their place within this world.
Those ideas come from a variety of sources. They may come from scientific discoveries,

1 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

personal experience, traditional beliefs commonly held by people in the society in which
they live, and so on. Much of the time people accept those ideas without questioning
them; they are relatively ‘unconsidered’ or ‘unexamined’. A philosopher, however, will
attempt to scrutinise such ideas about the world to see if they are based on sound evidence.
For example, many Filipinos nowadays still believe to superstitions. Oftentimes, those who
practice these superstitions do not question them. They simply practice them without
asking for a sound evidence of their truthfulness or origin. “Bawal daw mag walis pag gabi
kasi matatabuy ang swerte” duhh?

1.2 Some Philosophers

Look at the list of names below. How many of these philosophers’

names do you recognise? Do you know anything about their ideas or
theories? Choose two names and find out some biographical
information about them and some brief details about the nature of
their work. (10 points)
Karl Marx
Saint Augustine
René Descartes
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Martin Heidegger
John Locke
George Berkeley
John Dewey
Thomas Aquinas
Baruch Spinoza
John Stuart Mill
Immanuel Kant

What all these philosophers have in common is that they have attempted to answer their
chosen questions by working carefully and systematically through their ideas, convictions,
and possible prejudices to arrive at an answer that they believe to be fair and rational. For
instance, while it might be easy to blame poverty as a fault of poor people who did not
do their best to work or study, philosophers try to find reasoned and rational
explanations for why it is so or why it is not so. They try to look beyond what is
already obvious like what Marx did in answering this question. So, through the study
of ethics, you are invited to examine critically your own and others’ arguments and
intuitions about some important issues, however clear-cut those arguments may seem to
be at first glance. The study of ethics is, therefore, just as much concerned with developing

2 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

the ability to ask and answer questions as it is with ‘learning’ the answers that other people
have suggested to some of the questions posed here. Hopefully, by building up a clearer
picture of the building blocks of people’s beliefs, values and arguments, ‘we can be more
confident about our actual moral behaviour in the real world. We might even change our
minds about a few things’ (Wraight 2011 p. 48).

1.3 What is ‘ethics’?

Are you the type of person who usually ‘does the right thing’? How do
you know what the ‘right thing’ is? What do we mean by the term
‘ethics’? Before you read on, take a few moments to write down a
definition of what you think the term means. (5 points)

‘Ethics’ is concerned with studying and/or building up a coherent set of ‘rules’ or principles
by which people ought to live. The theoretical study of ethics is not normally something
that many people would regard as being necessary in order for them to conduct their
everyday activities. In place of systematically examined ethical frameworks, most people
instead carry around a useful set of day-to-day ‘rules of thumb’ that influence and govern
their behaviour; commonly, these include rules such as ‘it is wrong to steal’, ‘it is right to
help people in need’, and so on.

But sometimes the vicissitudes and complexities of life mean that these simple rules are
sometimes put to the test. Consider the idea that it is wrong to kill. Does this mean that
capital punishment is wrong? Is it wrong to kill animals? Is killing in self defence wrong? Is
the termination of pregnancy wrong? Is euthanasia wrong? If we try to apply our everyday
notions of right and wrong to these questions, straightforward answers are not always
forthcoming. We need to examine these questions in more detail; and we need theoretical
frameworks that can help us to analyse complex problems and to find rational, coherent
solutions to those problems. Whilst some people attempt to do this work individually, for
themselves, philosophers attempt to find general answers that can be used by everyone in
society’ Here, we will explore first the areas of the study of ethics.

1.3.1 METAETHICS
Metaethics deals with the study of the origin and meaning of ethical concepts. It covers two
important questions: (1) is morality objective or subjective? And, (2) what motivates us to
be moral?

First question: is morality objective or relative?

Proponents of objective morality argue that moral concepts are absolute and binding upon
all rational creatures. The idea of objective morality is that, moral codes are and ought to be

3 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

universal. Plato even likened this idea to the law of mathematics, i.e., 1+ 1 = 2 is true
anywhere in the world. Proponents give some examples of moral laws which possess a
universal character such as “murder is wrong” or “robbery violates property rights.”

On the other hand, proponents of subjective morality argue that morality is merely human
invention. This concept is popularly called moral relativism (we will discuss more on this
later). Proponents of this view deny the absolute and universal nature of morality and hold
instead that moral values are different from society to society, and different throughout
time. For instance, attitude about polygamy between Muslims and Christian is different.
The former may enter into marriage multiple times and that is still morally acceptable. Also
then, slavery was considered a normal activity, now the same is widely condemned as a
criminal and inhumane act. Thus, for relativists, morality varies among societies and among
time and culture. What is wrong about one may be correct to others.

Second question: What motivates us to be moral?

While we basically judge our actions to be right or wrong, it does not necessarily mean that
we automatically choose the right or the wrong one. Before an act to be realized, there
must be some psychological processes involved.

EGOISM AND ALTRUISM

For Thomas Hobbes our actions are prompted by selfish desires. Even if an action seems
selfless, such as giving alms to the poor, there are still selfish causes for this, such as
making other people witness your actions thus making you feel good. Also, giving free
papers to your classmates might seem to be an act of generosity, but a selfish desire to be
popular or to be likened by your classmates still lingers. So, for him, moral acts are
motivated by self-oriented interests. This theory is called psychological egoism. Another
version of this is called hedonism, which views that our actions are motivated by pleasure.
We want to please ourselves; we work, we study, we do all sort of things so that we can
minimize pain and maximize pleasure in whatever forms. On the other hand, some
philosophical quarters argue that humans are well capable of altruism and that we have an
inherent psychological capacity to show benevolence to others. Thus, giving papers to
classmates might in fact be an act of pure generosity that you indeed is a saint.

EMOTION AND REASON

David Hume argued that our moral acts are motivated by emotions rather than reason.
According to him, we need a distinctly emotional reaction in order to make a moral
pronouncement. Reason might be of service in giving us the relevant data, but, in Hume’s
words, “reason is, and ought to be, the slave of the passions.” On the other hand, Immanuel

4 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

Kant argued that true moral action is motivated only by reason. According to Kant, we can
act morally by solely relying upon reason, not emotion or even religion. For instance, in
deciding whether it is morally proper to steal your classmate`s pen, Kant argued that you
should have the best reason for doing so, if not, you might only upset him or violate his
ownership right and that means you are not acting morally. In short, Kantian perspective
suggests that we can act morally by using only pure reason. In deciding whether reading
this module is morally right, we can arrive upon the right answer without bothering
numerous Saints or without asking God and our innermost conscience. Simply, you have to
read this because it will benefit you personally, well your grades, it has to be high enough
so you can impress your future employer if you apply for a job, and your pay will later on
help your parents who troubled sending you to school. We will discuss Kant deeply at the
end of our course.

1.3.2. NORMATIVE ETHICS

Normative ethics deals with the criteria of what is morally right and wrong. It involves the
creation of the ultimate test which defines what is good and bad behavior. In contrast to
metaethics, normative ethics deals with the content of ethical theories rather than their
nature or origin. The central question of normative ethics is: what is the ultimate criterion
of moral conduct? The answer to this question falls into two broad categories, namely:
teleological and deontological approaches.

Teleological approach (or utilitarianism/consequentialism as it is popularly known)

advocates that certain kinds of actions are right because of the goodness of their
consequences. On the other hand, Deontological approach emphasizes rules or principles
on judging whether an act is inherently right.

In other words, Teleological moral theories locate moral goodness in the consequences of
our behavior and not the behavior itself. It is a goal-directed approach in judging the
rightness or wrongness of an action. For example, is it morally correct for a father to steal
food from a grocery store so that he can feed his starving children? Using a teleological
approach, we can say that the answer to this depends upon the foreseeable consequences.
If stealing food will surely prevent his children from starving, then the father should
strongly consider stealing that food. But what if the consequences would be different, what
if he get caught? Or jailed? Then such is a bad consequence, hence the act of stealing might
still be wrong because other actions may prove to be better than stealing i.e., begging in the
streets or asking a tip for manning a parking lot. In short, teleological approach considers
the actual consequences by using cost-benefit analysis in judging the goodness or
wrongness of an action. Are you going to buy that phone and expect no food tomorrow?

5 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

Meanwhile, deontological approach is by definition duty-based. Meaning, morality,

according to deontologists, consists in the fulfillment of moral obligations, or duties which
are most often associated with obeying absolute and pre-existing moral rules. Therefore,
morality in deontological tradition is judged not by the consequences of an action rather by
the inherent rightness or wrongness of the action itself. For instance, in the above example,
should a father steal food to feed his starving children? While utilitarian would say that he
can, yes, provided that consequences would be best for his children, a deontologist would
absolutely say no. First because, stealing violates personal property rights (from the
standpoint of natural law theorists), second, God commands us not to steal (from divine
right theorists), and third, that it would be horrible to imagine if everyone does the same
for the same end (from Kantian perspective).

1.3.3. APPLIED ETHICS

Applied ethics, which is concerned with how people can achieve moral outcomes in specific
situations. Therefore, it is concerned with the philosophical examination of particular – and
often complex – issues that involve moral judgments such as abortion, animal rights, or
euthanasia. Resolving particular applied ethical issues should be easy. With the issue of
abortion, for example, we would simply determine its morality by consulting our normative
principle of choice, such as utilitarianism. If a given abortion produces greater advantage
than disadvantage, then, according to utilitarianism, it would be morally acceptable to have
the abortion.

Unfortunately, there are perhaps hundreds of rival normative principles from which to
choose, many of which yield opposite conclusions. Thus, the stalemate in normative ethics
between conflicting theories prevents us from using a single decisive procedure for
determining the morality of a specific issue. The usual solution to this is to consult several
normative principles and theories on a given issue and see where the weight of the
evidence lies.

1.4 Answer the following questions:

A) What is the difference between teleological and deontological

approaches in ethics? (10 points)
B) How consequentialist different from non-consequentialist? (10 points)
C) Is morality absolute or relative? Defend your answer. (10 points)

6 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education

GE 4 - Ethics with Peace Education Module 1

More readings:
Popkin, Ph.D., Avrum Stroll, Philosophy Made Sipmple (1993). Broadway Books, New York:
New York. eISBN: 978-0-307-82325-0 (Available as pdf.)

References

“Ethics,” by James Fieser, University of Tennessee at Martin U. S. A, The Internet

Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ISSN 2161-0002, https://iep.utm.edu/ethics/, 15 August
2020.

“Normative Ethics,” by Brian Duignan, Emily Rodriguez and Editors of Encyclopedia

Britannica, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/normative-ethics, 15 August 2020.

Hursthouse, Rosalind and Pettigrove, Glen, "Virtue Ethics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =<https://plato.stanford.edu
/archives/win2018/entries/ethics-virtue/>.

Ronald F. White, Ph.D. MORAL INQUIRY (N.D.). College of Mount St. Joseph. Retrieved from:
https://faculty.msj.edu/whiter/ethicsbook.pdf

7 CBSUA – Calabanga, College of Education