Topic 3: Moral Courage

Nominal Duration: 1.5 hours

Learning Outcomes:
Upon completion of this topic, the student must be able to:
1. explain the significance of moral courage in ethical decision-making.

Reason, Will and Moral Courage in Ethics

Reason in ethics is the application of critical analysis to specific events to

determine what is right or wrong and what people ought to do in a particular situation
while will is the faculty of the mind that chooses a desire among the different desires
present. Will is guided by reason, where, as determined by reason, action is performed
according to rational requirements. The best ethical decision which is argued in the
most rational way is still incomplete without its execution. That is why moral courage is
important and the will enables the person to act deliberately and courageously
(Gambrell, 2015; Rowan, 2015).

Osswald, S. et al. (2010) describes moral courage as a prosocial behavior with

high social costs and no (or rare) direct rewards for the person. There are situations that
demand a morally courageous intervention: instances of injustice happen, human rights
are violated, persons are treated unfairly and in a degrading manner, or nature and
cultural assets are in danger. These situations are about discrimination against
foreigners or other minorities, violence and aggression against weaker individuals,
sexual harassment or abuse, mobbing, or illegal business practices.

Lopez, O’Byrne, and Petersen (2003) defined moral courage as “the expression
of personal views and values in the face of dissension and rejection” (p. 187) and “when
an individual stands up to someone with power over him or her (e.g., boss) for the
greater good” (p. 187). Thus, often an imbalance of power exists with a disadvantage on
the side of the person who acts morally courageously. Moral courage situations
(compared with other situations that demand prosocial behavior) are also characterized
by a specific social constellation: There are not only one or more victims but also one or
more perpetrators who discriminate against the victim(s) or act unfairly or threateningly,
and the potential helper has to deal with the perpetrators to act prosocially. Most of the
social costs moral courage entails emanate from the confrontation with the perpetrators.

Greitemeyer, Fischer, Kastenmueller, and Frey (2006) defined moral courage as

brave behavior accompanied by anger and indignation, which intends to enforce
societal and ethical norms without considering one’s own social costs. Social costs (i.e.,
negative social consequences) distinguish moral courage from other prosocial
behaviors.
Activity 3: Form a group of 5 members. Read the situation below and discuss how you
think you can help Jonas act with moral courage.

Jonas has just renewed his contract as a janitor with a job order status at a well-
known college in his province. He is just a senior high school graduate and has a five
month old baby to take care of. His peers respected him and described him as an
honest and hardworking person with strong work values. After almost four semesters,
he has noted a behavior in the work setting that concerned him and conflicted with his
ethical principles. He has been observing his supervisor falsifying daily time records of
fellow administrative aides and very lax inspections all around the campus. Although all
janitors have their own territories to clean and they work independently, there are
instances that they all work together in improving the landscapes of the campus. When
Jonas brought this behavior to the attention of some senior janitors, they explained that
they experienced retaliation if they even mentioned this misconduct. Anyway, all of them
are benefiting from it. After much pondering, Jonas felt that he has an ethical
responsibility to take action and bring this matter to the attention of the administration.
As soon as someone quietly brought this to the supervisor, the supervisor immediately
changed the work schedule of Jonas unfairly and added more loads of work for him. As
a result, he has to work on some Saturdays just to finish his job. The supervisor also set
unreasonable deadlines, and discouraged him opportunities for social gatherings
among them after office hours. What will he do?

Student Activity 4: Form a group with 5 members in each group. Choose one of the
topics below, make a script or a case, and make a good rational moral decision. Please
see attach rubric. (50 points)
1. Injustice
2. Violation Human Rights
3. Unfair Treatment (and in degrading manner)
4. Illegal business practice
5. Nature and cultural assets are in danger.
Assessment Task:
Exercise
Name: _________________________ Course & Year: ______________
I. Write a reflection paper about this quote: “Standing for what is right is a
lonesome journey”.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
2. Write a reflection paper about this quote: “It is better to be kind than to be
right.”
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
 ________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________

Learning Resources

Gambrell, A. Will, Reason, and Action (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from

https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/22695/1/WRA3.pdf
Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, P., Kastenmüller, A., & Frey, D. (2006). Civil courage
and helping behavior: Differences and similarities. European Psychologist,
11(2), 90-98.
Lerner, J.S., et al. (2014). Emotions and Decision Making. Annual Review
Psychology.
Lopez, S., O’Byrne, K. K., & Petersen, S. (2003). Profiling courage. In S. Lopez,
& C. R.
Snyder (Eds.). Positive psychology assessment: A handbook of models
and measures (pp. 185-197). Washington: APA.
Osswald, S., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, P., & Frey, D. (2010). What is moral
courage? Definition, explication, and classification of a complex construct.
Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.
net/profile/Silvia_Osswald/publication/232528056_What_is_moral_courage_Defi
nition_explication_and_classification_of_a_complex_construct/links/0deec525ba
6f9c4bbe000000/What-is-moral-courage-Definition-explication-and-classification-
of-a-complex-construct.pdf
Wilson, T.D. & D.T. Gilbert. (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing what to want.
Current Directions in Psychological Science 14: 131-34.
Rowan, A. M. (2015). The relationship between will and reason in the moral
philosophies of Kant and Aquinas. Logos i ethos, (1 (38)). Retrieved from
http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-9d247bbd-71fb-
46cf-8da0-c3cdfc6c28ab/c/1047-1914-1-PB.pdf.
 GEC 7: Ethics

1. Title of the Module

Chapter IV: Western Ethical Frameworks and Principles

2. Introduction

The goal of Western Ethics is generally for individuals to achieve self-direction

and self-understanding which have direct impact on ethical decision making. Our
intangible decision making as to determine what is right or wrong permeates everyday
life. Ethical problems are often complex and novel; they present themselves in unique
contexts in which conflicting principles are at stake. Ethics should concern all levels of
life: acting properly as individuals, creating responsible organizations and governments,
and making our society as a whole more ethical.

The first part presents an overview of the fundamental ethical frameworks and
principles. It introduces frameworks for ethical thinking and decision-making. These
ethical frameworks and principles represent the viewpoints from which students may
seek guidance as they make moral decisions.

The second part discusses virtue ethics which focuses on the development of the
character of the individual who must confront ethical dilemmas. Virtue ethics recognizes
that resolution of difficult problems depends, above all, on the character (that is, on the
virtues) of the people making decisions. It is important to note that, strictly speaking,
virtue ethics is very particular on character rather than on specific actions.

The third part discourses on Kantian ethics where the rightness or wrongness of
actions neither depends on their consequences nor on the character of individuals but
rather on whether these actions fulfill our duty. There are certain types of actions that
are absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more
happiness than the alternative. This theory asserts that there is a supreme principle of
morality, an unconditional command or universal duty for all human beings.

The fourth part focuses on Utilitarian Ethics where moral judgments are based on
the outcomes of a decision or an action. If the outcomes of an action are considered to
be useful, workable and positive, or to give rise to benefits, then that action is held to be
morally right. Conversely, if the outcome causes harm, then the action is held to be
morally wrong. The judgement of right or wrong depends on the consequences of the
decision or action.

The last part discusses Rawls’ justice as fairness which he proposed as an

alternative to utilitarianism. Rawls asserts that each individual has certain rights that
cannot be sacrificed simply for others to obtain more benefits. His theory revolves
around the adaptation of two fundamental principles of justice which would, in turn,
guarantee a just and morally acceptable society. The first principle guarantees the right
of each person to have the most extensive basic liberty compatible with the liberty of
others. The second principle states that social and economic positions are to be (a) to
everyone's advantage and (b) open to all.
3. Learning Outcomes
At the end of this chapter, the student is expected to:
1. explain the three broad areas of ethical study;
2. evaluate the different ethical frameworks;
3. compare and contrast ethical frameworks and principles;
4. explain virtue ethics;
5. explain Kantian ethics;
6. explain utilitarian ethics; and
7. explain Rawl’s principle of justice and fairness.

4. Learning Content

Topics for Chapter IV

Topic 1: Basic Areas of Ethical Study
Topic 2: Virtue Ethics
Topic 3: Kant and Right Theory
Topic 4: Utilitarianism
Topic 5: Justice and Fairness

5. Teaching and Learning Activities

a. Activity Sheets
b. Textual Reading
c. Discussion

6. Recommended learning materials and resources for supplementary reading

 “A Historical Survey of Western Ethics” (n.d.) Retrieved from
https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/183836/9/08%20chapter%203
.pdf
Baggini, Julian (2016). Philosophy: key texts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
De Guzman, Jens Micah, et al. (2018). Ethics: Principles of ethical behavior in
modern society. Philippines: MUTYA Publishing House, Inc.
Follesdal, A. (2015). John Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. In Philosophy of
Justice (pp. 311-328). Springer, Dordrecht. Retrieved from
http://www.follesdal.net/ms/Follesdal-2014-Rawls-JasF.pdf
Grayling, A. C. (2019). The history of philosophy. United Kingdom: Penguin
Books UK
Kantian Ethics (n.d.) Retrieved from
https://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/gaskilld/ethics/kantian%20ethics.htm#:~:text=Kant's
%20theory%20is%20an%20example,it%20as%20The%20Categorical%20Imper
ative.
Rachel, James and Stuart Rachels. (2018). Elements of moral philosophy, 9th
ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rawls, J. (n.d.) A theory of justice. Retrieved from
https://www.csus.edu/indiv/c/chalmersk/econ184sp09/johnrawls.pdf

7. Flexible Teaching Learning Modality (FTLM) adopted

Modular Distance Learning (MDL) – Module

Online Distance Learning (ODL) – VideoCon/Edmodo, Email,
Messenger, Zoom

8. Assessment Task

a. Reflection Paper
b. Reaction Paper
c. Module Exercises/Activity
d. Critique Paper
e. Situation Analysis