You are on page 1of 6

KINDS OF CONSCIENCE HUMAN VALUE DEVELOPMENT by: Carmelo P. Bautista III to: Miss Ma.

Concepcion Sim 25 April 2011

I. A.

KINDS OF CONSCIENCE Kinds which refer to a personal freedom: 1. Free one is able to assume a personal moral stand with regard to a particular attitude, or moral responsibility for a particular action in a way that is unhindered or unimpeded; so as to be able to claim full responsibility for a particular attitude or action. 2. Unfree ones moral attitude or responsibility for a particular action hindered or impeded by some obstacles or influences (for instance force, fear, anger).

B.

Kinds which refer to objective value: 1. Correct ones subjective perceptions, discernment, dictates and decisions of conscience are in conformity with the objective moral values and demands that one is striving to posses and to express in ones own personal actions **Objective moral values values that are generally accepted as good because they conform to the norm of morality, i.e. the Divine reason which is eternally good and true. 2. Erroneous there is lack of conformity between the objective values and the moral demands that they carry with them, and ones subjective moral perceptions, discernment, dictates, and decisions which an individual has or makes in the habitual or actual levels of conscience. 3. Culpable one is in error through ones own fault, and is therefore responsible for such an erroneous state of conscience. 4. Inculpable one is in error through no fault of ones own, having erred in good faith, while making reasonable attempts to form a correct conscience. **Vincible can be corrected or overcome **Invincible it is not possible to correct the error

C.

Kinds which refer to moral attitude In the process of making the transition from moral awareness to moral act, ones conscience maybe: 1. Lax is remiss or careless in its efforts to clearly perceive and internalize particular moral values. 2. Strict when the conscience ends to judge moral obligations too harshly, especially in an excessively legalistic way, adhering more to the letter than the spirit of the law. 3. Scrupulous a conscience that tends to judge sin to be present where, in fact, there is none.

4. Pharisaical tends to be self-righteous as for ones own moral evaluation is concerned, while tending to be judgmental towards others, making unwarranted conclusions on the basis of external observance of the law. 5. Clear a conscience which confidently and freely acts and with due regard for perceiving, appreciating and internalizing true values and making the proper transition in ones actual conscience when confronted with a moral decision regarding a particular way of acting.

6. Callous this is the worst type of conscience because it has love sensitivity to sin and God; as if the person has no conscience at all. (e.g. criminals).

D.

Kinds which refer to degree of certitude 1. Perplexed one judges it to be equally wrong to act in a particular way, or to refrain from acting, and, therefore, one cannot make a morally good choice. 2. Doubtful the conscience in its efforts to form a clear conscience on a particular attitude or way of acting, lacks sufficient evidence to make or leave judgment. 3. Probable the conscience arrives at a point where it finds security in its own formation of a moral attitude at the habitual level or of a practical judgment at the actual level, even while still admitting the possibility that the opposite maybe true. 4. Certain the conscience is able to reach a degree of certainty in its own formation of moral judgment so that all practical doubts are resolved, and the new conscience is unhesitatingly clear in the actual process of making a sound discernment, dictate and decision in the actual conscience.

II.

HUMAN VALUE DEVELOPMENT Based on several readings, there are two principles on the development of human values. The first one is on a discussion by Laura Evelyn P. Ciabal based on her book, HEALTH ETHICS A GUIDE FOR HEALTH CARE ALLIED PROFESSIONS. The qualities that should be present in ones conscience are: - Free - Correct - Clear - Certain 1. Dimensions of Conscience a. General sense of value which are aware that we should do good and avoid evil. A sure sign of this general awareness is the fact that people argue about right and wrong. There would be no debate if we did not experience the responsibility of choosing between good and evil. Our desire to do the right thing reflects this general sense of value.

b.

Search to discover the right course of action This probing into human behavior and the world is the search for truth. If we are honest in our search, then we turn into a variety of sources for wisdom and guidance. Actual Concrete Judgment After searching for the truth, this is the point when a specific decision must be made.

c.

2. Formation of Conscience Many of us have said: I must follow my conscience. One must follow his/her decision only after she/he has done the nest to search for truth concerning the issue facing him/her. Following ones conscience does not mean doing what one feels like doing. It does not mean to work often-hard work-of discerning what is right and what is wrong. **Obey Your Conscience This principle is actually true but it should be properly understood. Sincere people were oftentimes in trouble because they are faithfully obedient to their conscience without being critical on the validity of their decisions. A mature moral decision is not only a decision to make a good deed that we ought to do but also a choice made in good faith to make what we want ourselves to be. The dignity of the human person implies and demands the rectitude of the moral conscience; that is, its being based on truth. One must seriously seek a right conscience or, in other words, one must try to make sure that ones moral judgment is right. This refers to the precise preparation of ones judgment. A person is called prudent when he chooses according to that judgment. For reaching a right judgment there must be an intellects knowledge of moral laws, and there must be willingness to remove obstacles. The second is based on Lawrence Kohlberg (1971). I. Preconventional Level At this level, the child is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but he interprets the labels in terms of either the physical or hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward, exchange of favors) or the physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. The level is divided into the following three stages: Stage 0: Egocentric judgment. The child makes judgments of good on the basis of what he likes and wants or what helps him, and bad on the basis of what he does like or what hurts him. He has no concept of rules or of obligations to obey or independent of his wish. Stage 1: The punishment and obedience orientation. The physical consequences of action determine its goodness or badness regardless of the human meaning or value of consequences. Avoidance of punishment and unquestioning deference to power are values in their own right, not in terms of respect for an underlying moral order supported by punishment and authority (the latter is stage 4).

not conform

these

Stage 2: The instrumental relativist orientation. Right action consists of what instrumentally satisfies one's own needs and occasionally the needs of others. Human relations are viewed in terms such as those of the market place. Elements of fairness, reciprocity, and equal sharing are present, but they are always interpreted in a physical, pragmatic way. Reciprocity is a matter of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch your", not loyalty, gratitude, or justice. II. Conventional Level At this level, the individual perceives the maintenance of the expectations of his family, group, or nation as valuable in its own right, regardless of immediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only one of conformity to personal expectations and social order, but of loyalty to it, of actively maintaining, supporting, and justifying the order and identifying with the persons or group involved in it. The level consists of the following two stages: Stage 3: The interpersonal concordance or "good boy-nice girl" orientation. Good behavior is what pleases or helps others and is approved by them. There is much conformity to stereotypical images of what is majority or "natural" behavior. Behavior is frequently judged by intention -- "he means well" becomes important for the first time. One earns approval by being "nice". Stage 4: The "law and order" orientation. The individual is oriented toward authority, fixed rules, and the maintenance of the social order. Right behavior consists in doing one's duty, showing respect for authority, and maintaining the given social order for its own sake. III. Post-Conventional, Autonomous, or Principled Level. The individual makes a clear effort to define moral values and principles that have validity and application apart from the authority of the groups of persons holding them apart from the individual's own identification with the group. The level has the two following

and stages:

Stage 5: The social-contract legalistic orientation (generally with utilitarian overtones). Right action tends to be defined in terms of general individual rights and standards that have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole society. There is a clear awareness of the relativism of personal values and opinions and a corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside from what is constitutionally and democratically agreed upon, right action is a matter of personal values and opinions. The result is an emphasis upon the "legal point of view", but with an additional emphasis upon the possibility of changing the law in terms of rational considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in terms of stage 4 "law and order"). Outside the legal realm, free agreement, and contract, is the binding element of obligation. The "official" morality of the American government and Constitution is at this stage. Stage 6: The universal ethical-principle orientation. Right is defined by the decision of conscience in accord with self-chosen ethical principles that appeal to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. These principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical imperative); they are not concrete moral rules like the Ten Commandments. At heart, these are universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity and equality of the human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons.