PRELIM
Ergo as man progressed he
Module 1 Introduction to Ethics
Ethics and Philosophy
What is Ethics? Why is it important to every society? First of all, let
us define Ethics – simply put it is the Philosophy of Life. By critical
thinking it discerns men form brutes making men decide better
than mere a priori judgment. The quality of life men lived is a
testament to man’s mental development. Ethics is the primary
vehicle for men to reach the very purpose of life – the pursuit of
happiness. Ever since civilizations began their baby steps, societies
are created to ensure their security from predators – real or
imagined, they have to create laws but of what use is it if not guided
by reason, and that is where Ethics come in. The written law is used
to ensure order but what is the ultimate source of it all – ethics no
doubt. Ethics made men decide what is right or wrong guided by
reason should ambiguity in the written law persists.
As we all know nothing is perfect, everything has flaws, with that
confusion comes in. Human Ethics are clouded by man’s self-
interest that interpretation to law and order as muddled as needle
in a haystack. As time goes by changes in the environment as well
as the complexities of the human world as well as his thinking
altered the understanding of Ethics. That is an undeniable fact.
Sadly leaders of the modern world lack ethical standards that at
times their morals are condescending.
In the current world we are currently in, there are age-old questions
that even baffled geniuses and they are: 1) what is the supreme
purpose of human living?, 2) What is man’s greatest good and
perfection?, 3) what is the ultimate objective of human strivings, is
it attainable?, 4) what is the summum bonum (highest good) of
human life and 5) what is the root cause and remedy to human
suffering.
Is man intrinsically good or evil? If we are to correlate man as part
of the Animal Kingdom then men are bad. Take for example co-
workers in an office who display “decency” in each other’s presence
but invent stories behind their backs to discredit them to their boss
and gain brownie points a sure sign of a lack of professional ethics.
We might say this is immoral but logical just the same, we live in a
dog-eat-dog world. Survival at all cost is the name of the game.
Which brings us to another philosophical question, why are not
moral acts are not legal and vice versa? Going to church is moral
but why was this not legislated? In the same way, why is divorce
considered immoral to us Filipinos is legally approved in other
societies? The decadence of ethics is not just limited to the business
world. It has even affected every aspect of society, such as sports
and entertainment.
Ethics and Human Development
Humans are not born endowed with ethics as if it is an inherent
charcterisitic; but their behavior jives with human development.
Man initially behaves like brutes, and under human development,
he behaves less morally and more ethically. Ethics and morality are
interchangeable for they are both patterns of human behavior but
in reality are different. Ethics refer to rules provided by an external
source, such as laws, codes of conduct in workplaces or principles
in religions. Morals on the other hand refer to an individual’s own
principles regarding right and wrong.
deviates from his clouded personal beliefs to a more socially
acceptable norm.
Ethical human behavior depend on two things: personal
development and human development. Personal development, in
general, is a process of internalization of values, judgement and
thought; and morally, is a transition from what we should ought to
do, to what is the best thing to do. Human development is the
combination of -collective- personal development and social
development. The ethics of human behavior ranges from the
spectrum of low personal and human development to high
personal and human development. In time, man’s ethical
development will also serve as his transition from a self-indulging
individual to a person endowed with knowledge that will aid him in
his pursuit for happiness.
Module 2 The Scope and Meaning of Ethics
A deeper understanding of Ethics
Ethics is a branch of Philosophy that studies human acts and human
conduct. Although there are subjects that study human conduct
such as Psychology and Sociology. Ethics has a deeper meaning in
its standpoint by further delving into the aspect of human acts.
They are more concerned with the morality of human acts.
Noted definition of Ethics
1. Ethics is the practical science of the morality of human actions
2. Ethics is the scientific inquiry into the principles of morality
3. Ethics is the study of human conduct from the standpoint of
morality
4. Ethics is the science of human acts with reference of right and
wrong
Relation of Ethics with Other Sciences
1. Ethics and Logic – Logic is the science of right thinking and while
Ethics is the science of right living. Thinking and Doing things go
hand-in-hand, we cannot move without thinking right the same
way every action is guided by reason.
2. Ethics and Psychology – The two subjects dealt with the study of
man, human nature and human behavior but that is all their
similarity ends. Psychology only tell us the causes of man’s actions
that may be psychological or physiological but ethics tell us how
man should react. Ethics is interested in moral obligation while
Psychology ends there.
3. Ethics and Sociology – as we all know, Sociology deals with the
study of society as well as the social order that regulates the society
as a whole. But then what is the foundation of their social order if
there is no basis of right and wrong which is Ethics. Any society is
doomed to fail if devoid of correct basis of thinking.
4. Ethics and Economics – Napoleon once said that an army
marches on its stomach, in relation to economics man has to fulfill
is economic needs. The need for material wealth is inherent in man
that there are instances that economic topics needed ethical
principles such as capital-labor relations, profit, interests, money et
al. The need to settle these conflicts must have ethical basis to incur
equitable results.
Morality and Other Phases of Human Life
1. Ethics and Education – Education whether formal or informal is
a never-ending process and is the foundation of man’s moral,
intellectual and physical capacities. But then again education is
illicit if it is not supported by ethics, they say ethics is life the same
way education is intertwined with life. Learning is good but learning
supported by ethics is better inasmuch as ethics is living right.
2. Morality and Law – as mentioned in the previous module, not
everything moral is legal and not everything legal is moral. Meaning
there are good things that do not need legislation and immoral acts
that the State may approve. But to further differentiate them laws
only used external acts while ethics cover man’s “acts” that play in
his mind that will not incriminate him in any statute. For example,
a plan for a robbery if discovered is not criminally liable in any court
of law but ethics said it is a fault for such “act” is intrinsically evil.
3. Ethics and Politics - Man in his constant search for happiness be
it temporal or eternal is never ending. They say politics and ethics
are poles apart – in a certain point that is correct it is the very
reason why politics become dirty for they deviate from ethics.
Man’s insatiable greed for wealth and power thru politics means
absence of ethics. An ideal state should be an ethical state.
4. Ethics and Art – Ethics is about positive morality while art is
beauty. Any work of art that is beautiful, will give a positive outlook
to the looker that will be greatly appreciated. The purpose of art is
for appreciation that is contributory to man’s ethics.
5. Religion and Ethics – Religion is ethics and ethics is religion, they
are interchangeable for the any religious belief tends to ethical
standards in relation to his most fundamental tenet. What unites
them all boiled down to three things namely: a) belief in the
Supernatural, b) man’s beginning and end and c) right living.
Morality and Human Acts
Morality is the quality of goodness or badness in a human act. In
this case, we base judgement on any human act based on its
ethicality. The quality of an act may be justified according to its
gravity. An evil human act maybe considered “right” just as long as
it can be justified which lead us to its norm of morality. By that
term, we mean that the basis for determining its correctness are
the standard of the judging party and the reason why an act is
morally wrong or right.
Human Acts just like the word itself means actions of men that are
done willfully and willingly. Keep in mind that scenarios beyond
human control are not human acts such as rainfall, sunset,
earthquake even the beating of the heart or blood circulation are
beyond human act for these are actions man cannot control. In the
case of assassinations where the culprit pulled the trigger, the gun
is not to blame but the doer of the action that caused taking the life
of another man. Once questioned he has the right to justify his
action as either morally right or wrong.
Module 3 Moral Standards and Human Freedom
Moral Standards
Morality it must be noted, is present only in humanity. Meaning
man can only be moral if he is fully aware of his actions. Brutes have
no morality for they are not guided by reason hence they are not
responsible for their actions and are not classified as human acts.
Let us be guided based on these principles:
1. Man is the only Moral Being – due to three things: a) man is
capable of action, b) man has intellect and c) man has free will.
Being capable of action man can employ his bodily activities to
perform actions. With man’s intellect he can discern the good or
evilness of his actions and at the same time equate the
repercussions of his actions once asked to justify them. Free will is
present and inherent in men unless they are idiots and with that
they have the freedom of choice whether to perform or not the
action at hand.
2. Man is a the highest form of Animal – endowed with intellect,
man can decide what’s best for him although their desires are the
same with brutes such as hunger, thirst, pain and sensual needs;
man moves based on reason while their lower counterparts have
only instinct. Sentient beings like animals rely on instinct which are
natural biological drives, while men can decide whether an act is
moral or not.
3. Man is a rational animal – Ratio is the Latin term for reason that
means man has the power to discern things based on his previous
knowledge of things. Unlike brutes, man has the power of
abstraction – this is his ability to correlate ideas previously based
on his mind as well as his understanding of the situation at hand,
thereby giving him a logical or correct decision.
4. The intellect and the will – they are correlative with each other
because the intellect is the agent of knowing while the will is the
agent of choice. From intellect – knowledge is stored this will then
guide the will to decide which is basically “good”. They co-exist and
from their partnership “virtue” is born.
Voluntariness of Human Acts
A voluntary act is under the control of the intellect and the will and
must be answerable for their actions. As mentioned in the previous
module, only human acts are valid in ethics and at the same time
possess moral significance. There are four types of voluntary acts
and they are:
1. Perfect voluntariness – when a person acts with full knowledge
and complete freedom – we are fully aware of what we are doing
2. Imperfect voluntariness – when a person acts without full
understanding and no freedom – we are made to perform acts we
did not like
3. Simple voluntariness – it is the disposition of a person doing the
activity regardless to his liking or not – this may be positive or
negative. The former is by making him to do something while the
other is to prevent or stop him from doing things.
4. Conditional voluntariness - it is the situation when the person
was forced by circumstances or under duress which he would not
do under normal circumstances. Example is being extorted money
by a neighborhood toughie in exchange for his “protection”.
But what modifiers may cloud the intellect and the will that may
either reduce or increase accountability:
Modifiers of Human Acts:
1. Ignorance – this simply means absence of knowledge. A doer’s
responsibility for his actions may be increased or decreased due to
this. A person may have committed an act for he is unaware of it.
There are three types of ignorance and they are: Vincible ignorance
that can easily be corrected such as calling a person with a wrong
name or entering the wrong classroom. On the other hand
Invincible ignorance – cannot be rectified an example is a waiter
who gave the wrong food to the customer or a killer that claimed
the life of a wrong victim. The third is Affected ignorance – is the
doer’s attempt to escape responsibility such as a suspect denying
his complicity in a crime he has done.
2. Passions – Psychic responses that may adhere or abhor them to
either desirable or undesirable tendencies. Positive emotions such
as love, desire or hope are manifestations of the first while hatred,
horror and despair are example of negative emotions. There are
also two passions such as antecedent and consequent passions
wherein the former are passions that occur before the stimulus
such as accidentally meeting a special someone; while the other
came after a stimuli we ourselves caused for example meeting a
special someone that we are already aware of his arrival.
3. Fear – it is the disturbance of the mind when confronted by
danger to himself or a loved one. Actions whether done with fear
or out of fear may affect one’s action. Acts done with fear are
voluntary while acts done out of fear are two different things. If one
moves with fear this means he has to decide and yet is afraid he
might err an example is an amateur singer performing in front of a
large crowd or driving a vehicle with limited know-how in driving.
Actions out of fear are situations that needed immediate decisions
such as jumping out of a plane about to crash land or run away from
a violent situation.
4. Violence – it is physical force given to a free person to coerce him
to do or not to do something. Physical threats such as torture,
starvation or mutilation are examples of violence but was free will
impaired? No, the free will is still there for they can still resist
making their moral integrity intact, in short, there is still a choice.
5. Habits – readiness to perform habitual acts. Habits are done
mechanically that thinking is no longer necessary may either be
good or bad. It is second-nature to the doer and doing it is instinct.
Module 4 Morality
The Two Fundamental Questions
Two important questions are raised one is “What is Morality” and
“What is the meaning of life?”. The first question pertains to the
rightness or wrongfulness of an act and what is the basis of the
judge concerned. These are ethical questions that up to this time,
baffled sages and peons alike and remain unanswered. The second
is about the summum bonum (ultimate good) of human existence,
what is the very reason why man exists on this world?
In a nutshell, those two questions are related – Ethics is about
morality which is the basis of good, evreytime we decide on
dilemmas using morality men experienced happiness and that is
“good”. The more we attain happiness by being good – the closer
we are to the Ultimate Good. To sum it up, both questions boil
down to two words “goodness” and “purpose”, a thing that is of
use is good for it has served its purpose. For example, a politician is
good if he has fulfilled his promise to the people after serving his
term of office in doing so by being useful to his constituent, he felt
that he lived a worthy life. This will then be a step to reaching his
ultimate goal – the ultimate good. A good life will ultimately lead to
ultimate happiness.
The Norms of Morality
Rationally speaking man acts in accordance to his nature, that
human nature quantify as justification as to why an act be it good
or bad is performed. In doing so it conflicts with the higher
intelligence endowed to men. Is man basically good? We can say
yes but of what context of goodness is man supposed to follow?
The morality of man follows a proximate norm and an ultimate
norm so where does human nature come in? As mentioned earlier
man has baser tendencies that is human nature equivalent to
brutes that may come in the form of stimuli. The proximate norm
there is to follow human nature which is the low end of a human
being. On the other hand, the ultimate norm is to follow divine
nature which are decisions that are based on morality. For example
the stimulus of hunger based on proximate norm simply means to
eat the food regardless as to whether it is for somebody else, spoilt
or poisonous. Human nature dictates that man has to satiate his
hunger no matter what and may be considered moral if we are to
consider human nature. If man decides to study the situation by not
initially grabbing the “opportunity”, then he acted in relation to the
ultimate norm.
However, we are not discarding human nature as a basis of human
existence, man is a social animal which is the nature of man’s need
for association. In truth we can never reach divine status but we
must keep in mind that there is no conflict with the Natural law and
the Eternal law (the Law of God). The Natural is patterned after the
Eternal Law, man must adhere to his nature of man which is using
his intellect unlike human nature that is only to follow his passions.
Defective Norms of Morality
Human Nature is a simple foundation of man but there are
philosophies and they are:
1. Hedonism – this is also known as the Philosophy of Pleasure that
pleasure alone is the primary purpose of man’s existence. It is true
man desires for happiness but a happy life need not be composed
of pleasure alone. True happiness is seeking good but wallowing in
pleasure made man’s life baser than brutes.
2. Utilitarianism – is simply the ends of an action must be good, if
it is not then the action is unjustified. From the word “utility” it
means that anything that is of use to the agent is moral. There are
two types of utilitarianism and they are individual utilitarianism and
social utilitarianism – the first is known as egoism which is the
definition given – the agent is the one who will gain. Altruism is the
other term for social utilitarianism but the receiving factor is the
society where the agent belongs.
3. Moral Rationalism – simply states that human reason is the only
foundation of morality as postulated by German Philosopher
Immanuel Kant which he dubbed as “Categorical Imperative”.
However as Kant further explained we have to do good because we
ought to be good in doing so he is implying blind obedience. In his
philosophy “autonomy of reason”, inasmuch as reason creates the
law, it is “reasonable” for men to obey it without question nor
ambiguity. The general rule is that everyone thinks the same for
men are reasonable so conflict is a remote possibility.

4. Moral Positivism – states that morality is adherence to State

Laws as philosophizes by the English sage Thomas Hobbes. The
State is the foundation of morality since laws are geared for the
common good apparently, an act is moral if he obeys the law and
evil if he disobeys it. Comparing to Moral Rationalism where reason
is the law, Moral Positivism only has the State Law as its source of
morality.

5. Moral Evolutionism – In relation to Sociologist Herbert Spencer,

morality just like evolution is ever-changing until it reached its
perfect form. Friedrich Nietsche added that man was born withj
hardly any basis for right and wrong and their collective lives is a
never-ending struggle for change until they reach perfection.

6. Moral Sensism – Contrary to Moral Evolutionism men are born

with a special moral sense (not reason) that is comparable to the
five senses. For example, man can easily differentiate noise from
music, salty from sweet as well as pleasant and unpleasant that
may also serve as means to moral judgment.

7. Communism - Although this is more of an economic theory its

social implication cannot be denied and is geared for a classless
society. They believed in the philosophy of material dialectics that
means two material things are the only ingredients necessary for
change. They deny the existence of God, the free will and
immortality for they do not matter being immaterial. Ergo, anything
that will lead to a classless society is good and moral and anything
otherwise is evil and immoral.
MID-TERM
Module 5 Dilemma
What is dilemma
A social dilemma is an action situation in which an individual must
decide on his own even if it is against the socially-accepted norms.
It is the situation that measure one’s maturity. Below is the scale
used by Lawrence Kohlbeg in human reasoning.
Lawrence Kohlberg’s sequence of moral reasoning
Situation: You are a loving husband/wife whose spouse was
suffering from terminal cancer. At present, you are unemployed
and cannot provide medicine for your suffering partner. One
morning, your beloved was screaming in pain and you are forced to
find ways to ease the pain or better yet eradicate it. You went to a
drug store that has just opened, and the guard was out at that
moment and the solitary sales agent was busy preparing herself.
The medicine was there but you are penniless to buy it, that is just
within your reach and the chance was ripe to steal it. Will you take
the opportunity for your partner or back track to avoid committing?
Level 1: Pre Conventional Level – The concrete interests of an
individual is merely rewards and punishment. This is a childish
mentality that are only encouraged or discouraged based on what
they can get from the situation at hand.
Stage 1: “Obedience and Punishment Orientation”. People stick to
the rules to avoid punishment
Favor: If partner dies there will be trouble for you since you are the
spouse and must make a move instead of being idle.
Against: If you steal you might get caught if not your conscience will
bother you, this means that you have to make a move otherwise
you will be punished by your conscience by not doing so.
Stage 2: “Reward Orientation” – Rules are followed only for its
benefits. Obedience occurred because of the rewards. It means
that the doer is only after what can he gain from the actions he
perform or did not perform.
Favor: If you steal and got caught just return the just return the drug
and forget everything. Somehow you might end up in jail but the
wife is still alive just the same
Against: The sin committed is not that serious so a life term is
impossible but it will still be a lose-lose situation for this will
temporarily save her life but may end up dead sooner or later.
Level 2: Conventional Morality – People approach problems as
members of society and would like to be a role model.
Stage 3: “Good Boy Morality” - Individuals show an interest in
maintaining the respect of others and is doing what is expected of
them.
Favor: To be a good father is to do everything for his family that if
you do not steal the drug the people will label you as an
“irresponsible father”
Against: If you steal the drug the people will tag you as a “criminal”
and will bring dishonor to your family.
Stage 4: “Authority and Social Order maintaining Morality” –
People conform to what is right in a society.
Favor: If you have a sense of honor, you wouldn’t let your wife die
by denying the only means of saving her life. You will feel guilty and
this will haunt you for the rest of your life.
Against: You are aware that stealing is evil but the effect of that
shall be more painful once you are sent to jail. You will feel guilty
and will haunt you for the rest of your life. You are no longer
honorable.
Level 3: Post Conventional Morality: People use moral principles
which is seen as broader than any particular society.
Stage 5: “Morality of Rights and Laws” – People do what is right as
a sense of obligation to law and society, however they can be
modified.
Favor: If you don’t steal you’ll lose the people’s respect for you
avoided the act because of fear and not reason
Against: If you steal you’ll lose your social standing for violating the
law, don’t get carried away by emotions
Stage 6: “Morality of an Individual Principle and Conscience” – A
person follows laws based on ethical principles. Laws that run
counter to principles are violated.
Favor: If you don’t steal and wife dies you won’t be condemned by
society for you lived up to your own expectations but did not live to
your own standard of conscience
Against: If you steal the drug you will not be blamed by others but
you’ll condemn yourself for not living within your own conscience
and your virtue of honesty.
Module 6 Culture in Moral Behavior
Culture in Moral Behavior Explained
Dr. Emma Butchel in her work, “Challenging the concept of
Morality”, explained a comparison of morality between Chinese
and Western cultures. Both cultures have their respective sense of
morality that even conflicts the other. Her study also focused on
the moral and social concepts these two societies abide. One factor
that polarized these civilizations is their behavior that helped mold
their people to what they are now, as they say tradition outlasts a
lifetime so they can no longer alter moralities that they are already
used to. Both civilizations once immersed with their own, classify
“odd” behavior reprehensible that they branded them as either
major offense, minor offense or at least tolerable however there
are behavior that may be integrated to their civilization. One
example was during the time of Maoist China, western culture was
considered a taboo that fashion for them is a non-entity but with
the transition of Communist China to a capitalism – the very reason
why the Chinese society adhered to Marxist ideology, western
culture made China into one of the richest country in the world.
Cultural bias made people fail to see the moral principle of their
counterpart. Many societies even in the past adhere to
ethnocentrism, an idea that their culture alone is the only thing that
matters and at the same time dismissed others as either “uncouth”
or “barbaric”. So why waste time with societies below their station?
In this case, western morality is “blind” to Asian values and as
mentioned cultural bias clouded their judgment that they can’t
seem to understand the morality of another person’s culture that
is the foundation of their morality.
The Hindus and some Asian countries used arrange marriages to
ensure a good future for their children that western countries find
overlapping with their principles of their freedom of choice.
Another example was raised and it was the educational system that
divided the occidental from the oriental thought. Oriental schools
believed in the “infallibility” of teachers that they are the only
source of knowledge and should not be questioned whereas the
occidentals rely on the idea that students have every right to
debate with their teachers that even the philosopher Socrates
subscribed to. Flexibility and broadmindedness are the two things
that can help bridge the gap between the two opposing cultures.
By opening our minds and removing whatever bias we habe we can
have room to put ourselves in the shoes of others and will help
usher global unity. Man by nature tends to do good so the culture
of other people especially those we held with contempt or mirth
also have goodness in them. There is nothing wrong to understand
another person’s morality devoid of cultural bias.
What is Culture?
According to David Brinkenhoff and Lynn White culture is the whole
idea that provides a blueprint for living. It is a powerful force that
lived in all peoples that tells us what is right from wrong. Eating
dogs for example is tolerated in the Philippines but is totally banned
in the United States and other Western countries. That is because
not everything we do is acceptable to others. According to Alan
Johnson culture is the sum of symbols, ideas, forms, expressions
and material products associated with a social system. Edward
Taylor defined culture as the complex whole which includes beliefs,
arts, laws, morals, customs and habits acquired by people as
members of society.
Symbols are manifestations of culture and are anything that
represents more than itself an example is a cross that to some it is
just an object or figure formed by two short intersecting lines or
pieces but has several meanings. There are four kinds of symbols
namely 1) Symbolic objectives – they may mean a flag to represent
a nation a currency to mean a nation’s medium of exchange. 2)
Symbolic characteristics of object – purple for royalty, yellow for
cowardice and red for war. 3) Gestures – actions that can give
cultural control. 4) Spoken and written words - the most important
set of symbols in every culture for it is the building block used to
construct ideas.
Module 7 Filipino Culture and Morality
Cultural Relativism
Culture relativity is a concept that cultural norms and values must
be understood based on the culture he is adhered to. As the saying
goes, “different strokes for different folks” which simply means that
if I am to understand a situation the explanation must primary
begin with my own culture. According to William Graham Sumner,
in his book entitled “Folkways” written in 1906 culture can only be
understood in its own value and content. Example is December 30
to the Filipinos it is of value for it is Rizal Day but is worthless to the
Americans and the Japanese. On the other hand, February 22 is
Washington’s Birthday to the Americans but of no value to the
Filipinos or the Japanese. Same is true every February 6 which is the
Foundation of the Japanese Empire but is just an ordinary day to
Filipino and American calendars. The example reflects the
significance or insignificance of these dates reflecting a national
holiday to some and an ordinary day to others. In the first place
who is Jose Rizal to the Japanese and Americans but he is adored in
the Philippines. Conversely George Washington is just a face in a
one-dollar bill as far as Filipinos and Japanese are concerned but a
revered persona in America.
Ethics and Cultural Relativism
Before we delve into that let us define ethical relativism, it is the
theory that holds that morality is related to the tenets of his
culture. Right or wrong a certain belief that prevailed in a culture is
shared by everyone. In a nutshell, everybody thinks the same way
considering that anyone who belongs to a certain society
subscribed to every norm they dictated. This is universality in a
culture for as what everyone believed, culture is shared by
everyone and denial of their practices is a pariah among their ranks.
However not everyone shared their beliefs because blind
obedience denies man his fundamental right of his freedom of
choice. With his free will, he can decide what is right or wrong but
he is aware of what his culture dictates him what to obey. For
example During the Second World War, NAZI Germany believed
that the extermination of Jews is the “final solution” that may be
akin to ethnic cleansing. The dictates of their Fuehrer Adolf Hitler
has to be taken into account by every German and is expected that
every German must obey it to the letter. But not all Germans
believed in this among them was German industrialist and war
profiteer Oscar Schindler who saved twelve hundred Jews from the
Auschwitz Concentration Camp to work in his metal factory. This
proves that ethical relativism is untrue. To discuss further, although
Communist China Party Chairman believed in the apogee of
communism of human development and abhorred western culture
his successors believed otherwise among them were Deng Xiaoping
who even went to the US and begin China’s rise to industrialization
–the worst enemy of the communist/socialist ideology.
Filipino psyche and morality
Being a nation of multi-cultural race, Filipinos are also cosmopolitan
that our hospitality extends to almost every nation in the world.
Filipinos are a happy people that are known for their hospitality,
subtleness, patient and fun-loving. Despite coming from a third
world country, personal and family honor are given priority if given
a choice. They value education highly that poverty is not an excuse
to get a scholastic degree. At an early age Filipinos consider shame
as the worst among the negative trait they avoid they value dignity
as an important value in life that they cannot live in a society that
consider them as outcast. Spanish and American colonial rule that
lasted for more than four centuries are the major ingredients in the
Filipino psyche.
Comparing Filipinos to other Asian nations they are generally more
easy-going than their Asian counterparts. In a study conducted by
the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Constituency
(PERC) the Filipinos are "the easiest people in Asia to get along
with." Being a happy people that is understandable. In the 2006
Happy Planet Index (HPI), the Philippines ranked 17th out of 178
countries with the progressive United States at 150. This means to
show that materialism is not a primary source of Filipino happiness.
In a study conducted by Howard, he described Filipinos as nice,
cheerful and open people, everyone is welcomed even social misfits
being the most nonjudgmental and the least racist country in Asia.
Filipino negative traits in an article written by Alisa Krutovsky
mentioned that Filipinos have colonial mentality and are often
tardy during appointments.
Module 8 Morality and Conscience
Morality – a review
Morality according to Perry is man’s effort to harmonize conflicting
human interests. As mentioned in the past modules morality of a
person is different from another person. One example is the case
of public execution. There are some sectors in the Philippine society
that consider this evil for taking life ran contrary to their belief that
taking human life is against the laws of God. On the other hand
public execution especially the most humane type that is lethal
injection is a necessity to curb men from committing evil deeds, a
necessary evil so to speak. Morality is the goodness or evilness of
the act that may be justifiable. People mistook that anything that
we find good is moral because man’s pursuit of happiness is the
primary reason why we live in this world. This is not true, for man’s
desire to be good is innate in him and may prevent his pursuit of
such act. A married man might entertain extra-marital affairs,
especially to a lovely woman that also implied interest in him and
for him that is “good” for that is a means to his pursuit of happiness.
But then again he might neglect this passion once he recalled his
marital vows which is the greater good.
Values
Values are anything that satisfies human needs. Aristotle once said
that the ultimate good is to find things that will give us happiness
and that is where happiness comes in, he further added that value
is a “fitting function” –anything that is important or significant to
us. Anything that enriched our life or at least made it meaningful
such as a special someone, a friend, our laptop, our birthdays or
anything that is special are values. Even our beliefs and principles
are values that we even shared to our offspring that will guide them
to their adulthood. Values may also come as actions of our own or
of others that we classify good acts are values while evil acts are
not because they result to unhappiness. Morally good values are
genuine for their goodness are evident whereas evil are called
apparent values for they are evil things masquerading as good.
Kinds of Values
1. Biological values – they are important because they for the
physical survival and growth of man examples are food, shelter,
work, pleasure, medicine and the likes.
2. Psychological values – this contributes to his psychological and
social life examples are companionship, friendship, marriage etc.
3. Intellectual values – this developed man’s mental fulfillment
such as truth, science, art and religion
4. Moral values – this is for the formation of one’s character.
Examples are generosity, kindness, charity and honesty
Conscience
Is a feeling or inner voice that served as a guide to the correctness
or error of one's behavior. Some authors viewed it as the “inner
law” or the “sixth sense” that gives premonitions to acts we are to
perform or acts we already did. Where did this come from? Moral
conscience is innate idea that simply follow God’s unwritten dictum
of “follow good and obey evil”. Man is basically good for man is a
creation of God, being the source of goodness, He created man
endowed with free will but induced conscience to make sure His
words are heard.
An upright conscience is a necessity for human dignity, because it
knows moral principles and practiced them in each circumstance.
Only prudent judgments can recognize the truth. Anyone who
follows his conscience is prudent for he is guided not only by human
reason but by the voice of God. God is the source of the truth and
through conscience man can grasp a semblance of reason.
Inasmuch as conscience is present in man he assumes
responsibility. When an evil act is performed, he realized his error
by feeling remorse for his action then later regret it, which is a
manifestation of conscience. An act that is willfully done is
appeared to be guided by conscience thereby responsibility is
undeniable.
The Greatest Good
Jeremy Bentham a British philosopher during the 19th Century
answered that question when he said that the “greatest good is for
the greatest number”. He introduced Utilitarianism that is simply
states that the ends of an action must be good, if it is not then the
action is unjustified. Which is simply anything of use is good while
useless are evil. But like a double-edged sword it also has a good
side, he implied the spirit of humanity where everyone lived in
single planet and their desire to be happy and goodness are innate
in man. Everybody wants to be happy, so the best thing is to follow
happiness and goodness that is common to everyone. Being
children of God, we have identical aspirations, so whatever we find
good might also be good to others.
Module 9 Feelings and Moral Decisions
What are feelings and emotions?
Before we begin this discourse, let us differentiate feelings and
emotions. Feelings are defined as an emotional state or reaction
while emotions are distinctive feeling distinguished from reasoning
or knowledge. Simply put emotions or feelings do not play any role
in a human act and is not justifiable with regard to moral decisions.
As mentioned in many books human acts are human actions men
perform knowingly, freely and voluntarily. Ergo a human act must
have these three qualifications a) he must be fully be aware of what
he is doing or what he will do, b) he used his freedom of choice to
decide using his innate free will and 3) his decision is not coerced
by any outside factor. Feelings and emotions are one and the same
for it plays merely to the weakness of men which some sociologists
dubbed as “human frailties”. It can never be used as an excuse for
our negative actions for if we allow our emotions to “decide” then
we are not acting as human beings. Brutes react only to mere
instincts for they lack reason, emotions are devoid of reason and
rely to spur-of-the-moment decisions or the mood of the doer.
The ethics of Love
Many people are confused between love and emotions. We think
that emotions are strong because of love for it propels people to
feel it. We have to refute this perverted claim, in the scientific world
emotions can be seen through the face of the doer (see emoticons)
from there we can discern happiness, sadness, anger and content
but what moves them, it is not love but drives. By drive me mean
the cravings of men that they simply can’t do without such as
hunger, need for sex, companionship and the likes. From these
needs man developed a desire to acquire them by any means
possible and emotions are born, if we succeed in doing so we felt
happy or contented if not it lead to frustration that may later result
into anger or sadness. These craving of man boosted his
competitive nature that he won’t stop until he achieved it. In short,
emotions are simply attachments that resulted due to man’s
desires. Love on the other hand is an intense feeling of deep
affection that is also a drive but compared to emotion which is
solely for self-aggrandizement, love does not necessarily have to be
reciprocated. Man can love another person, thing or event even if
it does not render love in return. In relation to love when it comes
to moral decision such love is acceptable just as long as it is guided
by morality and reason.
Vice and Virtue
Socrates once said that, “knowledge is virtue and ignorance is vice”.
We got these things from the habits we obtain from dealing with
people in our everyday lives. A virtue is a trait or quality that is
deemed to be morally good and thus is valued as a foundation of
principle and good
moral being while vice is the opposite is what we know as vice.
Different from feelings, this is not a spur-of-the-moment affair, this
develops as man progressed intellectually and physically. Bad
habits develop into vice that as mentioned earlier the opposite of
virtue.
Moral Values – are those pertaining to the functions of the intellect
and the will – that may be our choices, decisions and actions that
became habits. This later will develop spiritual growth that is part
of human perfection. Moral values have the following
characteristics: a) they have intrinsic work – they are good acts in
themselves without any shadow of doubt, b) they are universally
accepted by all people and c) they are obligatory which means
everyone is expected to abide by it considering that it is a
universally accepted good.
Guidelines for choosing values:
1. Paramount or lasting values over temporal ones
2. Values favored by the majority instead by a few individuals
3. Essential values must be preferred over the accidental
4. Moral values must be preferred over physical values
Module 10 Human Reasoning
Human Reasoning
Reason is the capacity for consciously making sense of things,
establishing and verifying facts, applying logic, and changing or
justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or
existing information. In short, this is the ability of man to decide
which is also the same way how morality is. But let us make a
discernment here, as Immanuel Kant explained, morality is the
usage of our freedom of choice but is based on what we want, this
is purely based on the necessities men needed to fulfill such as the
freedom to do whatever we want. Human reasoning is our sense of
obligation to do what is right even if we do not want to do it. For
example we have fifty pesos in our pocket and we went to a
canteen to satisfy our need for food. In the counter, we see a plate
of fried chicken and a bowl of hot noodles, you want them both so
morality tells us to make a choice. But circumstance denied you
these things for they cost beyond your allowance and cannot spare
additional cash from your transportation allowance so you have to
choose only one to fit within your means – that is where reason
comes in.
Reason is a feature that is characteristic of men and without it they
are not classified as such. Reason is a tool for the man to cognizance
as well as our guide to correlate to the absolute truth (God). It must
be noted though that it is reason just as long as man can act on
them, supernatural truth is beyond human reason. Stimuli such as
human sensation, perception, and observation that the five senses
can perceive are part of man being part of the animal kingdom but
the power transforming sensuous stimuli into experience is
inherent in man’s intellect denied to brutes. With it, he alone can
arrange his experience that will later guide him in his decisions. In
any human endeavor, action is secondary to thinking. Thinking is a
deliberate act of anticipating future events that might come by
reflecting past actions or occurences. Thinking and acting are
inseparable. Every action rests upon the foundation of an idea
related to causal relations. Casual relations developed theories that
guide human action. Action without basis is absurd but acting
without thinking is ludicrous. The reason for his action may be
erroneous and his understanding of the situation is muddled; but
thinking and theorizing are still present so his action might be
“valid” or at least acceptable. Thinking is an individual process,
society does not think for man even if his customs, traditions or
laws are dictated by the society an individual belongs. There is joint
action, but no joint thinking, meaning people can be moved into a
collective action but collective thinking is impossible. People often
subscribe to common sense but the trouble with common sense is
that it is not common. People can never think the same hence there
is no common sense.
In the religious point of view, God created human beings aside from
his image and likeness as rational creations capable of reason.
Divine Revelation that may center on the salvation of the soul or
foreboding natural catastrophes are in harmony with reason.
Reason is God and comes from God so human reason is the only
way of understanding Him.
Types of Human Reasoning
1. Deductive Reasoning– it is the form of reasoning in which a
conclusion follows logically and coherently from the factual
premises and proposition. Arguments are based upon the concept
of logical reasoning. In doing so the premises which the conclusion
hinges its validity that if they are true then the resulting statement
are true and valid. This is plain logic.

2. Inductive Reasoning– refers to reasoning that takes specific

information and makes a broader generalization that is considered
probable, allowing for the fact that the conclusion may not be
accurate. This type of logic also uses experiences to come up with
conclusions based on general observations coming from
occurrence that might give similar results. To differentiate,
Deductive reasoning began with a premise while Inductive
reasoning begins with a conclusion. Examples Deductive Reasoning
– The Pope is the Representative of God, God is never wrong
therefore The Pope is never wrong. Inductive Reasoning – Mark
shows a golden ring to his friend Paul, Mark said he will marry
Martha therefor Paul thinks Martha will receive the ring.

3. Abductive Reasoning – is a method of reasoning in which one

chooses the hypothesis that would, if true, best explain the relevant
evidence. It is a type of reasoning that gets its conclusion in an
abductive argument of what is possibly true. This type of logic is
also considered as inference to the best explanation. It is choosing
the most likely or best hypothesis or explanation based upon the
most relevant evidence. Example: You wake up in the morning and
you see that your roommate has left but you see a half-eaten food
in the kitchen then you abduce that he left early.

4. Reductive Reasoning – It is proving a statement true by reducing

to the opposite of it and showing the absurdity of the opposite
result. A statement is true based on reducing or showing the
absurdity of the opposite result. It is also called Reductio ad
absurdum (Latin: “reduction to absurdity”). Example: People do not
go to college because they don’t need it.

5. Fallacious Reasoning– It is not real reasoning, it is the faulty

premises for critical thinking and logic. Example: God is love , love
is blind ergo God is blind.

The seven steps to moral ethical decisions

1. State the problem – what is the dilemma one is facing

2. Check the facts – find out if the problem can easily be solved by
mere speculations alone or there is still a need for a deeper means
of resolving it.

3. Identify the relevant and irrelevant factors – there are things

that are contributory in answering the question but we have to
separate from those that might help or not.

4. Develop the list of options – by options we mean sources beyond

what we are aware of that may be a list of sources person or books
that might help in answering the dilemma.

5. Prepare test questions – that might give us possible solutions

6. Choose the best answer

7. If need be, review steps 1 – 6.

FINAL
Module 11 Courage and Moral Courage
The Virtue of Courage
Courage is defined as taking action even one doubts or questions
about the consequences of his actions. Courage is often a
stereotype about soldiers giving their lives for the country;
sometimes is accepting defeat after a hard-fought struggle.
Courage is on a daily basis because everything that mattered to us
require this trait. We feel deep courage and strength to protect our
children either from sickness or bodily harm that we risk our lives
just to secure them. Courage comes even to the most cowardly for
it is innate in man. Mary Anne Radmacher, author of “Lean forward
into your life” mentioned in that poew “Courage doesn’t always
roar. Sometimes courage is the silent voice at the end of the day
that says ‘I will try again tomorrow’.”
Types of Courage
1. Physical Courage - This is the courage most people often
subscribes to - bravery at the risk of bodily harm or death. In order
to attain this must develop his physical strength, resiliency, and
awareness.
2. Social Courage - This type of courage is common to most of us
because it involves the risk of social embarrassment or exclusion,
unpopularity or rejection. It also involves leadership. Adhering to
socially-accepted norms is a mandate all members have to follow
to avoid being a social outcast.
3. Intellectual Courage - This talks about our willingness to engage
in cerebral fitness by raising questions on things we know and will
know, as well as to avoid the risk of making mistakes.
4. Moral Courage - This involves doing the right thing, particularly
when risks involve shame, opposition, or the disapproval of others.
Details will be discussed in the next topic.
5. Emotional Courage - This type of courage opens us to feeling the
full spectrum of positive emotions, at the risk of encountering the
negative ones. It is strongly correlated with happiness.
6. Spiritual Courage – Courage that deals with questions about
faith, the purpose, and meaning of life whether in a religious or
nonreligious framework.
Moral Courage
Moral courage is the courage to take action for moral reasons
despite the risk of adverse consequences and it requires
deliberation and careful thought. Moral courage entails a
person’s strength of character and must be willing to face risks in
order to act according to his or her values and beliefs. Moral
courage is the strength to stand up to authority to protect his or her
soldiers’ welfare or defend his or her decisions. This virtue develop
leaders that are followed by their inferiors without any iota of
doubt. Integrity is gained by leaders who perform their jobs even if
they do not want it because they knew their leader has their trust
and confidence.
Module 12 Aristotle on Virtue
Virtue according to Aristotle
Aristotle believed that virtue (arête) is a trait of mind or character
that helps us achieve a good life guided by reason. Virtues may be
intellectual and moral. The first deals with qualities of mind and
character that promote critical thinking, and the pursuit of truth.
Moral virtues talks about behaving in the right manner that
differentiate need from avarice that lead to vice. Aristotle
mentioned that anything that is passion, a faculty or a state (trait)
of character is part of the soul (the mind) that regulates vice and
virtue. Virtues are part of the soul, they must be in union with the
following:
1. Passions: By ‘passions’ we mean our bodily needs and stimuli
(examples are the need for food, drink, sex, etc.), our emotions, and
any feelings that accompany either pleasure or pain. We must keep
in mind though that these cannot be virtues per se because. a.
passions cannot exactly define a goodness or character of a person.
b. We can never choose our passions because it is inherent in
person, however virtues are related to the choices we make. we
cannot will what we want for passions come to man it is only his
decision in relation to that passion that create virtues. c. Virtues
center only on our responses; they are not desires that actually
motivate us.
2. Faculties: are stimuli that we get from our senses. They are not
actually virtues but these perceptions can guide us in the creation
of virtues.
3. Virtues must be states of character. Aristotle defines it as ‘the
things in virtue of which we stand well or badly with reference to
the passions’. Character is formed, by means of a person’s decisions
in relation to what they feel, how they think, how they react, the
choices they make, as well as their reaction based in a given
situation. For example someone is short-tempered often to feel
angry at the slightest provocation; quick-witted people can think
and decide in an instant and so on. Character traits last much longer
and change less easily than many ‘states of mind’, such as moods
and desires. But as what everybody believes character changes as
well.
Aristotle’s Telos Philosophy
Aristotle widely known as the ancient Greek father of western
philosophy, believed that there is purpose in life, and he called that
purpose as telos. The word might be interchanges with ‘purpose,’
‘intent,’ ‘end,’ or ‘goal,’. Aristotle for his part, termed it as the
inherent purpose of each thing. He refers it as the ultimate reason
for each thing being the way it is, regardless as to whether it was
man-made or created by nature.
Man-made objects
Take for example a coffee mug. A simple definition is that it is metal,
plastic or ceramic-handled object that can carry hot liquid; but the
mug reveals other purpose. You can’t use your coffee mug to
contain petrol or book cover. Describing the color, texture or height
of the object might be useful; but doing so would miss the most
important thing about it, it’s very reason for existing – it’s telos. The
coffee mug was created by humans to drink of coffee with, and
every human artifact is made for a specific purpose—chairs for
sitting, cars for driving, television shows for entertaining.
Natural Objects
What about natural objects? Do they have inherent purposes? Can
we make a definition of them sans any reference to religious
beliefs? Aristotle said that the telos of a plant or animal is also ‘what
it was made for’ that we can be observe. For example, the trees’
purpose is to grow, develop branches, produce fruit, nuts, or
flowers, provide shade, and reproduce. The telos of a tree is
something that can make use of its full potential –the very purpose
why it was created. Some observers include the telos of a tree is it’s
eventually decaying and death, and perhaps that is part of it, but
Aristotle could disagree by saying that the telos of a thing is that
which it does when it fulfills its full potential.
Humans
Humans according to Aristotle, has happiness as the telos for
human beings. The Greeks termed it as or eudemonia that also
means something more like “fulfillment.” By what Fulfillment is he
speaking of? Man of all beings has the potential for excellence, or
“virtues” in English translations of Aristotle. Aristotle defined
“virtue” as referring to artistic, scientific, athletic, or any other kind
of excellence. When man performed a chore such as painting a
masterpiece, winning an athletic event or aspiring for scholastic
honors happiness can be achieved once one aims for perfection.
Aristotle’s definition of Happiness
"Happiness depends on ourselves." More than anybody else,
Aristotle enshrines happiness as a central purpose of human life
and a goal in itself. As a result, he devotes more time in pursuing
happiness than any other topic to think about in the modern era.
Living during the same period as Mencius, but on the other side of
the world, he draws some similar conclusions. Aristotle was
convinced that in order to attain a completely happy life requires
the fulfillment of a broad range of conditions, including physical as
well as mental well-being. Essentially, Aristotle argues that virtue is
achieved by maintaining the Mean, which is the balance of the mind
to a state of equilibrium.
Module 13 The Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas
St. Thomas Aquinas – The Angelic Doctor
St. Thomas Aquinas is also known as Doctor Angelicus or “Angelic
Doctor” because of his chastity that remained with him until he
died. Angels are pure and being a Doctor of the Church he was
called as such. He was born on 1224 at Roccasecca, near Aquino, in
Sicily where he got his surname. He died on March 7, 1274 at
Fossanova, Italy; and was canonized as saint on July 18, 1323. He
was an Italian Dominican theologian and one of the leading
Scholars of the Medieval Period. He developed his own conclusions
based on Aristotelian logic, notably in the study of Metaphysics (the
study of the existence of God) that personality, creation, and
Providence. As a theologian he was responsible for the
masterpieces namley, the “Summa Theologica” – a compendium,
of church teachings for the laity and the “Summa Contra Gentiles”
(Summary against the Gentiles) which is a guidebook for
missionaries who might debate Moslems and Jews in the East. As a
poet, he wrote some of the most gravely beautiful eucharistic
hymns for church services.
St. Thomas Aquinas on The Natural Law
What is the Natural Law: Do Good and Avoid Evil. Man is born
intrinsically good and being molded in the image and likeness of
God this law is natural to every human being. St. Thomas Aquinas
based his doctrine on the aforementioned law being a prelate
himself. Based on his theory, the Natural Law is a reflection of the
Eternal Law (in God). In order to explain the existence of the Eternal
Law, he gave a definition of all laws: Law is an ordinance of reason
promulgated by the one in charge of the society. Laws are dictated
by reason and it is the reason or intellect of the ruler that propels
the creation of laws. The purpose of law is for a well-ordered
function of community under the sovereign’s care. (This political
theory of St. Thomas Aquinas believed that rulers rule for the sake
of the governed. By well-being, we mean the good and betterment
of his subjects.) With his idea that God rules the world with his
reason, Aquinas concludes that God has an idea on how to govern
the world. This Idea, in God, for the governance of things is the
eternal law.
The Natural Law, which is an extension of the Eternal Law applies
to human beings, requires greater precision because of the fact that
we have reason and free will. It is the nature of humans to act freely
(by being free from outside intervention and coercion) by
synchronizing our acts and ends. Human beings must exercise our
natural reason to discover what is best for us in order to achieve
the end to which their nature inclines. Natural Law tells us that it is
natural for humans to achieve their ends through reason and free
will. In other words, the Natural Law is humans' participation in the
Eternal Law, through reason and will that helped them discern good
from evil thereby giving them a happy contented life.
The Philosophy of Happiness and The Universal Man
In relation to Human happiness, Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas
agreed that man is constantly searching for happiness. But St.
Thomas believed that with the immortality of Human Soul
happiness can be achieved and it can be found in God alone. The
Universal Man, according to Aristotle whom he also calls “The
Whole Man” is a reasonable man. St. Thomas believed that while
man exists on earth he must possess an eternal and infinite
perfection. Despite the presence of material things, man is not
perfectly happy. While man lives on earth his happiness is mortal
finite and perfect but upon the attainment of the Supreme Purpose
man’s happiness is divine, immortal and perfect.
Module 14 The Philosophy of Immanuel Kant
Man and Duty
Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher that believed in the
dignity of human reason, duty, goodwill and the ends of human
actions. But first, let us begin with duty – it simply means that it is
anything that has to be done or omitted. Others believe that it is a
moral obligation one has to do but within the framework of human
freedom. There are four kinds of duty namely:
1. Natural Duty – These are moral duty of citizens to obey the laws
of their state and God in relation to the Eternal Law. Examples are
the duty to worship God or the duty to value human life
2. Positive Duty – An obligation to do an act, on the part of the
person on whom it is imposed. Examples are the duty to hear mass,
pay taxes and tuition fees
3. Affirmative Duty – these are things that adhere to moral
obligation. Examples are the inherent law of doing good and
avoiding evil, helping the poor, aid the needy and the likes.
4. Negative Duty – Moral obligation to avoid or refrain from doing
something. Examples are prohibitions of “no smoking”, “no
littering” or “loitering” as well as legal decisions.
Kant’s philosophy revolved around the dignity of Human Reason.
Man has gift or reason and free will and the master of his destiny.
Man is the only creature who can create his own destiny and is the
end not the means of God’s creation. Man having a free will should
never exploit his fellow men that slavery, bribery and any form of
human exploitation degrades men into beasts which is morally
wrong. God created all things as means and Man is an end being an
instrument of God’s Divine Plan. Man’s primary duty is to make sure
that God’s Divine Plan of being like Him is implemented but in
accordance with his free will.
Kant’s Philosophy of Good Will
Contrary to the Aristotelian and Thomistic philosophies that
mentioned Moral Law came from God and was made undisputed
by Man through his conscience for conscience came from Him. Kant
believed that reason made all laws and makes everyone obey all
laws at the same time this is called the “Autonomy of reason”.
Reason is endowed in men that laws are created because there is
reason for it and that is to reach a reasonable end. Man is the only
being capable of grasping the truth, according to Kant it can only be
seen through sense experience (sensation felt by the senses). We
can only grasp the tangible and phenomenon never the noumenon
(unexplainable events). Man cannot know the very essence of the
thing itself for man cannot know everything. Man will never know
what is right from wrong since there is no certainty in this world.
So what is Good Will then, Kant means to act out of a sense of moral
obligation or "duty". The German Scholar believed that the Eternal
Law “do good and avoid evil” is inherent in man, meaning that there
is goodness in every man that no matter how evil they are, the
tendency to do good or wanting something good is innate in man.
The will is his ability to pursue his good with help of human reason
but then again the goodness or badness of an act lies in the purpose
why had he done it. Not all good acts are good in itself such as a
politician doling out goods to typhoon victims or an adversary
delivering a eulogy to a fallen opponent. Good Will is the reason
why he made such action and the ends he wanted to achieve upon
doing it.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
This philosophy of Immanuel Kant is a derivation of The Golden Rule
mentioned in the Chinese Classics “Do not do unto to others what
you do not want others to do unto you”. In his case he “Act only in
accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same
time will that it become a universal law”. To sum it up that is a
command or an imperative. There are two kinds of imperatives
hypothetical and categorical, let us differentiate. The former are
commands that are dependent on the goals to be fulfilled. These
are commands that apply only in particular circumstances, for
particular people who happen to have these desires, these goals.
Examples are brushing your teeth to avoid bad breath, go to school
to fulfill your scholastic needs and the likes. Categorical Imperatives
are commands that are universal and impartial. It encompasses
every reasonable being regardless of their origin, culture or social
standing and at the same time they have to perform these in
respect for the dignity of everyone which devoid of their bias or
inclinations. Universal Love is an example of Categorical Imperative,
World Peace is another.
The Kingdom of Ends
Immanuel Kant believed in the dignity of human reason but also of
the free will. As mentioned in past modules man is endowed with
free will and human reason to decide but if they are coerced then
their freedom of choice is hampered making them less of a human
being. Dignity of man should not be compromised. The Kingdom of
ends is the idea of a state equal to Sir Thomas More’s Utopia. Kant
defines it as, "a systematic union of different rational beings
through common laws". But is it attainable? He believed it is
because as long as men think the same way which he deemed as
“categorical imperative” it is attainable. The Kingdom of ends has
three ingredients: the members, the sovereign, and the private
ends which the members have. The members refer to reasonable
free-willed persons, who obey universal laws. They are ends in
themselves and are willing to spread their ideals to others absent
of personal biases. The sovereign is perceived to be God for he is
not subject to any law but has no “power” to break the law itself he
is a role-model that the members will subscribe to. The private ends
of the members are the goals they wanted to achieve that will
benefit everyone that might refer to categorical imperatives. In this
kingdom, human degradation, slavery and exploitation for the
private ends they wanted to attain are for everyone’s benefit.
Module 15 Rights
What are Rights?
Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or
entitlement. Rights are part of modern civilizations, and are
regarded as established pillars of society and culture. Conflicts in
history such as war, for example, began and end with rights.
Democracy protected the rights of individuals, property and
privileges that is a thing men can never do without. Human rights
are moral principles that describe standards of human behavior
protected by law. They are considered as inalienable and
fundamental, which means they can be given and taken away once
abused and is a necessity for human existence. Human rights are
inherent among human beings because that is part of their
existence regardless of their race, color or creed. It must be noted
that human rights may be protected by law but if abused, as
mentioned will be taken away but with due process. The
“aggrieved” party may lose his fundamental rights backed up by a
court litigation and at the same time mete punishment for his
mistake.
Types of Human Rights:
1. Civil and Political Rights - “civil-political” rights center on political
liberties dealing with politics. They are strongly individualistic and
negatively constructed to protect the individual from the state.
These rights got their origin from Thomas Paine’s “Rights of Man”
that is part of the democratic process. Civil rights include the
security of peoples' well-being, the protection from discrimination,
and the exercise of freedoms of speech, freedom, press and
assembly. By Political Rights we mean natural justice such as the
right of the accused to fair trial, redress of grievances and legal
remedies.
2. Socio-Economic and Cultural Rights – are human rights
guarantee equal conditions and treatment of necessities provided
by the State. These include the human right employment, the right
to a high quality of life, including the basic needs of food, clothing,
and shelter and the right to social security, healthy environment,
and education. These rights are part of the body of human rights
that resulted after World War II.
3. Collective-Developmental Rights – the right of peoples and
groups to development in relation to states’ rights to public
assembly. This is for the protection of associations and groups with
the help of the state in its well-being.
Rights versus Privileges
A privilege is an entitlement to immunity granted by the state or
another authority to a restricted group on a conditional basis. On
the other hand a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held
by all citizens or all human beings from the moment of birth. What
is the difference, privilege refers to special powers or immunities
held as a consequence of political power, social status, or wealth.
Any local citizen has the right to elect a public official but having a
driver’s license is a privilege for it cannot be demanded. Such
government ID needed exams to pass and laws to follow. Privileges
elevate a person, that granted them status and power that not
everybody can claim. Both of them however can be taken away
once abused.
Moral Right versus Legal Right
As explained in the past modules not everything moral as legal and
vice versa but we will give an in-depth analysis of that in this
module. Moral rights are rights accorded under some system of
ethics. Moral rights adhere to the idea that men are to be respected
because they are rational people. This includes the right to fair
treatment and right to privacy. That is, if Pedro has the right to
these things Juan also being a human being must also be given the
same privileges.
Legal rights are people’s rights under some legal system, granted
by the government or any duly-constituted authority. Everyone has
the right to know the veracity of a news item that the State may
upheld the right to information but cannot force the people to
believe in it.
Module 16 The Philosophy of Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism
This philosophy is also known as Consequentialism that says the
rightness or wrongness of an object depends on the effect of the
consequence regardless of the method it utilized. There are two
kinds of utilitarianism and they are Act utilitarian and Rule
utilitarian, the first believed about the goodness or badness of a
particular act. An example is the assassination of former Indian
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1984 that was an act of murder by
the civilized people but to the perpetuators it was an act beneficial
to the maligned Indian minority. Rule utilitarian means the
goodness or evilness of an act itself. Say abortion may be an evil act
but Western civilization view it as a means to combat population
explosion. Morality is defined, simply as increasing good and
decreasing evil by eliminating traditions, taboos or archaic beliefs
that obstruct human development. These age-old beliefs put man
in a “primitive” way of life that denied their right to free-will and
are a bane to human behavior. The proponents of this theory were
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill wherein the first thought
about this idea and later shared to his pupil which the latter
propagated for humanity albeit with his own interpretation.
Despite being thinkers of the 18th Century their ideas were utilized
by the present generation but were doubted for its absurdities.
That even today the ideas of these scholars were unsure as to they
tend to Act Utilitarian or Rule Utilitarian. Their writings are
ambiguous that they have no idea what utilitarian act they
subscribe.
The Philosophies of Bentham and Mill
Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) proposed utilitarianism in this
premises: 1) Human life is greatly-affected by pleasure and pain; 2)
consequences of actions are caused by pleasure and pain; 3) the
idea of anything pleasurable is good and anything painful is evil is
absolute; and 4) Pleasure and pain can be quantified. To sum it up,
man’s happiness is quantified by either pleasure and pain and
nothing else. They can be measured according to the following
criteria such as: intensity, duration, certainty and nearness.
John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873) for his part clarified his professors’
stand by making his own counterpoint: 1) the quality of happiness
is more important than its quantity; 2) the quality of happiness
cannot be measured for these things are felt and no amount of
calculation can quantify it; 3) Mill believed in the idea of the
“General Happiness of the People” that happiness can be felt by
everyone, in short common happiness.
Positive and Negative Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is famous for its maxim “Greater happiness for the
greater number” and believed in the premise that while man’s
purpose in this world is to be happy, we must only think more of
happiness and neglect misery in our lives. Which brings us to
Positive Utilitarianism which adheres to the maxim mentioned,
while is negative counterpart centers on its complete contradiction
“least misery for the least number of people”. It must be noted,
though that both are absurd because suffering is part of human
existence that comes in great numbers that made a considerable
number of people suffering as well. Negative utilitarianism is also
impractical if not totally ludicrous because by experiencing misery
we became emotionally stronger inasmuch as it is triumph over
adversity, life is not a bed of roses anyway. Positive Utilitarianism is
also preposterous for happiness may not be attained by everyone
and anyone might not feel the same way. For example, if we are
happy inflicting pain to another being a sadist will the receiving
party feel pleasure? Certainly not unless he is a masochist.
Business Utilitarianism
As mentioned earlier, the rightness or wrongness of an action is
based on the consequence regardless of the method employed. We
can also connect that to the common adage “the end justifies the
means” just as long as it benefits the society where one belongs.
Conversely speaking, any action is valid as long as it is for the
“greater good for the greater number”. Now let us correlate
Utilitarianism to Business, four things have to be kept in mind:
1. Business depends upon the consequence of an action ergo
consequentialism – as mentioned the validity of the action is the
consequence or the attainment of its ends. This type of belief is
considered bad because this is practically permitting the profiteers
of exercising avarice by jacking up price of commodities and at the
same time using substandard goods and services just as long as they
attain of raking cash at the expense of good business.
2. Business depends on welfarism – by welfarism we mean an act
is valid if the society where one belongs subscribed to that similar
understanding. This is has positive effects because it deals with the
well-being of the society such as raising the salaries of the workers
that the State (unless they adhere to Command economy practiced
by Communists) approved.
3. Business is individualism – this centers on the happiness of the
consumer while the first two ideals are for the businessmen and the
workers respectively. In this concept, the businessmen will give
quality goods and services at affordable prices devoid of profit but
merely public service.
4. Business is aggregation – by aggregation this means the
rightness or wrongness of an action is dependent in only on the
average values of all the individual, egalitarian in the real sense of
the word. It simply means that happiness should be shared by all
sectors of business – the businessmen, workers, buyers and society.
Module 17 Justice and Fairness
What is Social Justice?
Plato in his writing “The Republic” dubbed social justice as
Pantheism because he compared justice or fairness as the universe
in its entirety that is moved by an invisible source. The universe has
been here since time immemorial and no one can determine the
age but why is it that it never collided and still “in order”? He
defined justice as universal, absolute and eternal. But what is
justice, Merriam and Webster defined it as, the maintenance or
administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment
of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or
punishments. So to correlate that with Plato’s “The Republic”, the
components of justice is harmony and unity. But that can never be
attained if there is no State which is the very purpose why the need
for state, politics and law is a must in every society.
Social Justice only came in to being during the 19th Century in the
Industrial Revolution to be exact by European counties. The
populace who were fed up by their monarchs demand justice and
fairness based on the premises of equality among men and to
resolve capitalist exploitation. This later expanded to issue such as
rights of the poor, equal distribution of wealth, race, gender and
the likes. Aristotle, Plato’s most apt subordinate gave his own
definition when he said, "equals should be treated equally and
unequals unequally” that means that individuals must be treated
the same but if necessity dictates there are exceptions. For
example, John and Joanne are both workers in the same factory and
in the same position and are having the same compensation.
However, there are things may differ when it comes to age, sex,
educational background or religious belief.
State and Law
State is a community of persons more or less numerous
permanently occupying a definite territory having a government of
their own to which a great body of inhabitants render habitual
obedience and enjoying freedom from external control. A State has
the following elements namely: 1) People: Mass of population living
within the state; 2) Territory: Land, maritime, aerial and fluvial area
over which jurisdiction exists; 3) Government: The agency through
which the will of the state is carried out; 4) Sovereignty: Supreme
power of the state to enforce its will on the people without foreign
intervention and; 5) Recognition: the acceptance of a nation into
the Family of Nations.
A law is part and parcel of a state and is defined as any rule that if
broken will mete punishments to offenders. It is also defined as a
body of rules made by the government interpreted by the courts
and backed by the power of the State. It is a legal order which refers
to a specialized phase of social control. Law is not only a means to
a civilization but also a product of civilization according to Roscoe
Pound, the spokesman for the School of Social Jurisprudence. Law
is responsible for social engineering for it is a mechanism in reacting
to changes in a society. laws are susceptible to change and is not
bound by traditions and legends and is created for the interest of
all members of society.
Government and Justice
1) Egalitarianism - Egalitarianism is a trend of thought in political
philosophy. It favors equality to everyone where people are treated
the same as equals. Justice is given to everyone regardless of race
color or creed.
2) Communism - is simply based class dictatorship of the proletariat
(the ruling party). This type of governance was thought of by Karl
Marx, where a society is dominated by one class over the entire
state. Socialism is the reciprocal of capitalism, where state control
of the economy is the nation’s priority.
3) Socialism - A political ideology that advocates for an equal
redistribution of wealth and power in society through a democratic
ownership and distribution of society’s means of production (or
means of making money).
Module 18 Pluralism versus Fundamentalism
Pluralism versus Fundamentalism
Let us define Pluralism – it is the holding of two or more beliefs or
concepts in a single society. This is the prevailing idea that is
introduced in the modern world to make this a better place to live
in. The Pluralist ideology fell on the following premises: 1) Pluralism
is engagement with diversity. This means that the walls that divide
people due to religious beliefs shall be removed, at present
religious diversity is present but devoid of religious pluralism. That
is in certain countries religious ghettoes allow religious minorities
to exist in their fold but is still alienated due to their biases by the
adherents of the dominant religion. 2) Pluralism is understanding
that transcends lines of differences. Many are mistaken that we
have to learn the entire religious doctrine of another only a portion
is enough to at least build a bridge to connect them. Absence of
knowledge of another culture led to bias and alienation. 3)
Pluralism is encounter of commitments, this is simply to empathize
to people of another religion. We should not isolate ourselves from
what we know but break borders. 4) Pluralism is based on dialogue
– talking is the most basic way of communicating, silence will bring
us nowhere.
Fundamentalism is defined as a strict belief in the literal
interpretation of the religious tenet. Fundamentalists view of other
religious beliefs are biased and contrary to their fundamental
beliefs are considered “heretic”. Their religious tenets adhere to
the idea that morality is ebbing due to modernization.
Globalization and Pluralism
them are their politically and social astuteness. The social media
opened their eyes that traditional media such as TV, movies, radio
and print are no longer the source of information. Compared to
other generations, millennials have their say about issues and are
more involved with politics and are not squeamish about revealing
their opinions.
The Role of Religion in Ethics
Even in the current situation, many are still arguing about the role
of religion in Ethics. Will this age-old institution be the primary
agent for the right ethics for they propagate the Word of God?
Most religions have an ethical component because ethics is
yardstick for right conduct and good life. A necessary component of
making this a guide to temporal happiness. Is this the most reliable
conception of analyzing what is right from what is wrong? The
central theme of ethics is "the good life", the very reason we aspire
for in this temporal world we live in that ancient Greeks regarded
as eudaimonia or happiness. The ancient Greeks believed
happiness was brought about by living one’s life in accordance with
virtue – positive traits of character. Virtue is the source of good
character, that us integrated by good personal habits such as
courage and temperance, but also friendship and justice and
intellectual virtue.

In our ever-changing world, pluralism are political responses to

different historical challenges that they shape history that build
bridges than Fundamentalism that create walls. Policies geared
religious pluralism center on religious toleration, rights for
denominations, or individual religious freedom. They believed that
even if they subscribe to religious beliefs they belong to One Faith
and are unified by the philosophy of being one. Globalization since
we are now in the Digital Age, play a major role in achieving
common understanding that Ecumenical Services accepted people
of “alien” religions to be at one thanks to the internet. With the
continuing development in telecommunications that will prove
brighter in the years to come, will lead to peaceful co-existence and
even to ideological convergence. Then again, like a double-edged
sword, pluralism may also lead to social dissolution, since the
awareness of fundamental differences between religious world-
views and might lead to misunderstanding and lead to religious
wars. One example is the Crusades that occurred in the Middle Ages
between Muslims and Christians in spite of the fact that Islam
revered Christ as one of their prophets and the Muslim beliefs
foster humility and brotherhood akin to Christian traditions.

The Filipino Millennials aka Filinnials

Time Magazine, described millennials as people born from 1980 to

2000. This generation comprise the largest age group in America
and Asia. Their age group is called the “yuppie” age (from the
acronym YUP or Young Urban Professionals). In the Philippines,
they are described as the “selfie” generation and followers of social
media no thanks to modern communication gadgets such as mobile
phones, laptops and tablets that seems they can never do without.
A Filinnial (short for Filipino millennials) are usually spendthrifts
due to their propensity to spend money for luxury goods which left
their bank accounts “broke.” Another trait that unified most of
them is their narcissistic attitude, making them known as the “Me,
Me, Me Generation.” They are so conscious of what and how they
look that selfies are a common thing. It must be noted though that
there are also good attitudes which millennials possess among