NO.

a) What is Ethics?
 "ethics" is derived from the Greek "ethos" (meaning "custom" or "habit"). 
 Ethics or Moral Philosophy is a system of ethical principles. These principles affect how people
behave in a modern society and how they make decisions.
 Using the framework of ethics, two people who are arguing a moral issue can often find that what
they disagree about is just one particular part of the issue, and that they broadly agree on everything
else.
 How should people act?" (Normative or Prescriptive Ethics),
 "What do people think is right?" (Descriptive Ethics),
 "How do we take moral knowledge and put it into practice?" (Applied Ethics),
 "What does 'right' even mean?" (Meta-Ethics).

Normative Ethics
Normative Ethics (or Prescriptive Ethics) is the branch of ethics concerned with establishing how
things should or ought to be, how to value them, which things are good or bad, and which actions
are right or wrong. It attempts to develop a set of rules governing human conduct, or a set
of norms for action.
Normative ethical theories are usually split into three main
categories: Consequentialism, Deontology and Virtue Ethics:
 Consequentialism (or Teleological Ethics) argues that the morality of an action is contingent on the
action's outcome or result. Thus, a morally right action is one that produces a good outcome
or consequence. Consequentialist theories must consider questions like "What sort of consequences
count as good consequences?", "Who is the primary beneficiary of moral action?", "How are the
consequences judged and who judges them?"
Some consequentialist theories include:
o Utilitarianism, which holds that an action is right if it leads to the most happiness for
the greatest number of people ("happiness" here is defined as the maximization of
pleasure and the minimization of pain). The origins of Utilitarianism can be traced back as far
as the Greek philosopher Epicurus, but its full formulation is usually credited to Jeremy
Bentham, with John Stuart Mill as its foremost proponent.
o Hedonism, which is the philosophy that pleasure is the most important pursuit of mankind, and
that individuals should strive to maximize their own total pleasure (net of any pain or
suffering). Epicureanism is a more moderate approach (which still seeks to maximize happiness,
but which defines happiness more as a state of tranquillity than pleasure).
o Egoism, which holds that an action is right if it maximizes good for the self. Thus, Egoism may
license actions which are good for the individual, but detrimental to the general
welfare. Individual Egoism holds that allpeople should do whatever benefits him or her
self. Personal Egoismholds that each person should act in his own self-interest, but makes no
 claims about what anyone else ought to do. Universal Egoism holds that everyone should act in
ways that are in their own interest.
o Asceticism, which is, in some ways, the opposite of Egoism in that it describes a life
characterized by abstinence from egoistic pleasuresespecially to achieve a spiritual goal.
 Deontology is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves,
as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions. It argues that decisions
should be made considering the factors of one's duties and other's rights (the Greek 'deon'means
'obligation' or 'duty').
Some deontological theories include: 
o Divine Command Theory: a form of deontological theory which states that an action is right
if God has decreed that it is right, and that an act is obligatory if and only if (and because) it
is commanded by God. Thus, moral obligations arise from God's commands, and the
rightness of any action depends upon that action being performed because it is a duty, not
because of any good consequences arising from that action. William of Ockham, René
Descartes and the 18th Century Calvinists all accepted versions of this moral theory.
o Natural Rights Theory (such as that espoused by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke), which
holds that humans have absolute, natural rights (in the sense of universal rights that
are inherent in the nature of ethics, and not contingent on human actions or beliefs). This
eventually developed into what we today call human rights.
o Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative, which roots morality in humanity's rational
capacity and asserts certain inviolable moral laws. Kant's formulation is deontological in that
he argues that to act in the morally right way, people must act according to duty, and that it is
the motives of the person who carries out the action that make them right or wrong, not the
consequences of the actions. Simply stated, the Categorical Imperative states that one should
only act in such a way that one could want the maxim (or motivating principle) of one's action
to become a universal law, and that one should always treat people as an end as well as a means
to an end.
o

Meta-Ethics
Meta-Ethics is concerned primarily with the meaning of ethical judgments, and seeks to understand
the nature of ethical properties, statements, attitudes, and judgments and how they may be
supported or defended. A meta-ethical theory, unlike a normative ethical theory (see below), does
not attempt to evaluate specific choices as being better, worse, good, bad or evil; rather it tries
to define the essential meaning and nature of the problem being discussed. It concerns itself with
second order questions, specifically the semantics, epistemology and ontology of ethics.

Descriptive Ethics
Descriptive Ethics is a value-free approach to ethics which examines ethics from the perspective
of observations of actual choices made by moral agents in practice. It is the study of
people's beliefs about morality, and implies the existence of, rather than explicitly prescribing,
 theories of value or of conduct. It is notd esigned to provide guidance to people in making moral
decisions, nor is it designed to evaluate the reasonableness of moral norms.
It is more likely to be investigated by those working in the fields of evolutionary
biology, psychology, sociology, history or anthropology, although information that comes from
descriptive ethics is also used in philosophical arguments.
Descriptive Ethics is sometimes referred to as Comparative Ethics because so much activity can
involve comparing ethical systems: comparing the ethics of the past to the present; comparing the
ethics of one society to another; and comparing the ethics which people claim to follow with
the actual rules of conduct which do describe their actions.

Applied Ethics
Applied Ethics is a discipline of philosophy that attempts to apply ethical theory to real-life
situations. Strict, principle-based ethical approaches often result in solutions to specific problems
that are not universally acceptable or impossible to implement. Applied Ethics is much more
ready to include the insights of psychology, sociology and other relevant areas of knowledge in its
deliberations. It is used in determining public policy.
The following would be questions of Applied Ethics: "Is getting an abortion immoral?", "Is
euthanasia immoral?", "Is affirmative action right or wrong?", "What are human rights, and how do
we determine them?" and "Do animals have rights as well?"
Some topics falling within the discipline include:
 Medical Ethics: the study of moral values and judgments as they apply to medicine. Historically,
Western medical ethics may be traced to guidelines on the duty of physicians in antiquity, such as
the Hippocratic Oath (at its simplest, "to practice and prescribe to the best of my ability for the good of
my patients, and to try to avoid harming them"), and early rabbinic, Muslim and Christian teachings. Six
of the values that commonly apply to medical ethics discussions are: Beneficence (a practitioner should
act in the best interest of the patient), Non-maleficence ("first, do no harm"), Autonomy (the patient has
the right to refuse or choose their treatment), Justice (concerning the distribution of scarce health
resources, and the decision of who gets what treatment), Dignity (both the patient and the practitioner
have the right to dignity), Honesty (truthfulness and respect for the concept of informed consent).
 Bioethics: concerns the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine.
Public attention was drawn to these questions by abuses of human subjects in biomedical experiments,
especially during the Second World War, but with recent advances in biotechnology, bioethics has
become a fast-growing academic and professional area of inquiry. Issuesinclude consideration of
cloning, stem cell research, transplant trade, genetically modified food, human genetic engineering,
genomics, infertility treatment, etc, etc
 Legal Ethics: an ethical code governing the conduct of people engaged in the practice of law. Model
rules usually address the client-lawyer relationship, duties of a lawyer as advocate in adversary
proceedings, dealings with persons other than clients, law firms and associations, public
service, advertising and maintaining the integrity of the profession. Respect of client
confidences, candor toward the tribunal, truthfulness in statements to others, and
professional independence are some of the defining features of legal ethics.
 Business Ethics: examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that can arise in a business
environment. This includes Corporate Social Responsibility, a concept
whereby organizations consider the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact of their
activities on customers, employees, shareholders, communities and the environment in all aspects of
their operations, over and above the statutory obligation to comply with legislation.
 Environmental Ethics: considers the ethical relationship between human beings and the natural
environment. It addresses questions like "Should we continue to clear cut forests for the sake of human
consumption?", "Should we continue to make gasoline powered vehicles, depleting fossil fuel resources
while the technology exists to create zero-emission vehicles?", "What environmental obligations do we
need to keep for future generations?", "Is it right for humans to knowingly cause the extinction of a
species for the (perceived or real) convenience of humanity?"
 Information Ethics: investigates the ethical issues arising from the development and application
of computers and information technologies. It is concerned with issues like the privacy of
information, whether artificial agents may be moral, how one should behave in the infosphere,
and ownership and copyright problems arising from the creation, collection, recording, distribution,
processing, etc, of information.
 Media Ethics: deals with the specific ethical principles and standards of media in general, including the
ethical issues relating to journalism, advertising and marketing, and entertainment media.

b) Difference between Moral and Non-Moral Standards

 Moral standards involve the rules people have about the kinds of actions they believe are
morally right and wrong, as well as the values they place on the kinds of objects they believe are
morally good and morally bad. Some ethicists equate moral standards with moral
values and moral principles.
- Moral standards are based on impartial considerations.
Moral standard does not evaluate standards on the basis of the interests of a certain person or
group, but one that goes beyond personal interests to a universal standpoint in which each
person’s interests are impartially counted as equal.
 
Impartiality is usually depicted as being free of bias or prejudice. Impartiality in morality
requires that we give equal and/or adequate consideration to the interests of all concerned parties.

 Non-moral standards refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical considerations.
-Technically, religious rules, some traditions, and legal statutes (i.e. laws and ordinances) are
non-moral principles, though they can be ethically relevant depending on some factors and
contexts.

c) Ethics vs. Morality

 Morality as something that’s personal and normative,
  Ethics is the standards of “good and bad” distinguished by a certain
community or social setting.
Ex. For example, your local community may think adultery is immoral, and you
personally may agree with that. However, the distinction can be useful if your
local community has no strong feelings about adultery, but you consider adultery
immoral on a personal level. By these definitions of the terms, your morality
would contradict the ethics of your community. In popular discourse, however,
we’ll often use the terms moral and immoral when talking about issues like
adultery regardless of whether it’s being discussed in a personal or in a
community-based situation. As you can see, the distinction can get a bit tricky.

d) Deontology vs. Teology

 In deontology, assessment of human actions is based on ultimate or absolute

standards or criteria or moral principles.
 In Teleological approach, the assessment of action is based on judgement
taken in consideration of the consequences of that action. Thus, rules, laws or
regulations don’t help in judging such consequences. In reality, teleological
approach is “situation ethics”.
 The individual needs to have a clear understanding of moral principles and
rules in deontological theory. Thus, means to an end is important here.
 Teleological approach, there is no need to have a clear understanding of
moral duties. The very correct consequence or outcome makes the action
ethical (the ends justify the means)

e) Actus Humanus vs. Actus Hominis

Human actions can be of two types viz. actus humanus {deliberate actions}
and actus hominis {undeliberate actions}. Ethics is applicable to only deliberate
human actions. They don’t apply to undeliberate human actions or the actions
of the animals. The question is – how to arrive at a conclusion that the
particular action was deliberate or undeliberate?
According to Thomas Aquinas, there are three basic criteria
Involvement of Knowledge. is essential requirement for an action to be
human and subject to test of ethics. Absence of knowledge is ignorance.
 Presence of voluntariness. To qualify as a human action, an action needs to
be done voluntarily. Something done involuntarily does not considered as
human action.

Free will. The doer of an action must have his / her free will while carrying out
an action to be considered as human action. The thumb rule here is that if a
person is doing an action with his free will {has options, can control and cause
that action}, it qualifies for ethical scrutiny. If there is no free will, it would be
sort of involuntary and will not be considered a human action. This implies that
all voluntary actions may not be o may not be out of a free will but all free will
actions are voluntary action. There are several ways in which the above three
may manifest.

NO.2
a) What is freedom?
Freedom to have two definitions.
(1) The first definition is the array of possibilities you have, and
(2) The second definition is independence.
b) Relation to Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity
 SUBJECT.(Independence)
In summary, Kant says that the moral law is only that I know myself as a free person.
Kantian freedom is closely linked to the notion of autonomy, which means law itself: thus,
freedom falls obedience to a law that I created myself. It is therefore respect its commitment
to compliance with oneself.
“I THINK THERFORE I AM”. The freedom to work alone.
 INTERSUBJ.
With people to understand you and your ideas, you can create a greater cooperation with
them, which in turn expose more possibilities to attain, than the array you previously had
without said cooperation.

Much of what makes us free beings in today’s world, is the ability to cooperate with each
other on a global scale. With different people with different skills and abilities across the
world, the potential to create new things and lead to new possibilities is higher than without
this scale.

However, this cooperation hinders the second definition of freedom, which is independence.
Like with any cooperation, you ought to give a piece of your autonomy to allow shared
 work. Even if the potential of possibilities is greater when together, it at the same time
decreases your potential as an autonomous individual.

Intersubjectivity is a concept that both advocates and hinders freedom, paradoxical as it may
sound. It promotes your array of possibilities, as it allows collective understanding and
bigger collective effort, but it can discard large portions of your independence as a human
being if you’ll become to sunk in it, in the ultimate form of herd mentality, which is
intersubjectivity at its peak.

NO.3
a) What is Cultural Relativism? Discuss its main arguments and discuss why it is a
persuasive moral theory yet unsound according to James Rachels.

Culture Relativism- states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong
because it all depends in the society we live in.
-warns us about the danger of assuming our practices are based on some absolute rational
standard.

James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right
and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that
“certain basic values are common to all cultures.”
KEY POINTS:
 Culture relativism theory is not a valid; it is not sound as Rachels puts it.
 This theory says “there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only
various culture codes, and nothing more.”
 Rachel agree up to a certain point with this statement, there is in my opinion various
culture codes
 but to say that there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics, Rachels cannot
agree with that.
 Rachels holds that the conclusion does not follow from the premise.
- "The premise concerns what people believe. In some societies, people believe one
thing; in other societies people believe differently. The conclusion, however, concerns
what really is the case."
 (5) From the mere fact that people disagree on a subject, we cannot conclude that
there is no objective truth on that subject.
 For instance, if one society believes that the earth is flat and another that it is
spherical, we should not conclude that there is no objective truth about the shape of
the earth. The fact is that one of the societies may simply be mistaken.
 As Rachels puts it, "There is no reason to think that if the world is round
everyone must know it. Similarly, there is no reason to think that if there is
moral truth everyone must know it." (6)
According to cultural relativism, if it is customary in a given culture to permit parents whose
religion affirms faith-healing to pray over a sick child rather than take the child for medical
care, then the parents who do this are acting morally. They may be exempt from prosecution
because they have conformed to custom (and possibly law). (7) I would argue as a moral
objectivist, on the contrary, that all parents in all cultures have a duty to provide medical care
to sick children, local customs and laws notwithstanding. This duty is part of the general
custodial duty of parents to help, instruct, and preserve their offspring, a duty addressed by
British philosopher, John Locke, more than three hundred years ago in his Second Treatise
of Government. (8) Parents who refuse medical care within their means to sick children are
guilty of child abuse, negligence, and possibly manslaughter or murder and they deserve
moral condemnation and legal prosecution. I believe, further, that modern international
moral affirmations, such as the 1948 United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
NO.4
What is the philosophical basis of Filipino values? Illustrate the objectivity and subjectivity of
Filipino values. What are some Filipino values, and why are these values ambivalent?

NO.5
One way of ensuring the rationality and impartiality of moral decisions is to follow the seven-
step moral reasoning process. Why the importance of rationality and impartiality in moral
deliberation process? Why is there a need for Moral Courage?
NO.6
Aristotle assumes that “any activity, practical or theoretical, aims towards some end or goal,
or the life of eudemonia.” In this activity one must be habituated to the virtues. Virtue
according to Aristotle is a “characteristic marked by choice residing in the mean relative to
us, a characteristic defined by reason and as a prudent person would define it.”
NO.7
Alasdaire MacIntyre and other ethicists emphasize the relevance of Virtue Ethics today as
not primarily interested in particular actions or question on ‘What should I do?’ Rather, on
‘Who should I become?’ and expanded it three key questions: ‘Who am I?’ ‘Who ought I to
become?’ and ‘How am I to get there?’
NO.8
“The Natural Law Theory of St. Thomas Aquinas guides the human being’s realization of the
good. It also makes an imprint of the Divine Will on the free person.” What are the precepts
of Natural Law? The conditions of Double Effect Theory and Proportionate Reason.
NO.9
“Instead of looking at the good as external to man, Kant locates the good in the very
interiority of the self. The good that is relevant to the person who through his/her reason
knows what one ought to do, is that which he/she can do and know as good.”
NO.10
John Stuart Mill said that “it is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied;
better Socrates dissatisfied than a food satisfied.” What is Utilitarianism? What is the
Felicific Calculus of the utilitarian? What is the defense of the minority in utilitarianism?