TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

College of Liberal Arts

GEC8 – ETHICS

Topic:
1.Foundation of Human Acts
2.Three Positions of Freedom
3.Freedom, responsibility, and justice.
4.Scheler’s Hierarchy of Values
5.Fundamental Option and Fundamental Stance
Learning Objectives:
At the end of the discussion, students are expected to
a. Define freedom, responsibility, and justice from different viewpoints.
b. Explain the different types of freedom.
c. Understand the relevance of Scheler’s Hierarchy of Values.
d. Compare and contrast the fundamental option and fundamental stance.

Definition of terms:
Freedom – Freedom is the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance
or restraint, and the absence of a despotic government. (livescience.com)
Responsibility – A duty or obligation to satisfactorily perform or complete a task (assigned by
someone or created by one's own promise or circumstances) that one must fulfill, and which has
a consequent penalty for failure. (BusinessDictionary)
Justice – Fairness in protection of rights and punishment of wrongs. While all legal systems aim
to uphold this ideal through fair and proper administration of the law of the land, it is possible to
have unjust laws.
Fundamental Option – A theory of morals that each person gradually develops in a basic
orientation of his or her life, either for or against God. This fundamental direction is said to be for
God if one's life is fundamentally devoted to the love and service of others, and against God if
one's life is essentially devoted to self-love and self-service. / Fundamental option is that decision
of faith we enter as to whether we will commit our lives to God or not.
Fundamental Stance - Fundamental stance is a term used in moral theology. In short, it is the
fundamental decision we make as to the type of person we want to be. Our fundamental stance
guides a person’s character and actions. A Christians fundamental stance is one in which the
great commandment of love is central. Fundamental stance is part of the fundamental option
theory of moral theology.
Existentialism - a form of philosophical inquiry that explores the nature of existence by
emphasizing experience of the human subject—not merely the thinking subject, but the acting,
feeling, living human individual.

Are we really free? In what ways we are free? Have you ever imagined what a world would
be if all people are not free and we are just pretending to be free? Are we slaves? If yes,
what enslaves us?
1 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

THE HUMAN FREEDOM

Human freedom is a social concept that recognizes the dignity of individuals and is defined here
as negative liberty or the absence of coercive constraint.

Isaiah Berlin provides us with two concepts of freedom, negative freedom and positive freedom.
(Berlin, 2006) Positive freedom does not mean the freedom of good people and negative freedom
does not mean the freedom of bad people. According to Berlin, negative freedom is the freedom
from interference and positive freedom is freedom to do something of one’s will.

POSITIVE FREEDOM NEGATIVE FREEDOM

Positive freedom is ‘positive’ in the sense that Key to negative freedom is the notion of non-
individuals will want to be their own masters. interference. One only lacks political liberty if
In Berlin’s words, by virtue of positive freedom, he/she is “prevented from attaining a goal by
one will “wish to be a subject, not an object” human beings” (Berlin, 1969)
(Berlin, 1969).
KQ: What is the area within which the subject
It is important to realize that Berlin's notion of – a person or group of persons – is or should
positive liberty does not just apply to self- be left to do or be what he is able to do or be,
mastery at the individual level; it also without interference by other persons?
encompasses theories of freedom which
emphasize collective control over common Over what area am I master?
life. So, for example, when someone calls a So, if you park your car across my drive,
society a free society because its members thereby preventing me from getting my car out,
play an active role in controlling it through their
you restrict my freedom; and this is true even
participation in democratic institutions, they if I choose to stay in bed listening to my CDs
are appealing to a notion of positive freedom all day, and would have done so even if you
rather than of negative freedom. In this hadn't parked there. Or, if the state prevents
example the people are free because they, me from going on strike by making my actions
collectively, have mastery over the life of their illegal, even if I don't have anything to strike
society. A free society based upon the concept about, and even if I don't ever intend to strike,
of negative freedom would typically be one in my freedom is still curtailed. Negative freedom
which state interference in individual lives is is a matter of the doors open to me, not of
kept to a minimum. This would not necessarily whether I happen to choose to go through
be a democratic society since a benevolent them.
dictator might be concerned to provide an
extensive realm of individual negative freedom
for each of his or her subjects.

"Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for
everything he does." – Jean Paul Sartre

Jean-Paul Sartre believed that human beings live in constant anguish, not solely because life is
miserable, but because we are 'condemned to be free'. While the circumstances of our birth and

2 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

upbringing are beyond our control, he reasons that once we become self-aware (and we all do
eventually), we have to make choices — choices that define our very 'essence'.

One problem that arises in Rousseau’s political theory is that the Social Contract purports to be
a legitimate state in one sense because it frees human beings from their chains. But if the state
is to protect individual freedom, how can this be reconciled with the notion of the general will,
which looks always to the welfare of the whole and not to the will of the individual? This criticism,
although not unfounded, is also not devastating. To answer it, one must return to the concepts of
Sovereignty and the general will. True Sovereignty, again, is not simply the will of those in power,
but rather the general will. Sovereignty does have the proper authority override the will of an
individual or even the collective will of a particular group of individuals. However, as the general
will is infallible, it can only do so when intervening will be to the benefit of the society. To
understand this, one must take note of Rousseau’s emphasis on the equality and freedom of the
citizens. Proper intervention on the part of the Sovereign is therefore best understood as that
which secures the freedom and equality of citizens rather than that which limits them. Ultimately,
the delicate balance between the supreme authority of the state and the rights of individual
citizens is based on a social compact that protects society against factions and gross differences
in wealth and privilege among its members. (Delaney, n.d.)

True liberty is achieved when individuals can let go of amour propre (the love of oneself) and
instead become possessed by amour de soi (the desire for self-preservation and self-mastery).

Jean Paul Sartre “ABSOLUTE FREEDOM”

A. Existence precedes Essence

Existentialists maintain that we cannot know anything if not from our subjectivity. The first and
only real thing we know is that we exist and that we experience everything subjectively. This leads
us into questions of being.

Sartre rejected the idea that there is a divine meaning to one’s life or that there is a purpose for
which everyone is born. For him, existence precedes essence, freedom is absolute, and existence
is freedom. He does not believe that any essence or substance can be attributed to individuals
prior to their existence. (Sa madaling salita, kailangan mo munang mag-exist bago ka magka-
kwenta.)

B. Subject rather than object

Humans are not objects to be used by God or a government or corporation or society. Nor we to
be “adjusted” or molded into roles – to be only waiter or a conductor or a mother or worker. We
must look deeper than our roles and find ourselves. (Mahalaga ang self-awareness para malaman
ang value/worth mo.)

C. Notions of Choice

FREEDOM is the central and unique potentiality which constitutes us as human. Sartre rejects
determinism, saying that it is our choice how we respond to determining tendencies. I am my
3 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

choices. I cannot not choose. If I do not choose, that is still a choice. If faced with inevitable
circumstances, we still choose how we are in those circumstances.

D. Responsibility

Each of us is responsible for everything we do. If we seek advide from others, we choose our
advisor and have some idea of the course he or she will recommend. (“I am responsible for my
very desire of fleeing responsibilities.”)

E. Our Acts Define Us

Grades do not define us, they say. Our illusions and imaginings about ourselves, about what we
could have been, are nothing but self-deception.

“In life, a man commits himself, draws his own portrait, and there is nothing but that portrait.”

A “brave” person is simply someone who usually acts bravely. Each act contributes to defining us
as we are, and at any moment we can begin to act differently and draw a different portrait of
ourselves. There is always a possibility to change, to start making a different kind of choice. If you
want change, make sure that the change you will have is for the betterment of yourself not for
pleasing others.

F. The unconscious is not truly unconscious

At some level I am aware of, and I choose, what I will allow fully into my consciousness and what
I will not. Thus, I cannot use “the unconscious” as an excuse for my behaviors. Even though I
may not admit it to myself, I am aware, and I am choosing.

The three positions of Freedom

1. Man is absolutely free. (Jean Paul Sartre)

2. Man is absolutely determined.
3. The middle position: Man is situated. (Maurice Merleau Ponty)

Determinism: theory that all events, including moral choices, are completely determined by
previously existing causes. Determinism is usually understood to preclude free will because it
entails that humans cannot act otherwise than they do. The theory holds that the universe is utterly
rational because complete knowledge of any given situation assures that unerring knowledge of
its future is also possible.

Types of Determinism:

Logical – the future is already fixed as unalterably as the past.

Physical – based on physical laws of nature, with the claim that all other features of the world are
dependent on physical factors.

Theological – argues that since God is omniscient, He knows everything, the future included.

4 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

Psychological – there are certain psychological laws which we are beginning to discover,
enabling us to predict, usually based on his experiences in early infancy, how a man will respond
to different situations throughout his later life.

Objections on the absolute determinism

- If the feeling of freedom is rejected, then no basic experience is trustworthy, which would
lead to total skepticism and inaction.
- If the statemenrt “man is absolutely determined” is true, the statement is also determined,
and the opposite “man is absolutely free” would also be determined, and so there would
be no truth value anymore to the statement.

The Situated Freedom – Maurice Merleu Ponty

Freedom could never be divorced from the individual’s insertion in a world; it is interwoven with
the field of existence. The concept of freedom only made sense in conjunction with this insertion
(man’s beingness in the world).

For Merleau-Ponty, there was ‘never determinism and never absolute choice,’ by the very nature
of man’s being in the world. Choice is always embedded in and dependent upon the meaningful
choices disclosed by a specific social and historical situation.

Objection to Sartre:

- If freedom is absolute, always, and everywhere, then freedom is impossible and nowhere.
- Absolute freedom implies that there would be no distinction between freedom and
unfreedom.

Gabriel Marcel on Freedom

Freedom is related to person. Existence grows out as an ego (in the context of having freedom)
and grow into becoming (beingness) a person. Man recognizes that at root, he is an existing thing,

5 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

but he somehow feels compelled to prove his life is more significant than that. He begins to
believe that the things he surrounds himself with can make his life more meaningful or valuable.

All people become a master of defining their individual selves by either their possessions or by
their professions. Meaning is forced into life through these venues. Even more, individuals begin
to believe that their lives have worth because they are tied to these things, these objects. This
devolution creates a situation in which individuals experience the self only as a statement, as an
object, “I am x.”

The two realms of Freedom

Realm of Having Realm of Being

- Having” involves taking possession of
objects, requires detachment from the
self, and is the realm in which one
seeks conceptual mastery and
universal solutions.
- Freedom is external to me;
- A “problem” apart from me;
- Applicable to ideas, implying
possession (not open for sharing with
others).
- The realm of being, on the other hand,
is one in which experience is unified
before conceptual analysis, in which
the individual participates in reality and
has access to experiences that are
later distorted at the level of abstract
thinking.
- Pertains to persons;
- This is not a “problem” but a mystery
that is part of me;
- Applicable also to things: I am my
ideas, I am free.

Understanding Freedom and Responsibility

Two meanings of Responsibility
ACCOUNTABILITY
Responsibility can be defined as the state of being responsible or accountable; that for which one
is answerable, for example, a duty or trust. It also means the ability to meet obligations or to act
without superior authority or guidance. Moreover, it is the capacity to distinguish between right
and wrong – having ethical discrimination. And of course, in the first place, it is accepting full
res-ponsibility for one's own life and all that it entails.

I am accountable for an action that is free, whose source is the “I” … I acted on my own; I decided
on my own; I am free from external constraints.

A person is morally responsible for an injury if:

a. The person caused the injury or failed to prevent it when he or she could have or should
have prevented it.
b. The person did so despite of knowing what he or she was doing.
c. The person did so out of his own freewill.

6 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

RESPONSE-ABILITY

It is the ability to give an account; the ability to justify actions that are truly responsive to the
objective demands of the situation. A response that meets the objective demands of the situation
is a response that meets the demand of justice.

Freedom and Justice

The relationship of these concepts can be discerned when the network of relationships with fellow
human beings and the goods intended by freedom is given consideration. Justice is giving to the
other what is due.

“Freedom conditions justice and justice is a condition of freedom” when we realize that our
obligation to give lies only on what we can give within the limited matrix of possibilities.

The ancient philosophers said that justice is speaking the truth and paying your debts, giving to
each man what is proper to him, doing good to friends and evil to enemies. Therefore, there must
be something more basic, more fundamental than laws on which to found justice. In fact, the
French jurist Charles de Montesquieu ably contended that “before laws were made, there were
relations of possible justice. To say that there is nothing just or unjust but what is commanded or
forbidden by positive laws, is the same as saying that before the describing of a circle all the radii
were not equal.” If human being is to keep is freedom, he must assess his real needs with respect
to what is available around his world and the equally real needs of his fellowman. What is due to
other is all that he needs to preserve and enhance his dignity as a human being.

To speak of liberty and freedom is to speak first of natural laws or the right of nature. According
to Thomas Hobbes, the right of nature is the liberty each man must use his own power for the
preservation of his own life, and his own judgment and reason are the best means for achieving
it.

ACTIVITY: Understanding Human Freedom

Check your Class Notebook for your activity under this module.

7 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m
 TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
College of Liberal Arts

Reference/s:

• (n.d.). Retrieved from OpenLearn:

https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/mod/oucontent/view.php?printable=1&id=1747
• Delaney, J. J. (n.d.). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from
https://iep.utm.edu/
• Ethics – Bridging Freedom and Responsibility. (n.d.). Retrieved September 26, 2020, from
https://www.theosophyforward.com/articles/theosophy/1780-ethics-bridging-freedom-
and-responsibility
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZIrMkxZhIs
• Jean Paul Sartre Summary. (n.d.). Retrieved September 25, 2020, from
http://web.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/sartre_sum.html
• Manzi, Y. (2013, January 23). Jean-Paul Sartre: Existential "Freedom" and the Political.
Retrieved September 25, 2020, from https://www.e-ir.info/2013/01/23/jean-paul-sartre-
existential-freedom-and-the-political/
• Naktranun, C. (n.d.). Understanding Freedom from Different Perspectives, 23-28.
• responsibility/justice. BusinessDictionary.com. Retrieved September 27, 2020, from
BusinessDictionary.com website:
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/justice.html
• Snyder, L. (1980, March 01). Justice and Freedom: Leslie Snyder. Retrieved September
26, 2020, from https://fee.org/articles/justice-and-freedom/
• OpenLearn from The Open University. (n.d.). Retrieved September 27, 2020, from
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/mod/oucontent/view.php?printable=1

8 | G E C 8 – U n d e r s t a n d i n g H u m a n F r e e d o m