ETHICS – GEC 107 A28

ALLAN JR. A. AGAO-AGAO

Activity 1:
In relation with the definition of normative ethics, how are you to discuss
the following key terms:

1. HUMAN ACTION
Human action is the starting point of ethics because it is where moral evaluation and
judgment take place. To explain further, human action is always followed with certain
reaction. Kung sa physics pa, it is like Newton’s third law of motion which states that in
every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. These action and reactions are ought
to be guided by the ethical theories. Since judgmental man kaayo ang mga pinoy, we judge
the action of other people in ethical lens. Therefore, human action is important in the
discussion of normative ethics.

2. RIGHT OR WRONG
When a man gives an opinion about a certain human action, it is always between right
or wrong. Right and wrong are two vague terms that are hard to qualify up to what point it
is considered as acceptable or not because everyone has different perspective. Isang
magandang halimbawa ang isang buntis na ina na may prinsipyong bawal ang pumatay.
Ngunit kailangang ipalaglag ang kanyang anak upang mailigtas siya. Ang pagpapalaglag is a
form of killing, kelan ba masasabi kung tama o mali ang kanyang gagawin? That is the
essence of ethics, to guide one’s opinion into rational thinking.

3. ETHICAL THEORIES
Ethical theories are well-constructed guide proposed by some known philosophers.
Ethical theories are not just random ideas but composed of logical concepts and virtues
where humans are encouraged to follow. Since hilig man kaayo ta mag judge ug mga
actions, people must at least think rationally to decide in a more reasonable and logical way.
No one is perfect; thus, everyone makes fault and wrong decisions. Therefore, ethical
theories are important in the decision-making process on how and when to consider one’s
action as right or wrong.
Activity 2:
I am giving you 2 problems, which of the two problems can be appropriately considered as an
ethical / moral problem and which is not? Of course, you need to explain and argue your
opinion. You need to use whatever is suggested in your reading. If you read what I shared with
you.

Problem A:
Last year 2019, nagkagubot ang mga turista, lalo na ang mga locals, sa Boracay dahil sa
isang Korean na babae. Dumating ang mga pulis at gidakop ang maong turista. Unsa ang
nahitabo? Isang umaga, namasyal sa dalampasigan ng Boracay ang isang Koreana na almost
naked or 90% or 96% naked. Tinawag na naked na ang Koreana dahil ang suot na bikini (bra at
panty) ay kasing lapad lamang ng isang rope o pisi, at ito lamang ang naka-cover sa maselang
bahagi ng kanyang body. Ayon sa nakasulat sa Inquirer, ang explanation ng Koreana ay ito - “this
is self-expression.”

Parang sinabi ng Koreana na - what is wrong with this? This is freedom of self-
expression.

Anong masasabi nyo madlang pipol?

Answer:

Problem A is a conflict of culture and traditions between two different nationality. The
problem is focused on the Korean girl, wearing a “piece of string” bikini, strolling at the beach of
Boracay Island, Philippines. The tourist fined for disrespecting the culture and traditions of the
Filipinos. On the other hand, wearing revealing bikini doesn’t break any law and considered as
normal in their country. Therefore, problem A is a debatable topic which falls into the discussion
of ethics as an ethical/moral problem.

As respect to Filipino culture and people, the action of the tourist is unacceptable
because it’s inappropriate to the majority of the people in Boracay, it disrespects the
conservative culture of the country, and display of erotic and lewd image can lead to public
disturbance. In my first argument, majority of the people in Boracay are Filipinos and only 1/3 of
them are tourists visiting the island in three days according to Boracay Daily 2016. Mostly, rules
and standards in a community are set by the majority type of people. Although some human
actions that are not offensive in your perspective, may be offensive to others. Sa madaling salita,
iba man ang kanilang kultura at gawain, kung nasa Pilipinas sila at Pilipino ang mga
nakakasalamuha nila, dapat makisabay sila sa kultura ng mga pinoy. In this situation, ethical
judgment must be based on the Filipino culture. This argument is supported by the concept of
cultural relativism which states that ethics is relative to or dependent on one’s culture. Even
though, cultural relativism is flawed with diversity and differences in moral codes, the ethical
judgment must still be based on the Filipino’s moral conduct since the incident happened in the
Philippines.

On my second argument, the action of the tourist disrespects the conservative culture
of the country by displaying her body that is 96% naked in the public. According to her, it is just
a form of self-expression, however, it is already offensive and disturbing to others. The reason of
the tourist is an example of subjectivism which claims that the ethical agent is only the self.
Hindi pwedeng isipin niya lang ang sarili niya at sabihing wala namang mali sa ginawa niya. She
exercised her freedom of self-expression but jeopardize the customs and traditions of the
Filipinos. Hindi na tama ang ginawa niya, this is an act of selfishness! In the definition, ethics is
anchored in rational discussion and not subjectivity, so the self cannot be the basis for ethics.

Lastly, display of erotic and lewd image can lead to public disturbance which may results
to other forms of crime. Since her action is not tolerated in the practice of the Filipinos to wear
string bikini in public, she might receive negative comments and criticism from the Filipino
netizens. Furthermore, it might ruin the image of her country and bring conflict between the
two nations. The safety of the tourist is also at risk from sexual abuse, violence, or even rape.
Walang nga daw mali sa suot niya, pero pag nabastos, no to men agad, protesta agad, women
empowerment agad, wherein the first place, hindi naman ka resperespeto ang ginawa niya para
sa sarili niya. Ethics is not one-sided but an equal and fair judgment. Its main purpose is to
provide a way in considering our own well-being while thinking of other’s well-being.

Problem B:
Let us assume that you divulge the secret of the partner of your friend, that he/she is
maintaining another relationship somewhere. Sa dihang nagka-alaman na, nagkagulo, merong
sumbatan, merong sigawan at hiwalayan. At nalaman ng partner ng friend mo na ikaw ang
culprit.

In problem B, do we have an ethical problem here? Why or why not?

Answer:
The scenario in problem B includes mistrust, dishonesty, and betrayal between
friendship and couple. To set the parameters of the problem, person A is cheating on person B,
and person C knows it. Person C is friends with person B, so he told person B the truth. Person B
and A fought and broke up, and later A found out that C is the culprit. Basically, the source of
human action in the scenario is person C and the observers are A and B. To qualify the certain
problem as ethical issue, we can consider the following: it must be debatable, it follows a certain
gravity like between life and death matters, and it is logical and significant to the society. In my
critical analysis of the situation, it is not considered as ethical problem because it does not
qualify the certain gravity of ethics, it does not affect the society, and it is only a matter of
etiquette.

The certain gravity is a vague term that is hard to qualify, but in my argument, it is
defined as life and death matters. In the problem above, it does not qualify the certain gravity
because there is no deprivation of rights happened. Person C has a choice to make, but neither
 of his options, telling the truth or keeping it a secret, affects their privacy rights. Furthermore,
person C does not break any laws by telling the truth. The action done by person C does not
even affects one’s culture and religious beliefs. After all, the fight of person A and B is just the
output of their previous actions.

The problem occurs only between the three persons, and not in a group of people, tribe,
or community. In comparison to problem A, the scale of the issue is not vast enough to be
considered as an ethical problem. It does not affect other’s beliefs, culture, ideologies, or
perspectives which makes the problem trivial. Furthermore, it can be considered as personal
problem that is subjective which is not part of the discussion in ethics.

The situation is not qualified as an ethical problem because it is just a matter of

etiquette. Etiquette is trivial in nature. Sa madaling salita, ang umutot sa public, o pumasok sa
opisina ng hindi kumakatok o makisawsaw sa usapan ng ibang tao ay masasabing mali at bahagi
lamang ito ng etiquette at hindi ng ethics. Maihalintulad natin ito sa problem B, pwedeng
sabihing hindi tama ang nakisawsaw si person C sa problema nina A and B dahil wala naman
talaga siyang kinalaman dito. But this problem is only considered as part of etiquette only
because it is superficial. Therefore, the problem has a little value or unimportant to be
considered as part of the ethical discussion.

ALLAN JR. A. AGAO-AGAO - GEC 107 A28

SECOND ASSIGNMENT

Activity 1:
I am giving you 2 problems, which of the two problems can be appropriately considered as an
ethical / moral problem and which is not? Of course, you need to explain and argue your
opinion. You need to use whatever is suggested in your reading. If you read what I shared with
you.

Problem A:
Last year 2019, nagkagubot ang mga turista, lalo na ang mga locals, sa Boracay dahil sa
isang Korean na babae. Dumating ang mga pulis at gidakop ang maong turista. Unsa ang
nahitabo? Isang umaga, namasyal sa dalampasigan ng Boracay ang isang Koreana na almost
naked or 90% or 96% naked. Tinawag na naked na ang Koreana dahil ang suot na bikini (bra at
panty) ay kasing lapad lamang ng isang rope o pisi, at ito lamang ang naka-cover sa maselang
bahagi ng kanyang body. Ayon sa nakasulat sa Inquirer, ang explanation ng Koreana ay ito - “this
is self-expression.”

Parang sinabi ng Koreana na - what is wrong with this? This is freedom of self-
expression.
Anong masasabi nyo madlang pipol?

Answer:

The problem in the scenario is focused on the Korean girl, wearing a “piece of string”
bikini, strolling at the beach of Boracay Island, Philippines. The tourist fined for disrespecting the
culture and traditions of the Filipinos. However, wearing revealing bikini is just a form of self-
expression and considered as normal in their country. Therefore, the scenario is not considered
as moral problem because it does not qualify the scope of ethics, it is just a form art, and it only
favors Filipino culture.

Ethics is defined as the study of rightness or wrongness of human action. However,

there were limitations on what specific human action is included in the discussion of ethics. Few
considerations include aesthetics, etiquette, and technical valuation. Some human actions are
just trivial in nature, but some are debatable and requires the help of ethical theories. The
qualification depends on the certain gravity set by normative ethics whether the state of
seriousness already concerns own well-being with others well-being or not. Furthermore, ethical
discussion is always inclined with reason rather than custom and oftentimes impose a moral
dilemma.

In the given scenario, disregarding Filipino culture by exercising one’s freedom of self-
expression does not qualify the certain gravity because the state of seriousness only concerns
Filipino culture. Sa madaling salita, dili siya angay hisgutan kay ang mga pinoy lang man ang
naghatag ug problema tungod kay lahi ilang kultura sa turista. Moreover, the state of
seriousness of the scenario does not reach between life and death matters and it does not
impose moral dilemmas on both sides.

On the next argument, it is written in the Inquirer that the tourist’s intention to wear
revealing bikini is to practice self-expression which is a form of art or aesthetics. Aesthetics or
one’s taste in fashion is not included in the discussion of ethics. Every man has its own personal
preference derived from one’s senses and feelings, but ethics is anchored in rational thinking,
hence, subjective reasoning is not acceptable in ethical discussion. Ethics sets no rules nor
standards in art.

Lastly, the problem involves the conflict of different culture, but only favors the culture
and traditions of the Filipinos. This argument is supported by the concept of cultural relativism
which states that ethics is relative or dependent on one’s culture. Even so, cultural relativism is
flawed with diversity and differences in moral codes. These moral codes are oftentimes based
on religious beliefs and culture. However, ethical discussion excluded the presence of
supernatural being that gives orders on what is right and wrong. Thus, ethics exists beyond
culture and religious orientations.

Problem B:
 Let us assume that you divulge the secret of the partner of your friend, that he/she is
maintaining another relationship somewhere. Sa dihang nagka-alaman na, nagkagulo, merong
sumbatan, merong sigawan at hiwalayan. At nalaman ng partner ng friend mo na ikaw ang
culprit.

In problem B, do we have an ethical problem here? Why or why not?

Answer:
The problem on the second scenario is anchored in the act of cheating. Cheating is
considered as an immoral act because it undermines social integrity, decreases trust, and thus
damages society. Furthermore, it is a form of dishonesty which gives someone an unfair
advantage. Therefore, there is an ethical problem because cheating is an immoral act, it imposes
moral dilemma to the person, and divulging one’s secret affects other’s well-being.

Cheating in different gravity is still considered as an immoral act. Keeping secrets from
your partner may not be on the same gravity as cheating on ethical business but still qualified as
immoral act because it is unjust, unfair, and affects the partner’s well-being by putting him into
disadvantage. Furthermore, it is also considered wrong even if cheating is used for personal
gain. For example, a student cheats on final exam to keep his scholarship. This may sound
acceptable but the welfare of itself and other students are affected. If cheating on lighter gravity
is tolerated, other people will start to cheat as well and consider low-level cheating as norms on
the long run which will affects social integrity. Therefore, cheating at different levels can still be
considered as unethical because it is unjust.

Activity 2:

The problem has to do with the mayors who either imposed moratorium or who accept the
returning locally stranded individuals to their localities.

Questions:

1. Which mayors are caught in moral dilemma?

a. those who imposed a moratorium on the return of LSIs
b. those who accept the return of LSIs
2. Explain why these particular group of mayors are in a moral / ethical dilemma.
3. Also, state what type of moral dilemma is experienced by the mayors.

Answer

During the pandemic cases in the Philippines, most government officials and local government
units are facing different dilemmas. Accordingly, a dilemma is considered as moral dilemma if the moral
agent is forced to choose between two conflicting options, neither of which resolves the situation in a
morally acceptable manner. In the problem above, it is mentioned that one mayor imposed a
moratorium on locally stranded individuals (LSI’s) while the other one accepted their return.
 In the problem, the two mayors are caught in moral dilemma, but they choose differently. It is
considered as moral dilemma because they are forced to choose between 2 conflicting options which
concerns the LSI’s well-being and the community. The two mayors are facing world-imposed moral
dilemma because of the pandemic cases which obliged them to choose whether to accept the LSI’s or
not. Imposing moratorium on the LSI’s return affects their well-being because they are underprivileged
of their safety and health. On the other hand, accepting their return could lead to increase of COVID
cases in the community, hence, the well-being of the majority is affected. Neither of these two options
are morally acceptable because it’s either compromise the welfare of LSI’s or the community. No matter
what course of action is taken, the mayor is bound to do something wrong.