WEEK 2

A. Definition of Ethics

          What is Ethics? Ethics comes from the Greek word Ethos. Ethos can mean custom,
habit, character, or disposition. Due to the various possible meanings, ethics can cover

several topics. 

          Ethics is often viewed as a branch of philosophy that is concerned with human

conduct. It examines the rational justification of our moral judgements: what is morally
right or wrong, just or unjust. It aims to realize the perfect happiness of human life
through individual good, social good, and the good of mankind as a whole.

          Moreover, it deals with the 

proper course of action for man. It answers the question, "What do I do?”. At a more
fundamental level, it is the method by which we categorize our values and pursue them.
Do we pursue our own happiness, or do we sacrifice ourselves to a greater cause? Is the
foundation of ethics based on nature, or on the very nature of man himself, or neither?
B. Introduction to Ethics

           Ethics, also called moral philosophy, is the discipline concerned with what is
morally good and bad and morally right and wrong. The term is also applied to any
system or theory of moral values or principles.

           The terms ethics and morality are closely related. It is now common to refer to
ethical judgments or to ethical principles where it once would have been more accurate
to speak of moral judgments or moral principles. These applications are an extension of
the meaning of ethics. In earlier usage, the term referred not to morality itself but to the
field of study, or branch of
inquiry, that has morality as its subject matter. In this sense, ethics is equivalent to
moral philosophy.
           Although ethics has always been viewed as a branch of philosophy, its all-
embracing practical nature links it with many other areas of study, including
anthropology, biology, economics, history, politics, sociology, and theology. Yet,
ethics remains distinct from such disciplines because it is not a matter of factual
knowledge in the way that the sciences and other branches of inquiry are. Rather, it has
to do with determining the nature of normative theories and applying these sets of
principles to practical moral problems.

C. Characteristics and Nature of Ethics

1. Ethics is a science.
It is concerned with a particular sphere that deals with certain judgments that we make
about human conduct. It also talks about systematic explanation of rightness or
wrongness in a man’s life.

2. Ethics is concerned with the ideal of life. 

It gives our mind a vision of some higher condition of life 
and society than that which exists.

3. Ethics treats of what ought to be.  

It believes that what is ideal must not be one which simply floats in the air.  It must be
an ideal which is possible, and, therefore, as such, obligatory. 

4. Ethics is a wisdom of values.

Ethics is a science of values as it discovers the forms of conduct or behavior, which have

the character of moral obligation. 

5. Ethics is concerned with the will.  
It is based specifically on the fact that man is not only an intellectual being (capable of
knowing) and a sensitive being (possessed of feeling) but also a volitional being; that is,
a being endowed with self-determining activity.
 D. Importance of Ethics
Ethics is a requirement for human life. It is our means of deciding a course of action.
Without it, our actions would be random and aimless. There would be no way to work
towards a goal because there would be no way to pick between a limitless number
of goals. Even with an ethical standard, we may be unable to pursue our goals with the
possibility of success. To the degree which a rational ethical standard is taken, we are
able to correctly organize our goals and actions to accomplish our most important
values. Any flaw in our ethics will reduce our ability to be successful in our endeavors.

E. Branches and Areas of Ethics

Branch Example Questions

1. Descriptive Ethics 
Deals with what people actually believe (or made What proportion of the
to believe) to be right or wrong, and accordingly population believe divorce is
holds up the human actions acceptable or not morally acceptable?
acceptable or punishable under a custom or law.

2. Normative Ethics  Is it morally acceptable for a

Deals with “norms” or set of considerations how couple to get a divorce?
one should act. Thus, it’s a study of “ethical
action” and sets out the rightness or wrongness of
the actions. It is also called prescriptive
ethics because it rests on the principles which
determine whether an action is right or wrong. 

3. Meta Ethics 
Meta Ethics is also known as “analytical ethics”. It
deals with the origin of the ethical concepts
themselves. It does not consider whether an
action is good or bad, right or wrong. Rather, it
questions – what goodness or rightness or
morality itself is? It is basically a highly abstract
way of thinking about ethics.  Is there a definitive answer to
the question about the morality
of getting a divorce?

4. Applied Ethics 
Deals with the philosophical examination, from a
moral standpoint, of particular issues in private When, if ever, is it morally
and public life which are matters of moral acceptable to get a divorce?
judgment. It attempts to answer difficult moral
questions actual people face in their lives. 
WEEK 3
Morality and Ethics

            To start off, here’s the difference 

       between Ethics and Morals:

BASIS FOR
MORALS ETHICS
COMPARISON

Morals are the beliefs of the Ethics are the guiding principles
Meaning individual or group as to what which help the individual or group to
is right or wrong. decide what is good or bad.

General principles set by

What is it? Response to a specific situation
group

Mos (mores) which means Ethikos (ethos) which means

Root word
custom character

Individual or legal and professional

Governed By Social and cultural norms
norms

Deals with Principles of right and wrong Right and wrong conduct

Morals may differ from society

Consistency to society and culture to Ethics is generally uniform.
culture.

Morals is expressed in the

Expression form of general rules and Ethics is abstract.
statements.

Freedom to think
No Yes
and choose

B. Moral and Non-Moral Standards

            Morality may refer to the standards that a person or a group has about what is
right and wrong, or good and evil. Accordingly, there are moral and non-moral
standards concerned with or relating to human behavior, especially the distinction
between good and bad (or right and wrong) behavior.

            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.

            Non-moral standards refer to rules that are

unrelated to moral or ethical considerations. Either these standards are not necessarily
linked to morality or by nature lack ethical sense. Basic examples of non-moral
standards include rules of etiquette, fashion standards, rules in games, and various
house rules.
 
            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.
 
         
   The following six (6) characteristics of moral standards further differentiate them
from non-moral standards:

6 Characteristics of Moral Standards to Further Differentiate Them from Non-

Moral Standards

a. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits.

Moral standards deal with matters which can seriously impact, that is, injure or
benefit human beings. It is not the case with many non-moral standards. For instance,
following or violating some basketball rules may matter in basketball games but does
not necessarily affect one’s life or wellbeing.
b. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values.
Moral standards have overriding character or hegemonic authority. If a moral
standard state that a person has the moral obligation to do something, then he/she is
supposed to do that even if it conflicts with other non-moral standards, and even with
self-interest.

Moral standards are not the only rules or principles in society, but they take
precedence over other considerations, including aesthetic, prudential, and even legal
ones. A person may be aesthetically justified in leaving behind his family in order to
devote his life to painting, but morally, all things considered, he/she probably was not
justified. It may be prudent to lie to save one’s dignity, but it probably is morally
wrong to do so. When a particular law becomes seriously immoral, it may be people’s
moral duty to exercise civil disobedience.
 
There is a general moral duty to obey the law, but there may come a time when the
injustice of an evil law is unbearable and thus calls for illegal but moral
noncooperation (such as the antebellum laws calling for citizens to return slaves to
their owners).

c. Moral standards are not established by authority figures.

Moral standards are not invented, formed, or generated by authoritative bodies or
persons such as nations’ legislative bodies. Ideally instead, these values ought to be
considered in the process of making laws. In principle therefore, moral standards
cannot be changed nor nullified by the decisions of particular authoritative body. One
thing about these standards, nonetheless, is that its validity lies on the soundness or
adequacy of the reasons that are considered to support and justify them.

d. Moral standards have the trait of universalizability.

Simply put, it means that everyone should live up to moral standards. To be more
accurate, however, it entails that moral principles must apply to all who are in the
relevantly similar situation. If one judges that act A is morally right for a certain
person P, then it is morally right for anybody relevantly similar to P.
 
This characteristic is exemplified in the Golden Rule, “Do unto others what you would
them do unto you (if you were in their shoes)” and in the formal Principle of Justice,
“It cannot be right for A to treat B in a manner in which it would be wrong for B to

treat A, merely on the ground that they are  

two different individuals, and without there being any difference between the natures
or circumstances of the  
two which can be stated as a reasonable ground for difference of treatment.”
Universalizability is an extension of the principle of consistency, that is, one ought to
be consistent about one’s value judgments.

e. 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.
 

f. Moral standards are associated with special emotions and vocabulary.

Prescriptivity indicates the practical or action-guiding nature of moral standards.
These moral standards are generally put forth as injunction or imperatives (such as,
‘Do not kill,’ ‘Do no unnecessary harm,’ and ‘Love your neighbor’). These principles
are proposed for use, to advise, and to influence to action. Retroactively, this feature
is used to evaluate behavior, to assign praise and blame, and to produce feelings of
satisfaction or of guilt.
 
If a person violates a moral standard by telling a lie even to fulfill a special purpose, it
is not surprising if he/she starts feeling guilty or being ashamed of his behavior
afterwards. On the contrary, not much guilt is felt if one goes against the current
fashion trend (e.g. refusing to wear tattered jeans). 

WEEK 4
A. Moral Foundations Theory

             Moral Foundations Theory was created by a group of social and cultural

psychologists, including Jonathan Haidt, to understand 
 why morality varies so much across cultures yet still

shows 
so many similarities and recurrent themes. In brief, the 
theory proposes that several innate and universally 
available psychological systems are the foundations of 
“intuitive ethics.” Each culture then constructs virtues, 
narratives, and institutions on top of these 
foundations, thereby creating the unique 
moralities we see around the world, and 
conflicting within nations
too. 

The six foundations are:

B. Sources of Morality

The three sources of morality are essential in helping us to evaluate human acts and
form our moral code. They give us tools to help us live our lives in a morally upright and
praiseworthy way.

The morality of a human actions depends on three sources:

1. The object chosen
2. The intention of the one who acts
3. The circumstances of the act

A morally good act requires the goodness of its object, of its end, and of its circumstances
altogether. (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

Source of Morality Example/ Illustration

Object– the thing or action Ex. Murder, prostitution

toward which the “will”
deliberately directs itself.
     -It is WHAT one chooses
     -It is the MEANS to the end
one is pursuing  
    -Before one chooses (wills)
an object (action) the intellect
makes a judgment about
whether this object (action) is
in conformity with true and
objective goodness

Ex. stealing money to help the poor, alms giving for

 Intention– the reason a
person performs the action  
      -WHY one chooses
something
      -END or goal one hopes to
gain by an action
      -The intention resides in
the acting person
      -A good intention cannot vainglory.
justify a bad action

Circumstances– secondary Ex. Yelling at your child when you are excessively
elements of the moral act busy and frustrated, or refusing to help a family
      -WHEN, WHERE, WHO, member when there is plenty of time.
HOW, etc.
      -They include the
consequences of actions.

 In determining the morality of an action, it is the object of the action, not the intention of
the agent that is of primary importance because the object of a person’s choice can
destroy the goodness of a moral act entirely, regardless of the circumstances or the
intention.

C. Definition of Moral Dilemma

           A dilemma is a situation where a person is forced to choose between two

or more conflicting options, neither of which is acceptable.

           When dilemmas involve human actions which have moral implications,

they are called ethical or moral dilemmas. According to Karen Allen, there are
three conditions that must be present for situations to be considered moral
dilemmas.

1. The person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make a decision about

which course of action is best.

2. There must be different courses of action to choose from.
3. No matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are always
compromised.
 This means that, according to Allen, there is no perfect solution to the problem
and by choosing one of the possible moral requirements, the person also fails on
others.
D. Suggestions on How to Resolve Moral Dilemmas

       The largest struggle in trying to resolve a moral dilemma is recognizing that

whatever action you take, it will not be completely ethical. It will just be the most ethical
in comparison with the other choices.

       Philosophers have attempted to find solutions to moral dilemmas for centuries.

They have discussed and attempted to find the best ways to resolve them, in order to
help us live better and reduce the suffering that we may face.   Here are a few pieces of
advice to help resolve moral dilemmas:
 1. Be reasonable, not emotional.
     We have a greater chance of overcoming these struggles if we logically work
through them. Analyze the aspects of the dilemma in order to better conclude what
action is the greatest good. Emotion can cloud our judgment of what may be the best
ethical outcome.

2. Choose the greater good or the lesser evil.

     Perhaps the soundest piece of advice is to conclude which choice allows for the
greatest good, or the less evil. This isn’t simple and will take much consideration.
However, if there is an action that is on balance morally superior, despite other
personal or social implications, then it is the best action to take.

3. Is there an alternative?
     Analyzing the situation in greater detail may reveal alternative options that were
not immediately obvious. Is there an alternative choice or action that will resolve the
dilemma better than the ones you have in front of you? Take time to recognize if there
is.

4. What are the consequences?

     Weighing up the positive and negative consequences of each action will give a
clearer picture of the best choice to make. Each option may have a number of negative
consequences, but if one has more positive consequences and less negative, then it is
on the balance the right action to take.

5. What would a good person do?

     Sometimes a useful thing to do would be to just simply ask: What would a good
person do?

Imagine yourself as a truly virtuous and morally upright person and then determine
what they would do, regardless of your own character and the personal or social
factors that may influence your decision.

WEEK 5
Definition of Virtue Ethics

          Commonly referred to as character-based ethics, virtue ethics believes

that a right act is the action a virtuous person would do in the same
circumstances. 
           Virtue ethics is person rather than action based: it looks at the virtue or
moral character of the person carrying out an action, rather than at ethical duties

and rules, or the consequences of particular actions.

          Virtue ethics not only deals with the rightness or wrongness of individual
actions, it provides guidance as to the sort of characteristics and behaviours a
good person will seek to achieve.

          In that way, virtue ethics is concerned with the whole of a person's life,
rather than particular episodes or actions.

B. Principles of Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics teaches:

 An action is only right if it is an action that a virtuous person would carry out in
the same circumstances.
 A virtuous person is a person who acts virtuously
 A person acts virtuously if they "possess and live the virtues"
 A virtue is a moral characteristic that a person needs to live well.

          Most virtue theorists would also insist that the virtuous person is one who
acts in a virtuous way as the result of rational thought (rather than, say, instinct).

The three questions

The modern philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre proposed three questions as being
at the heart of moral thinking:
  Who am I? 
 Who ought I to become?
 How ought I to get there?

C. Lists of the Virtues

          Most virtue theorists say that there is a common set of virtues that all
human beings would benefit from, rather than different sets for different sorts of
people, and that these virtues are natural to mature human beings - even if they
are hard to acquire.

           This poses a problem, since lists of virtues from different times in history
and different societies show significant differences.

          The traditional list of cardinal virtues is divided into two groups:

(derived by most philosophers in the Catechism of the Catholic Church)

I. Theological Virtues

II. Cardinal Virtues

 On the other hand, the modern theologian James F Keenan suggests:
(modern list)

 Justice
Justice requires us to treat all human beings equally and impartially.

 Fidelity
Fidelity requires that we treat people closer to us with special care.

 Self-care
We each have a unique responsibility to care for ourselves, affectively, mentally,
physically, and spiritually.

 Prudence
The prudent person must always consider Justice, Fidelity and Self-care.
The prudent person must always look for opportunities to acquire more of the
other three virtues

D. Good Points of Virtue Ethics

 It centers ethics on the person and what it means to be human
 It includes the whole of a person's life

E. Bad Points of Virtue Ethics

 It doesn't provide clear guidance on what to do in moral dilemmas

 Although it does provide general guidance on how to be a good person
 Presumably a totally virtuous person would know what to do and we could
consider them a suitable role model to guide us
 There is no general agreement on what the virtues are
 It may be that any list of virtues will be relative to the culture in which it is being
drawn up.