Module 2/Week 2

Moral Dilemma, Freedom as foundation for moral acts, Domains of Ethical Assessment, The purpose of
Morality
Prepared by: Prof. John Christian Cabales
Time allotment: 6 hours

Overview:

This module comprises four (4) lessons. It is expected that you will:

1. Explain the influence of Filipino culture on the way the students look at moral experiences and solve moral
dilemmas.

Lesson 1: Deals with the dilemma, levels of dilemma, and how to handle dilemmas.
Lesson 2: Talk about Human Freedom and her relevance to moral acts.
Lesson 3: Be aware of assessing a human act whether it is ethical or unethical.
Lesson 4: Shows the objectives of morality.

Lesson 1/Topic 1
Moral Dilemma

Objectives:
This lesson will help you –

1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems;

2. Explain the influence of Filipino culture on the way the students look at moral experiences and solve moral
dilemmas.

Introduction

Have you ever experienced a situation that challenged you to choose an option you thought it is the best but
in doing so, inflicting pain to you and others? Did you feel peace of mind? If you did, then, that circumstance
may be one of the many that puts you in a dilemma. In this Lesson, we will study the nature of Dilemma by
looking at different situations hoping that we can always find a better solution to everyday problems.

Content

Read and Study Topic 1 in www.usa.neolms.com: Open Classes/ Resources

Power point presentation: Topic 1: Moral Dilemma

Page 5//Module 2 GE 8
Evaluation

The Concentration Camp

You are an inmate in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and
wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don’t he will not only kill your son but
some other innocent inmate as well. You don’t have any doubt that he means what he says.
What should you do?

1. Is the dilemma of the parent in the situation above considered moral or non-moral problem?

2. If you are the parent in the above situation, describe your moral experiences of the situation.
(Limit the answer to 3 sentences)

3. Suggest three solutions to solve a certain dilemma:

Enrichment activities

1. For further reading, read Introductory text to Philosophy.Makati: Best Books, Inc., 1987. Adrales, Venancio
B. Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981 Avey, Alber E. Handbook in
History of Philosophy. New York: Barns and Noble, Inc., 1968 Black, Max. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. New
York: Prentice-Hall, 1955 Beck, Lewis W. Eighteenth Century Philosophy. New York:The Free Press, 1966.

Lesson 2/Topic 2
Freedom as foundations of moral acts

Objectives:
This lesson will help you –

1. Explain the influence of Freedom on the way the students look at moral experiences and solve moral
problems related to moral acts.

Introduction

To be free or not to be free? Everytime we speak of Freedom we always highlight the concept of
responsibility as part of the exercise of human freedom. Are you really responsible because you are free to do
an act or are you free from whatever accountability of those actions since you know what responsibility really
is? Let this lesson, clarify our notions of freedom, and her significance in the morality of human acts.

Content

Read and Study Topic 1 in www.usa.neolms.com: Open Classes/ Resources

Power point presentation: Topic 2: Freedom as foundations of moral acts

Page 6//Module 2 GE 8
Evaluation

1. Online classes have different subjects with a variety of activities that a student must be ready to process and
submit to their respective professors. Some students and teachers find it easy while others are struggling to
adjust with the new mode of classes. To make the online classes smooth as much as possible, class policies
were established. Plagiarism, late submission, no submission, no grade are just a part of this policies. In this
context, how can a student exercise true freedom despite being bombarded or overwhelmed by workload?
(Limit the answer to 3 sentences)*

2. Why should we be responsible for our actions? *

3. Why shouldn’t we allow people to just do what they would like to do like other lower animals? *

4. Does morality entail impartiality? Discuss your answer. *

Enrichment activities

1. For further reading, read Introductory text to Philosophy.Makati: Best Books, Inc., 1987. Adrales, Venancio
B. Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981 Avey, Alber E. Handbook in
History of Philosophy. New York: Barns and Noble, Inc., 1968 Black, Max. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. New
York: Prentice-Hall, 1955 Beck, Lewis W. Eighteenth Century Philosophy. New York:The Free Press, 1966.

Lesson 3/Topic 2.b

Domains of Ethical Assessment

Objectives:
This lesson will help you –

1. make an assessment of human acts whether it is moral or immoral.

Introduction

How do we evaluate a human act as moral or immoral? Right or wrong. Legal or illegal. We know that all
moral acts are legal, but, not all legal acts are moral. All immoral acts are wrong and illegal. In this Lesson,
you will be encourage to search for those dimensions of ethical assessment. Doing so, will help you realize the
gravity of human actions in yourself, and others.

Page 7//Module 2 GE 8
Content

Domains of Ethical Assessment

Ethics concern itself entirely with rules of conduct based solely on evaluation of actions. There are four (4)
domains of ethical assessment:

Domain Evaluation terms

1. Action/Act - Is it right (obligatory) or wrong (forbidden)?

Permissible or not permissible (right or wrong)

2. Consequences - Good/Bad/Indifferent

3. Character - Virtuous (virtue), Vicious (vice)

4. Motive - Good will, Evil will

Evaluation

Assess the following actions according to the domains of Ethics and use the evaluation terms:

Example: A Student submits an activity after the deadline was given by the instructor.

1. The act of Student is not permissible (wrong, not allowed).

2. She/He will get deductions as a consequence (bad).
3. The Act can be vicious (vice).
4. The motive can possible come from an evil will.

Choose one (1):

1. Joined the class in google meeting but the student turned off the microphone or camera and do other activities
e.g. play mobile games or scroll in Facebook.

2. Avoiding house chores or errands by reasoning out to parents/guardians that you have online classes from
Monday to Saturdays.

3. Copy and pasting statements, etc. from the internet to answer the assigned activities of different modules in
various subjects.

Page 8//Module 2 GE 8
Enrichment activities

1. For further reading, read Introductory text to Philosophy.Makati: Best Books, Inc., 1987. Adrales, Venancio
B. Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981 Avey, Alber E. Handbook in
History of Philosophy. New York: Barns and Noble, Inc., 1968 Black, Max. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. New
York: Prentice-Hall, 1955 Beck, Lewis W. Eighteenth Century Philosophy. New York:The Free Press, 1966.

Lesson 4/Topic 4
Purpose of Morality

Objectives:
This lesson will help you –

1. explain the objectives of morality;

2. differentiate human actions that corresponds to the aims of morality and contradicts the objectives of
morality.

Introduction

It is best to know that human actions are done with a purpose. It becomes more meaningful and productive.
Keep in mind that not all our motives are right all the time. We need a clear guide to find out the morality
behind the intention. It is always first initiated before an action. In this Lesson, we will study the aims of
morality.

Content

Purpose of Morality

Pojman's claim that morality has five purposes can be used as an argument against ethical relativism. The idea
that morality has five purposes, as presented in the essay "On the Nature and Purpose of Morality", can be used
as an argument against relativism. In the essay, Louis Pojman claims that morality has the following five
purposes: "to keep society from falling apart", "to ameliorate human suffering", "to promote human
flourishing", "to resolve conflicts of interest in just and orderly ways", and "to assign praise and blame,
reward the good and punish the guilty" (Pojman, 2000). This paper will regard these five purposes of
morality as conditions that must be satisfied in order for an act to be morally right and these conditions aim to
bring about flourishing communities. Ethical relativism will be defined as stated by John Ladd in page 160,
wherein any act committed by an individual or group is morally right if it is acceptable within the society to
which the individual or group belongs (Ladd, 1973; Pojman, 2000). This shows that an act cannot be considered
right or wrong because there are no universal moral principles that govern an act committed by an individual.
Furthermore, one statement will be considered to be an argument against another statement if and only if the
first statement can provide at least one instance when the second statement will not hold. In this case, Pojman's
claim on the five purposes of morality can be considered as an argument against ethical relativism if it can show
that an act can be considered right if it satisfies the five conditions stated earlier, or wrong if it does not satisfy
the five conditions, thus showing that ethical relativism cannot be true.
Page 9//Module 2 GE 8
In order to show that Pojman's essay can be used as an argument against ethical relativism, it has to be shown
that the claims made in the essay disprove ethical relativism. Since Pojman's essay argues that morality has five
purposes, all of which aim to "create happy and virtuous people" (Pojman, 2000), then an act that is committed
by an individual or group can be judged to be right or wrong whether or not the act is acceptable within the
community to which the individual or group belongs. For example, Hitler's persecution of the Jews was
acceptable within the society to which he belonged, the Nazi government. However, Jews were forced to suffer
unbearable conditions in concentration camps during World War II and many were sentenced to die. More
recently, the terrorist attacks on the US were considered just within the terrorist organization itself, even though
these attacks resulted in a great deal of damaged property and death. According to Pojman's arguments, the acts
of Hitler and these terrorists can be considered morally wrong because they also brought about human suffering.

There are also some people who act in the interest of promoting flourishing human communities, prevent
human suffering and prevent the breakdown of society, yet their ideas go against the beliefs held by the
majority of people in the society. Such people are called reformers (Pojman, 2000). Malcolm X and Martin
Luther King opposed the oppression of African-Americans in the United States during the 1960's. Their acts can
be considered morally right because they fought for the equality of different ethnic groups in America, which
indeed promotes growth in the community, even if it meant going against the racist mentality that most of the
people held during that time. This logically implies that ethical relativism is wrong. Thus, an individual's or a
number of people's actions can be judged to be right or wrong regardless of the fact that the act may or may not
be acceptable within the society to which he or she belongs. The only thing that matters in judging

These arguments presented by Pojman, some of which are implied, disprove the theory of ethical relativism, so
the essay "On the Nature and Purpose of Morality" can be used as an argument against ethical relativism. The
essay provided instances when ethical relativism can be wrong. Pojman asserts that an act indeed has certain
conditions that it must satisfy and he further states that morality has goals that it must meet in order for an act to
be considered morally right, more specifically, it must "create flourishing communities" (Pojman, 2000).

References
Pojman, L.P. (2000). On the nature and purpose of morality. The Moral Life. 32-41. Oxford University Press.
New York, New York. Pojman, L.P. (2000). The case against moral relativism. The Moral Life. 106-185.
Oxford University Press. New York, New York.

Evaluation

Hitler's persecution of the Jews was acceptable within the society to which he belonged, the Nazi government.
However, Jews were forced to suffer unbearable conditions in concentration camps during World War II and
many were sentenced to die. More recently, the terrorist attacks on the US were considered just within the
terrorist organization itself, even though these attacks resulted in a great deal of damaged property and death.

1. What objective of morality is contradicted by the actions of Hitler as described in the paragraph above?

2. Cite a human action that contradicts the purposes of morality in the current situation of the Philippines.
Why? (Limit the answer to 4 sentences)

Enrichment activities

1. For further reading, read Introductory text to Philosophy.Makati: Best Books, Inc., 1987. Adrales, Venancio
B. Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1981 Avey, Alber E. Handbook in
History of Philosophy. New York: Barns and Noble, Inc., 1968 Black, Max. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. New
York: Prentice-Hall, 1955 Beck, Lewis W. Eighteenth Century Philosophy. New York:The Free Press, 1966.

Page 10//Module 2 GE 8