LESSON 1

ETHICS: FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS AND ISSUES

What Is This Lesson About?

Ethics is about systematizing and recommending notions of what is right and wrong
behavior. It is about what is acceptable and unacceptable in human behavior which may involve
obligations that we are expected to fulfill, prohibitions that we are required to respect, and
ideals that we are encouraged to meet. Thus, in general, ethics is all about the systematic study
of notions related to morality as well as it digs into the moral issues that we encounter in our
everyday life. Nonetheless, before we proceed in tackling the practical moral question. It is
important for us to first clarify the fundamental concepts of ethics. In this lesson, the basic
concepts of ethics and vital issues will be discussed. Ultimately, the topics discussed here will
serve as your groundwork for the next lesson.

What Will You Learn?

After completing the lesson, you will be able to:

1. Explain the meaning of ethics and its general subject areas.

2. Explain what are moral dilemmas and differentiate moral standards from non-moral
standards.
3. Recognize differences in the moral behavior of different cultures and generations.
4. Reflect on the fundamental qualities of the Filipino moral identity in their own moral
experiences.

Let’s Try This! (A.1.1) Before you read on, try and answer the question below. Write your
answer on the space provided.

1. Should there be a proper study of morality? Why or why not?

- A proper study of morality is of great importance because our decision and
actions in life must be deliberated and aligned through moral standards. Studying
it, will not just make us aware how our decisions in life could affect us, but also it
could make us cautious and aware of the consequences it might impact you and
the people around us. Morality is something that bonds people of a community
together, it makes bounded over a moral standard that they must abide, a
righteous works.

2. Are all acts be subjected to ethical analysis? Why?

- Well, there is a lot of great area of the concept of ethical analysis. For me, not all
acts should undergo ethical analysis. Why? Because we are not only focusing on
the action itself. Acts subjected to ethical analysis is dependent on the person
who executed the act, and must also consider the very nature of doing such
action.
 3. Have you already encountered a situation where you need to decide or choose between
to equal options?
- Yes. I’ve remembered once when my parents got separated and I had to make a
choice whether to whom I should go to. It was a very tough moment. My feeling
got mixed because I want to be with my father but I also want to go with my
mother. So, I’ve made my decision to live with my mom because there are other
things for me to fulfill and things to improve to myself that I think would be
possible if I was under my dad’s custody. I really hope I made the right choice.

4. Are all moral behavior the same among all cultures? How about among different
generations?
- No, and that is because people of different countries, groups, or generations
have a culture of their own. They follow different beliefs, custom and practices,
and values. An example of that is, the issue of “Same-sex marriage, in this, in
other countries they have accepted it wholly while others don’t. What I’m trying to
say is that, other countries/people see same-sex marriage as nothing bad, as
long the love is there and the partners’ love doesn’t affect and hurt others, then
that thing would be considered as morally good and acceptable. While to other
people who are in complete contradict towards it, they consider same-sex
marriage as an opposition and wrong doing based upon the Bible, so, they will
judge it based on their moral code as morally bad. Behaviors and actions are
being sorted out depending on the beliefs and values people are giving
importance to.

Let’s Read!

A. Ethics and Morality

The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and
recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior (Fieser, 2020). It is also understood by
individuals in different ways. The word ethics is confused with morality which is often used
synonymously. The term morality has Latin roots, whereas the term ethics stems from classical
Greek, but both words originally referred to respectable behavior in a given society. However,
these concepts have gradually become labels for different phenomena, that is why clarifications
must be given.

Morality can be used either descriptively or normatively.

Morality in its descriptive sense refers to certain codes of conduct put forward by a
society or a group such as a religion.

However, in its normative sense it refers to a code of conduct “ethics is the that would
be put forward by all rational persons given in study of morality
”
specified conditions. In other words, if we use “morality” in its descriptive sense we will almost
certainly deny that there is a universal morality that applies to all human person since standards
of societies may vary. However, if we use “morality” in its normative sense, we will all hold that
morality refers to a code of conduct that applies to all who can understand it and can govern our
behavior by it (Gert 2016).

Ethics on the other hand, “refers to the discipline that examines the moral standards of an
individual or society. Therefore, ethics is the study of morality” (Evangelista and Mabaquiao
2020, p. 2). As a philosophical discipline, ethics is systematic in its approach. By systematic it
means that it follows a certain process to understand, analyze, recommend and defend matters
of right and wrong as they relate to the welfare of individuals, their relationships with one
another including the environment. Its analysis is based on sound and logical reasons based on
facts and ethical theories. Moreover, as we have distinguished normative and descriptive
morality earlier, we also need to distinguish between descriptive and normative study of ethics.

A descriptive study of ethics reports how people, particularly groups, think about right and
wrong, acceptable or not acceptable, how they behave, or how they reason about ethics. This
kind of study is often the work of the social-scientist such as historians, sociologists,
anthropologists. Emphasis must be made that this kind of study of ethics is not an area of moral
philosophy. On the other hand, the normative study of ethics is often done in philosophy. It is
concerned with the moral standards to determine right from wrong conduct. It involves the
formulation of moral norms that can serve as a basis of the kinds of actions, institutions, and
ways of life we should pursue (Evangelista and Mabaquiao, 2020)

Consequently, it quite clear that individuals learn morality and ethics in different ways. Moral
beliefs and convictions are usually adopted through social interaction, whereas ethics is an
academic discipline that is learned academically. There are ethics courses and exams, but
there are no equivalent activities for morality; there are only moral tests, both in everyday life
and in more extraordinary situations. An individual’s actions on these tests determine whether
that person is living under his or her moral convictions (Knalves 2020). The significance of
ethics is it will guide the individuals to assess and to justify their morals by the aid of sound
ethical frameworks.

General Subject Areas of Ethics

Philosophers usually divide ethical theories into

METAETHICS three general subject areas: metaethics, normative ethics,
NORMATIVE ETHICS and applied ethics. Metaethics investigates where our
APPLIED ETHICS ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Are they
merely social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our emotions?
Metaethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will
of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms
themselves. Normative
ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right
and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the
duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others. Lastly, applied
ethics involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion, infanticide, animal
rights, environmental concerns, homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war (Fieser,
2020).

Furthermore, by using the theoretical tools of metaethics and normative ethics,

discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial issues. The lines of distinction
between metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry. For example, the
issue of abortion is an applied ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial
behavior. But it also depends on more general normative principles, such as the right of self-
rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for determining the morality of that procedure.
The issue also rests on metaethical issues such as, “where do rights come from?” and “what
kind of beings have rights?” (Fieser, 2020).

For further discussion, read, “Ethics” by James Fieser in The Internet

Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available online: https://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/

Watch! Metaethics by Crash Course Philosophy. Available online:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOoffXFpAlU&t=1s
Let’s Think About This (LT1)

What if there is no systematic study of morality? Can all acts be justified? Write your answer on
the space provided. Post also your answer in the course site.

- Being bounded and aligned in moral conventions and standards provides people
a harmonious life living together, and making every individual be in right track of
their behaviors knowing if it is morally good or bad. Now, if there is no systematic
study of morality there would be chaos everywhere. Everything would become
more complicated. Try to consider this, there are acts that are morally good with
its very purpose but legally wrong. There were also behaviors and acts that are
morally wrong but legally right.
Every actions must undergo judgments that vary depending on the reason behind
the action, its effect on the people around, and the person who carries it. So,
having no systematic study of morality, it would leave people astray. Some of
them might think for example, stealing money to buy food or necessities of the
family morally good because of the very reason of it, which is to feed off his
family. Now, I’m saying that all acts must be justified. Not because, you did
something beneficial for your family, but the process of it will fall into judgments
of being morally and legally wrong. That means, studying morality is really of
great significance.

B. Moral Standards 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 (Mañebog 2016). The best way to describe what moral standards is
its characteristics as seen in the table below as discussed by Mañebog (2016).

Characteristics of moral standards further distinguish it from non-moral standards

(Mañebog 2016):
a. Moral standards involve serious wrongs
or significant benefits.
b. Moral standards ought to be preferred
to other values.
c. Moral standards are not established by
authority figures.
Moral standards deal with matters
which can seriously impact, that is, to
injure or benefit individuals. Unlike the
case with many non-moral standards,
for example, following or violating
some basketball rules may matter in
basketball games but does not
necessarily affect one’s life or
wellbeing. Thus, moral standards are
only concerned with serious actions or
significant benefits that involve an
individual’s life or wellbeing.
Moral standards have an overriding
importance. If a moral standard states
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 invented or
made by authoritative individuals such
as legislative bodies, although, these
moral standards ought to be
considered in the process of making
laws. However, moral standards
cannot be changed nor nullified by the

d. Moral standards have the trait of
universalizability.
decisions of a particular authoritative
body. Nonetheless, one thing about
these standards, is that its validity lies
in the soundness or adequacy of the
reasons that are considered to
support and justify them.
This means that everyone should live
up to moral standards. However, this
entails that moral principles must
apply to all who are in the relevantly
similar in situation. This characteristic
is exemplified in the Gold Rule, “Do
unto others what you would them do
unto you”

Non-moral standards, on the other hand, refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or
ethical considerations. These standards are either not necessarily linked to or by nature lack
ethical sense. Basic examples of non-moral standards include rules of etiquette, fashion
standards and house rules or in games. In other words, non-moral standards refer to those
standards which we judge as good or bad in a non-moral way.

C. Moral Dilemma priority to one moral value

over another. Such
A dilemma is a situation that requires a choice between dilemmas arise when an
two options that are equally undesirable or unsatisfactory. There individual is faced with a
are non-moral dilemmas in which the choice is between options
that are undesirable or unsatisfactory for some reasons other a moral dilemma is a
than morality. For example, if a person wants to buy both a book situation in which the
and a shirt but can only afford to purchase one of them,
decision-maker has to give
choosing one over the other will inevitably lead to
priority to one moral value
disappointment, in that it will fulfill only one of the two desires.
There need not be any moral dimension to this decision for it to over another.
be a dilemma. Nonetheless, in terms of morality, a moral
dilemma is a situation in which the decision-maker has to give
difficult situation such as two or more values which are conflicting, or when an individual is
assessing another’s moral choice. The individual who faces a dilemma must decide which
moral duty to prioritize (Kvalnes 2019). Consider the moral dilemma by Knalves (2019) below:

Anne is the project manager for a large industrial project (run by a Nordic company) in
a developing country. On a crucial day during the project, the entire plant’s electricity
suddenly went out. Large quantities of cement were beginning to congeal in their mixers, and
it was crucial to quickly reactivate them. More than one thousand employees were unable to
do their work. Anne contacted the local authorities to solve the problem. A bureaucrat turned
up at the plant and explained that he could turn the electricity back on very quickly—on the
condition that he be allowed to bring ten of the company’s PCs back to the town hall, which
had a desperate shortage of PCs that was preventing the bureaucrat and his colleagues from
providing adequate service to the local community. Thus, he suggested a trade-off: PCs for
electricity. In this manner, Anne and her company had the option to make a significant
contribution to the local community.

Time was of the essence, and Anne had little time to dwell on the alternatives. There
was no time to contact her supervisors in the firm’s home country for advice or instructions.
She had to figure the situation out by herself. If the cement were to congeal, that would mean
a considerable delay in the project, and several operations would have to be redone, at a high
cost. That cost would be much higher than that of losing ten PCs, which could be easily
 replaced. Anne also had sympathy for the local bureaucrats and (the population they serve),
who she believed would probably make very good use of the PCs. On the other hand, the
demand was blackmail, and if she gave in this time, then it may happen again at other crucial
stages of the project. Anne faced a difficult choice. What should she do?

Anne wanted to honor not just the moral value of finishing the project on time and
within budget but also that of not giving in to blackmail and corruption. One of these values
had to give way. There was no way in which Anne could act in a completely moral manner.

Take note that, moral dilemmas such as Anne’s can be encountered not just in working
life but also in student life. It may also happen in both public and private sectors and
organizations, homes, communities, societies, or even on a personal level. In busy situations,
we sometimes don’t notice that we are already having a moral dilemma, therefore failing to see
the moral dimensions of our choices. Understanding the nature of moral dilemmas is an
important prerequisite to identifying them and finding ways in which to deal with them
responsibly (Kvalnes 2019).

Let’s Think About This (LT2)

Have you already encountered a moral dilemma? How did you respond to it? Write your
answer in the box provided. Post also your answer in the course site.
Yes. Back when I was in 11th grade, I remembered that I have this girl bestfriend. We we’re so
close that she entrust me of her secrets, one of those is her having a boyfriend that she kept it
hidden from her parents, and she handed me her full trust. And then one day, I accidentally
got to bumped off with his father on a road, not so distanced from our school. He approached
to me, and confronted me of something I am of great fear it was his intention. He then asked
me, “I know that you are one of the closest and trusted friend of my unica hija, now tell me the
truth, is she have a boyfriend now?
I began thinking and stuck in a moral dilemma. Should I break the trust of my friend or tell her
father the truth. Either way I am stuck. Until I’ve came up to the right decision. I’ve decided to
tell her father the truth about everything. Not only I’m following the golden rule which is
honesty, I am also giving respect to her parents, it’s just like respecting my parents too.
Although I would say that I’ve betrayed my friend for this, I think what I have done is the best
thing for her, to fix and clear the relationship between her parents.
Yes. I truly value our friendship and the trust she had given me, but I couldn’t just disrespect
her father by not saying the truth. We all know that parents knows best.

D. Ethics and Culture

Darius, a king of ancient Persia, was intrigued by the variety of cultures he met in his
travels. He had found, for example, that the Callatians, who lived in India, ate the bodies of their
dead fathers. The Greeks, of course, did not do that—the Greeks practiced cremation and
regarded the funeral pyre as the natural and fitting way to dispose of the dead. Darius thought
that a sophisticated outlook should appreciate the differences between cultures. One day, to
teach this lesson, he summoned some Greeks who happened to be at his court and asked
what it would take for them to eat the bodies of their dead fathers. They were shocked, as
Darius knew they would be, and replied that no amount of money could persuade them to do
such a thing. Then Darius called in some Callatians and, while the Greeks listened, asked them
what it would take for them to burn their dead fathers’ bodies. The Callatians were horrified and
told Darius not to speak of such things. This story, recounted by Herodotus in his History,
illustrates a recurring theme in the literature of social science (Rachels 2013). Should you eat
the bodies of the dead or burn them? Which cultural practice do you think is correct?
Cultural Relativism
 Cultural relativism is a view that good and bad
are relative to culture. Different cultures have different
moral codes. What is thought right within one group
may horrify the members of another group and vice
versa. What is “good” is what is “socially approved” in
a given culture. Our moral principles describe social
conventions and must be based on the norms of our
society. Perhaps the most appealing of its claims is
that that it emphasizes that no culture is superior to
any other culture when comparing systems of
morality, law, politics, etc. as a result, resulting in
moral tolerance. Cultural beliefs are equally valid and
that truth itself is relative, depending on the cultural
environment. Thus, those who hold to cultural
relativism hold that all religious, ethical, aesthetic, and
political beliefs are completely relative to the
individual within a cultural identity.
Perhaps it is undeniable that different cultures
have different moral codes. What is thought right
within one group may horrify the members of another
group and vice versa. To raise questions from the
story, we can ask this following. First,
should individuals eat the
The following claims by cultural relativist:
1. Different societies have different
moral codes.
2. The moral code of a society
determines what is right within that
society; that is, if the moral code of a
society says that a certain action is
right, then that action is right, at least
within that society.
3. There is no objective standard that
can be used to judge one society’s
code as better than another’s. There
are no moral truths that hold for all
people at all times.
4. The moral code of our own society
has no special status; it is but one
among many.
5. It is arrogant for us to judge other
cultures. We should always be
tolerant of them.

bodies of the dead or burn them? Second, can they judge the culture of others? The answer to
the first question is that, if you were a Greek, to burn the bodies of the dead would seem
correct; but if you were a Callatian, to eat the bodies of the dead would seem equally certain.
For the second question, to call a custom “correct” or “incorrect” would imply that we can judge
that custom by some independent standard of right and wrong. But according to Rachels
(2017), no such standard exists; every standard is culture-bound. Culture plays a major part in
our perception of what is moral, and because of that, it could also pose some issues since each
culture has a unique feature that other culture doesn’t have. With this regard, cultural relativism
challenges our belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth.

Watch! Online video lecture by Gregory B. Sadler titled, James Rachels’ Five Claims of
Cultural Relativism. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAwIjx5Ms2A

Ima Relativist
(from Harry Gensler 2011, pp. 8-9)

My name is Ima Relativist. I’ve embraced cultural relativism as I’ve come to appreciate
the deeply cultural basis for morality. I was brought up to believe that morality is about objective
facts. Just as snow is white, so also infanticide is wrong. But attitudes vary with time and place.
The norms that I was taught are the norms of my own society; other societies have different
ones. Morality is a cultural construct. Just as societies create different styles of food and
clothing, so too they create different moral codes. I’ve learned about these in my anthropology
class and experienced them as an exchange student in Mexico.

Consider my belief that infanticide is wrong. I was taught this as if it were an objective
standard. But it isn’t; it’s just what my society holds. When I say “Infanticide is wrong,” this just
means that my society disapproves of it. For the ancient Romans, on the other hand, infanticide
was all right. There’s no sense in asking which side here is “correct.” Their view is true relative
to their culture, and our view is true relative to ours. There are no objective truths about right or
wrong. When we claim otherwise, we’re just imposing our culturally taught attitudes as the
“objective truth.”

“Wrong” is a relative term, and thus needs a further reference to complete its sense. Let
me explain what this means. Something isn’t “to the left” absolutely, but only “to the left of” this
or that. So “to the left” is a relative term. Similarly,
something isn’t “wrong” absolutely, but only “wrong in” this or that society. Infanticide might be
wrong in one society but right in another.

We can express cultural relativism most clearly as a definition: “X is good” means “The
majority (of the society in question) approves of X.” Other moral terms, like “bad” and “right,”
can be defined in a similar way. Note the reference to a specific society. Unless otherwise
specified, the society in question is that of the person making the judgment. When I say “Hitler
acted wrongly,” I mean “according to the standards of my society.”

The myth of objectivity says that things can be good or bad “absolutely”— not relative to
this or that culture. But how can we know what is good or bad absolutely? And how can we
argue about this without just presupposing the standards of our own society? People who
speak of good or bad absolutely are absolutizing the norms of their own society. They take the
norms that they were taught to be objective facts. Such people need to study anthropology, or
to live for a time in another culture.

As I’ve come to believe in cultural relativism, I’ve grown in my acceptance of other

cultures. Like many exchange students, I used to have this “we’re right and they’re wrong”
attitude. I struggled against this. I came to realize that the other side isn’t “wrong” but just
“different.” We have to see others from their point of view; if we criticize them, we’re just
imposing the standards of our own society. We cultural relativists are more tolerant.

Through cultural relativism I’ve also come to be more accepting of the norms of my own
society. cultural relativism gives a basis for a common morality within a culture—a democratic
basis that pools everyone’s ideas and insures that the norms have wide support. So I can feel
solidarity with my own people, even though other groups have different values.

Let’s Think About This! (LT2)

Write a short reflection on Ima’s position on cultural relativism. Are we in a position to morally
judge a particular cultural practice? Write your answer in the space provided. Post also your
answer in the course site.

- When we say cultural relativism, what we mean is that one should have a wider
room to fill those understandings that we must pay respect to other cultures just
like how we respect ours. Yes, there were times that we cannot fully control
ourselves in comparing our culture to other places, and we keep criticizing them
as if we do have a reference of what is morally good or bad. That’s absurd.
Just like in the stand of Ima, objective truth would never be measured if we keep
on going the tracks of our society standards. An example of that is, way back
when I was on 12th Grade when we got a vacation to Cotabato. I saw some
families with an old husband having an estimated 13-year old wife. This literally
shocked me. I was so confused that time why a 13-year old girl be married at a
very young age. But now, I’ve come to realized that they do have different
cultural basis far different from ours. Above everything else, we are not in the
right position to morally judge a particular cultural practice, because for sure we
might be imposing an objective fact that surely came from the standards and
values of our society. Rather criticize them, we must be understanding. When we
try to put ourselves in their point of view, only then we will see a different new
world to explore without judging it.
Filipino Culture
Given the diversity of the Philippines, the
unifying element of Filipino culture is a complex
matter. It comprises a diverse set of landscapes,
Core concepts in Filipino Culture
languages, and cultures. As Evason (2016)
discussed, “the long history of contact with Spain
Hospitality and the United States continues to have a
Hiya significant impact on the Filipino identity. One
Modesty example is the influence of American standards of
Courtesy beauty, which are often measured in the
Warmth Philippines by the possession of Western physical
Respect traits – such as fair skin and curly hair. Another
Kapwa example is the prominence of Christian ideology
Fatalism since the introduction of Christianity by the
Spanish. Indeed,

when compared to other countries on the Asian

continent, the Philippines has one of the highest Christian populations.” Nonetheless, a sense
of national identity emerged out of the long-standing struggle for independence. In the
contemporary Philippines, many Filipinos are very aware of the colonial history of their country.
For example, Jose Rizal who is a national hero who fought for Philippine independence is being
looked up by many of as an exemplar of a virtuous person. The sense of national identity is
however fragile, with loyalty resides first to their kin, group, or community. That is why the
Philippines is a collectivist society thus Filipinos see themselves as part of a collective group
where the interest of the collectives overrides the interest of the individual (Evason 2016). With
this regard, let us survey the core concepts of Filipino culture which contributes not only to their
national identity but also their moral identity.

Social Hierarchy and “Hiya”

Social hierarchy in the Philippines is very vital. All Filipinos at a very early age are being
taught of the importance of social hierarchy. One obvious example of this is the gestures, terms
of address, and communication styles which depend on the person they interact with as well as
the position in the social hierarchy. To give a more specific example, it is expected if you are
referring to someone who is older than you but within the same generation, we use the terms
Kuya for males and Ate for females, while for family members or even to close family friend, not
within the same generation, we use the terms tito or tita. Failing to do so is considered highly
disrespectful and a lack of acknowledgment of the established hierarchy.

The term Kapwa, on the other hand, refers to “shared self”, “shared identity”, or “self-
inthe-other” (Reyes 2015). Thus, it generally refers to an identity that is shared and whereby
people connect despite differences in social status or wealth. Moreover, kapwa is related to the
collectivistic nature of Filipino society. It is believed that what is good for one person will be
good for the collective and ought to be is shared with fellow people. Being branded as not
having any kapwa is an insult as it implies that the person does not belong to a community
(Evason 2016).
 The concept of ‘hiya’ is also one of the important factors influencing how Filipinos
behave and interact with others. According to Evason (2016) hiya translates roughly into
English as ‘shame’ or ‘embarrassment’, on a deeper level it refers to one’s sense of self,
propriety, and respect. Filipinos may be more motivated to succeed by a fear of shame rather
than fear of failing the task at hand. To avoid experiencing shame, they may try to give face to
those around them through complimenting them and avoiding direct criticism. Individuals will
often try to be generous and hospitable to avoid hiya and to maintain kapwa.

Warmth and Acceptance

It is an undeniable fact that Filipinos are very welcoming and friendly. They love the presence
of other individuals around them, and it is common to find strangers engaging in conversation
or sharing stories to family, friends or foreigners. Also, are often expressive and sentimental
while maintaining a light-hearted character. For example, the word ‘hugot’ (‘to pull out’) is often
used to describe someone drawing out deep sentimental memories or experiences Evason
(2016). They are often willing to share stories of their past that may be considered personal.

Moreover, Filipinos have the general approach to life is of acceptance. ‘Bahala na’
(come what may) captures the strong belief among many Filipinos that whatever may happen is
a part of God’s will. Evason (2016) explains that any individual or group's success is often
attributed to fate or God rather than efforts. This indicates a fatalistic attitude throughout society
whereby Filipinos are generally accepting of theirs and other circumstances. However, this
does not mean Filipinos are passive. Rather, they are hardworking and will often do their best
to help themselves and their family.

Loób and Kapwa: An Introduction to a Filipino Virtue Ethics

by Jeremiah Reyes (2015)

In contrast with the popular scheme of Filipino ‘values’ inherited from twentieth century
American scholarship, this introduction presents a revised interpretation of those ‘values’
through a dialogue with Aristotelian-Thomistic virtue ethics. Filipino virtue ethics is the result of
the mixing of two traditions—the Southeast Asian tribal and animist tradition and the Spanish
Catholic tradition—for over 300 years. It has two main concepts: loób and kapwa, which serve
as pillars that support a special collection of virtues dedicated to strengthening and preserving
human relationships. The glossary below is a survey of Filipino virtue ethics.

1. Kagandahang-Loob - this word is literally translated as “beauty-of-will”. The beauty of

the will in this context is determined by one’s relationship towards the kapwa. Someone
who has an affective concern for others and the willingness to help them in times of
need is a person with kagandahang-loob. It is best understood through the paradigmatic
example of a mother’s love and concern for her child, most especially during the child’s
weakness in infancy.

2. Utang-na-Loob—This word is literally translated as ‘debt-of-will’. It is the natural

response to kagandahang-loób. It is the self-imposed obligation to give back the same
kind of kagandahang-loob to the person who has shown it to you. When utang-na-loob
is returned with interest, that is more than what is due, it can bring about a circular
dynamic between two persons where the one who previously showed kagandahang-
loób is now the one with utang-na-loób, and then vice versa; it continues to alternate
and strengthen the relationship in the process.

3. Pakikiramdam—The closest translation might be relational sensitivity or empath’. It is

about being skilled in reading the other person’s feelings and correctly guessing his
inner state. It requires receptivity to many non-verbal cues, such as subtle facial
expressions, tones of voice and bodily gestures. This indirect communication, though it
might seem tedious or frustrating to the foreigner, is a way of practicing a kind of
emotional intelligence, a way of evaluating and deepening the relationship with the other
person.
 4. Hiya—Hiya has been variously translated as embarrassment or shame. It has often
been negatively criticized when studied in isolation, especially for the Filipino tendency
to be roundabout and not direct to the point. But it is a virtue when it controls and
restrains selfish desires for the welfare of the other. One of the most common
manifestations is withholding a direct verbal confrontation that could embarrass the
other, especially in public.

5. Lakas-ng-Loob/Bahala na—Lakas-ng-loob is literally translated as courage, bahala na is

sometimes translated as ‘fatalism’ or ‘resignation’, but it is translated more positively as
courage to face uncertainty’. The unique history of the Philippines must also be taken
into account in order to see that this is not just any kind of courage, but a courage for
self-sacrifice for the kinship group.

E. Generational Values
Moral behavior doesn’t just vary by culture but also by generations. We commonly hear
the terms silent generations, baby boomers, generation x, generation y or millennials, and
generation z, which most of the times differentiated by social behaviors and values. But what do
these different labels mean, and do any of the stereotypes attached to them contain any grains
of truth? Dr. Alexis Abramson, an expert in what is known as “generational cohorts”, says we
define generations because “when you are born affects your attitudes, your perceptions, your
values, your behaviors.” This means that each of them has its characteristics (BBC 2020).
Below is a survey from the BBC regarding each generation's characteristics and their values.

The Silent Generation

This is the first defined generational group. It refers to those born between 1926 and
1945, so these are people who lived through World War Two. The name comes from an article
in Time magazine from the 1950s and alludes to the fact that the children of this generation
were taught to be seen and not heard. According to Dr. Abramson, this group is:

 Disciplined
 value-oriented and loyal
 interested in direct communication, so enjoy speaking in
person as opposed to via technology

Baby Boomers

This is the only generation that’s been defined by an official government body: The US
Census Bureau (which is part of the country’s Department for Commerce and is responsible for
collecting data from across the US). They’re so named because of the huge surge of births after
World War Two. The group starts in 1946 and ends with those born around 1964 when the
birthrate began to decline again. Dr. Abramson says boomers are:

• committed
• self-sufficient
• competitive (she thinks this may have something to do with how many of them there
were)
Generation X

The Resolution Foundation think tank defines Gen X as those born between 1966 and
1980. They grew up in a time when technology was advancing fast, but it wasn’t nearly as
readily available as it is today. Because of this, this generation straddles both the digital and
non-digital world and understands the importance of both. Dr. Abramson says these people are:

• resourceful
• logical
• good problem-solvers

Millennials (Generation Y)

This is the cohort you’ve probably heard the most about. It’s not entirely certain where
the generation starts and ends, but it’s approximately those born from 1980 to 1995. They’re
often described as ‘lazy’ in the media and that they spend all the money they should be saving
for a house on avocado toast, but they’re also the first generation to be “digital natives”, as Dr.
Abramson describes them. She thinks this makes them extremely self-sufficient, as they no
longer have to rely on others to solve their problems or teach them things - they have the
internet for that. Other defining characteristics include:

 confidentcurious

 questioning authority - Dr Abramson thinks that this can be

perceived quite badlywould be less likely to do so by some of the older generations, who

Generation Z

There are a few conflicting ideas about where this generation starts. Pew Statistics says
1997, Statistics Canada says 1993, and the Resolution Foundation says 2000. Wherever it
begins though, we can safely say this group is young and has never known a life without tech.
That might be why their alternative name (coined by American psychologist Dr. Jean Twenge)
is iGen. Some of their characteristics include:

 ambitious

 digitalconfident-natives

Bridging the Generation Gap

The important thing to note according to Dr. Abramson is that while these separations
can be useful, at the end of the day we are individuals. It’s like with horoscopes: you may
identify with one or two characteristics of being a Sagittarius or a Leo, but you won’t ever fit
your star sign’s description exactly. The same goes for cohorts, although as the stereotypes are
given more prominence in the media, she notes that people in the different groups can “pigeon
hole themselves into aligning themselves with those characteristics”. What they can help us
with, as Dr. Abramson explains: is "so that we know how and when to work differently with a
group.” In other words, you wouldn’t treat a 60-year-old the same way would a teenager, so
having these cohorts gives us a rough idea of what different age groups might want and need
(BBC 2020). Moreover, in terms of communication, Dr. Abramson says the key difference
between all of these cohorts are the different methods of communication they use. Where the
silent generation and baby boomers had to rely on face-to-face relationships and are as a result
more “engaged” in their real-life communities, the younger generations have social media for
that and create their communities online instead. Nonetheless, the key to overcoming these
differences, according to Dr. Abramson, is that “the younger folks can teach the older folks
something and the older folks can teach the younger folks something”. Thus, she suggests
“mentor-mentee relationships, downward and upward”. Historically it’s usually the older person
holding the position of being a mentor. So for example, in a workplace, an older person might
take a young newbie under their wing to teach them what they know and give them a leg up in
the organization (BBC 2020).

Values differ not only by culture but also by generations. There are notable
characteristics among generations. Each is unique and needs to be openly understood and
ultimately, be respected.
Watch! Gen X, Y, and Z: Which One Are You by Bright Side. Available online:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtIojDWOsgg&t=31s

Let’s Think About This (LT3)

 How would respond to the generational differences in terms of both social and moral
behavior? Cite an example to further substantiate your answer. Write your answers
in the space provided. Post also your answer in the course site.

- We all know that a generation is a collective of all the people

born and lived through the same time and raised also in the same place.
People raised and lived in a particular bracket of time cohort exhibit similar
behavior, values, characteristics and preferences over their lifetimes. Now,
there’s always an appearance of the differences on values and
preferences over the different people of generation. In regards to that,
there could be a thing that must act as a mediator to control conflicts over
generational gaps, that would be open-mindedness and respect. We must
disregard the major differences on generation gap as conflicts could
possibly arise if we kept on bragging out generation stereotypes, for
example people of stickler to traditional living are rigid, baby boomers tend
to fear technology while millennials are tend to be not working hard. Trying
to set out boundaries and walls over generation gaps is unreasonable. To
draw closer look and expand the world’s harmony is possible by an
understanding mindset.
Possible solutions could be, as much as practical customize their
work according to their preferences. Communication styles must vary to
the person’s preference. And we could make it at ease by recognizing
biases, as we see different things from what they do, and same to other
way around.
All of these are the very course that needs proper address.
Differences are out there and we could not just completely erase it, but it
is possible to lead it into advantage.

Let’s Remember
Morality refers to the set of standards a person or society uses to judge whether an act is good
or bad, whether someone is virtuous or not, or whether we ought to do this or that (Evangelista,
F. and N. Mabaquiao, 2020). While ethics is the systematic study of morality. It examines,
through the use of ethical theories, the moral standards or code of conduct of an individual or
society.

Morality can be used either descriptively or normatively. In its descriptive sense, it refers to
certain codes of conduct put forward by a society or a group or accepted by an individual for her
behavior. In its normative sense, it refers to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions,
would be put forward by all rational persons.

A descriptive study of ethics reports how people, particularly groups, think about right and
wrong, acceptable or not acceptable, how they behave, or how they reason about ethics. This
kind of study is often the work of social scientists. a normative study of ethics, on the other
hand, is concerned with the moral standards to determine right from wrong conduct. It involves
the formulation of moral norms that can serve as a basis of the kinds of actions, institutions,
and ways of life we should pursue.

There are three general areas of ethics, metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics.
Metaethics answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God,
the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves.
Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that
regulate right and wrong conduct. Lastly, applied ethics involves examining specific
controversial moral issues.

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. On the other hand, the non-moral standard refers to rules
that are unrelated to moral or ethical considerations. These standards are either not necessarily
linked to or by nature lack ethical sense. 5 characteristics distinguish it from non-moral
standards: (1) moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits, (2) moral
standards ought to be preferred to other values, (3) moral standards are not established by
authority figures, (4) moral standards are not established by an authority figure, and (5) moral
standards have the trait of universalizability.

A moral dilemma is a situation in which the decision-maker has to give priority to one moral
value over another. Such dilemmas arise when an individual is faced with a difficult situation
such as two or more values which are conflicting, or when an individual is assessing another’s
moral choice. The individual who faces a dilemma must decide which moral duty to prioritize
(Kvalnes 2019)

Cultural relativism is a view that good and bad are relative to culture. What is “good” is what is
“socially approved” in a given culture. Cultural relativists claim that: (1) different societies have
different moral codes; (2) The moral code of a society determines what is right within that
society; that is, if the moral code of a society says that a certain action is right, then that action
is right, at least within that society; (3) There is no objective standard that can be used to judge
one society’s code as better than another’s. There are no moral truths that hold for all people at
all times; (4) the moral code of our society has no special status; it is but one among many, and
(5) It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures. We should always be tolerant of them.

There are 5 major virtues that a Filipino possesses according to Reyes (2015):
KagandahangLoob, Utang-na-Loob, Pakikiramdam, Hiya, and Lakas-ng-Loob/Bahala na.

Values differ not only by culture but also by generations. There are notable characteristics
among generations. Each is unique and needs to be understood and ultimately, be respected.

How Much Have You Learned? (A.1.2)

To find out more how much you have learned from this lesson, try and answer the question
below. Write your answer on the space provided.
1. What do we mean by the term ethics? Is it different from the term morality?
- Ethics is often misunderstood and nearly compared to morality, but on further
studies it states that it is the study of morality as a whole. It focuses mainly
intersubjective point and actions, they are the set of behaviors, specific rules and
actions. Well, ethics does not need to be morally good for it to be followed and
accepted. They are created for people to be followed, in other words, it has
nothing to do with cosmic or heavenly righteousness but mainly it aims to keep
the group of people remain abound of the ethical codes to keep them away from
trouble and unpleasant conflicts. While morality, in vice-versa can also be
unethical. There are moral values that are considered morally good but unethical
in some sort of ways. Morality refers to the principles and distinction acts whether
good and evil. This somehow resembles the code of conduct from a particular
religion, philosophy or culture that a person believes should be universal.

2. Are all acts be subjected to ethical analysis? Why?

- There are a lot of things to be taken into consideration. I would say that all acts
must undergo ethical analysis. The probable nature or reason behind this ethical
analysis marks variation over the person executing the act, the moral standard of
a certain society, and the situation or the context it is done. Hence, not only acts
should be set for analysis but also the world. Everything needs to be scrutinized
for a clearer picture. To further understand, for example, while you walking down
a street you saw a man getting shot by another man. You would probably react
immediately if it was justified or not. Could it be done by the man because has an
a conflict against the victim. Could it be just a stranger who just shot the victim
without further reasons. And in other circumstances, if the situation was done in a
war with an enemy combatant. See, this is probably the reason why all acts
should undergo ethical analysis. We are going to think more deeply, killing a man
or an enemy in a declared could be justifiable and no problems included, if you
are in that situation, if you don’t initiate an attack the other side might do the
other way around. Thus, determining if an act is ethically justified is a serious
thing to do and needs immersed scrutiny to draw a clearer picture of the act
acted upon by someone.

3. What are moral dilemmas?

- We often experience moral dilemmas in a particular situation happened in our

lives. Personally, this is one of the most difficult to surpass and there is always a
challenge in our part as it is a test of character. Moral dilemmas is a situation one
has to overlook and weigh things out and give priority over another option. Thus,
the options are way too hard to weigh due to its unpleasant structure. In regards
with that, it is in-need of scrutiny in decision-making to determine the best
decision to take to which has a good effect to you as an enactor of the decision
and to the people around you.

4. Are all moral behavior the same among all cultures? How about per generation?

- It is most likely to say that culture resembles the structure of moral behaviors. It
has variation effect and in relation to moral codes of a certain society. To further
understand, for example, in some cultures of some parts in India, once a parent
died unlike here in the Philippines we bury our parents, in their country they used
to eat as a way of commemoration and respect unto their parents death. Hence,
this culture they consider it as morally good and we for us Filipinos it’s totally
absurd based upon our moral codes. This only means perceive things differently
from others and that is because of differences in cultural backgrounds. This is
also applicable in generations. For example, in the Japanese regime happened
here in the Philippines in 19th century, Filipinos are industrially inclined. They are
very industrious and hard-working that even a 60-year old person and above can
 still continue working, that compared to the present times we consider our
seniors pensioners required to retire at the age of 60. Now, this is a huge gap to
be aware of. Considering having a senior working in 19th century is morally
accepted, but right now in 21st century, having a senior allowed to work in an
industry is a sign of disrespect and injustice.

Feedback

Compare your answers with those on (A.1.1) Are your answers nearly the same as the
given ones? Take note that what matters is for you to be oriented toward the basic
concepts of the subject matter. This will serve as your groundwork for the upcoming
lessons.

LEARNING OUTPUT
(O1) Essay Paper.
1. Look for a news article from a newspaper, online or tv/radio broadcast that tackles an
ethical issue and write an essay of at least 150 words. Use the questions below as your
guide in writing your essay.

a. What is the case about?

b. What makes it a matter of ethics?
c. Is it considered a moral dilemma?
d. What is your ethical analysis of the case?

(O2) Reflection Paper.

1. Write a reflective essay with at least 150 words regarding your personal experiences of
Filipino Culture. Use the questions below as your guide in writing your essay.
a. What are your personal experiences of Filipino Culture?
b. What are its strengths and weaknesses?
c. Cite at least 2 problems rooted in Filipino qualities you’ve encountered, and
recommend how you would address the problem.

References
Bulaong, Oscar G. Jr. et. A (2018). Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation. Quezon City: Rex
Bookstore Inc.

Evangelista, F., and N. Mabaquiao (2020). Ethics: Theories and Applications. Anvil Publishing
Inc.

Evason, Nina. (2016). Filipino Culture. Retrieved from

https://culturalatlas.sbs.com.au/filipinoculture/filipino-culture-core-concepts#filipino-culture-core-
concepts

Fieser, J. (2020) Ethics. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from:

https://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/
Gensler, Harry. (2011). Ethics: A Contemporary Introduction. 2nd Edition. London: Routledge.

Gert, B. and Gert, J. (2016) "The Definition of Morality", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Retrieved from:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/#DescDefiMora
Jeremiah Reyes (2015) Loób and Kapwa: An Introduction to a Filipino Virtue Ethics, Asian
Philosophy, 25:2, 148-171, DOI: 10.1080/09552367.2015.1043173

Kvalnes. O. (2019). Moral Reasoning at Work. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15191-1

Mañebog, J. (2013). Moral Standards vs. Non-Moral Standards. Retrieved from:
https://ourhappyschool.com/node/824

Millennials, baby boomers or Gen Z: Which one are you and what does it mean? (2020).
Retrived from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zf8j92p