Exercise # 3 (For Chapter III)

Name: ELLAINE REMLY R. TUNGGOLH

Course and Section: BSCE 3A

Test I. True or False

1. False. Gymnasium was the name of Aristotle’s school in Athens.

2. False. The achievement of success is the end of everyone.

3. True. Happiness is a means to achievement of end goal.

4. True. Virtue is prerequisite of happiness.

5. True. Moral virtues are sufficient for happiness.

6. False. Friendship based on utility is better than that which is based on goodness
according to Aristotle.

7. False. According to Aristotle, pleasure, as such, is always good.

8. False. Pleasure and happiness are the same.

9. False. The contemplative faculty is the exercise of happiness in our good actions.

10. False. Aristotle was a student of Socrates.

Test II. Explanation

1. Why is Aristotle’s Ethics teleological? What End do we aim for in doing what is good?
 According to Aristotle, "… for all things that have a function or activity, the good
and the 'well' is thought to reside in the function". The core of Aristotle's
argument is that a thing realizes its good when it fulfills its purpose, objective, or
end. Since every object has a genuine function of this kind, they can all work
toward goodness. By figuring out what a human being's purpose is, Aristotle can
define what benefits them.

2. Are virtues inherent in humans? How does one develop virtues? Explain.
 According to Aristotle, virtues are attitudes rather than behaviors. In other words,
he implied that human beings are born with qualities. He believed a person of
virtue should be faultless in intellect and character. The morally upright
individual understands what is right and feels strongly about it. Being wise,
courageous, and compassionate cannot be attained only by making a choice.
Instead, you must have these experiences to acquire them. Instead of cerebral
instruction, practical learning and consistent practice develop ethical qualities.
Since it can be challenging to act in a way that is wise rather than rude or brave
rather than cowardly without the ability of practical wisdom, Aristotle views
practical wisdom as the most important virtue to cultivate.
3. Why is Aristotle’s Ethics called Virtue Ethics?
 It is the endeavor to comprehend and lead a morally upright life. This character-
based perspective on morality supposes that we learn virtue via experience. One
can cultivate these virtues by acting honorably and morally, such as being
truthful, brave, just, and generous. When presented with moral dilemmas, people
are more likely to make the correct decision if they practice virtue, according to
Aristotle.

4. How do you understand Aristotle’s two kinds of Arete?

 The two kinds of Arete are intellectual and moral virtues. Intellectual virtue is the
outcome of learning. It includes the rational part of our mind, which has reason in
a strict sense and is involved in pure thought or contemplation. Moral virtue on
the other hand, is the result of habit and practice. Aristotle added that moral
qualities are not intrinsic, but rather learned through the practice of exercising
them. Man is neither moral nor immoral at birth, but he does have the ability to
acquire moral virtue, which can only be developed by habituation.

5. Explain Aristotle’s theory of the Mean.

 According to Aristotle, virtue is a mean. The mean is a condition of clarity and
comprehension that allows one to assess what seems most pleasant or unpleasant
among joys and sufferings. All the soul's abilities work together while the soul is
in this active state. Developing excellent character involves removing the barriers
that prevent the soul from functioning to its most significant potential.
Exercise # 4 (For Chapter IV)

Name: ELLAINE REMLY R. TUNGGOLH

Course and Section: BSCE 3A

Test I. Identification

1. Law to St. Thomas Aquinas is a dictate of practical reason emanating from a ruler.

2. Eternal Law to Aquinas is the source of all laws.

3. Prudence is making good judgements about how we behave.

4. Temperance is a cardinal virtue concerning the moderation of physical pleasure.

5. Courage is a cardinal virtue which Aquinas calls “irascible appetite.

6. Justice is a cardinal virtue which concerns more on community welfare or common good.

7. Religion is a virtue falling under justice since it involves offering God His due honor.

8. Truthfulness,

9. Gratitude, and

10. Revenge are other virtues annexed to justice according to St. Thomas Aquinas.

Test II. Discussion

1. Compare Aquinas’ and Aristotle’s virtue ethics.

 Aristotle believed that happiness was the ultimate form and the aim of all human
endeavor and that it may be defined as the continuous contemplation of eternal
and universal truth. A good life, the development of reason, and the strength of
theoretical knowledge attain happiness. The middle ground between excess and
insufficiency is moral goodness. Moral virtue develops through a combination of
knowledge, habit, and self-discipline. According to Aristotle, our ultimate
objective is happiness; we should live virtuously by reason and be social beings.
His idea is connected to Aquinas' virtue. Aquinas concurs with Aristotle that the
case's particulars must be considered when determining what course of action
should be pursued or the ultimate good and striving toward pleasure via living a
virtuous life. Aquinas explains that we are both unique and socially responsible
beings and that what we should do is love, which we express through virtue. If
we lack virtue, we are unable to express love. Virtue is defined as "a good habit
bearing on activity" or "a good faculty habit" same for Aristotle, continuous
virtuous acts require conscious choice and moral purpose or motivation, and man
has personal moral responsibility for his actions.

2. Explain the role of Natural Law in man’s duty toward God’s Eternal Law.
  Humans are free beings. Hence, they require direction to discover the proper
route. The correct way is discovered through reasoning, producing the "internal"
Natural Law. By abiding by the Natural Law, we participate in God's plan for us
as outlined in the Eternal Law. However, the main principles established from the
Natural Law are highly generic, such as pursuing goodness and avoiding evil.

Nevertheless, because we are flawed, sometimes we are incorrect and sometimes

right about these secondary principles. Only our seeming good is reflected when
they are incorrect. They mirror our material possessions when they are accurate.
Finally, even if we are morally upright, rational thinking can only take us so far
because of our limitations and sinfulness.

3. Compare Aristotle’s and Aquinas’ concepts of distributive justice.

 Aristotle defined distributive justice as the need to share riches and honors among
the people but solely based on merit. Aristotle thought that this form of justice,
which upholds the proper and proportionate sharing of offices, honors, goods, and
services as a citizen of the state, is the most effective law for thwarting
revolutions. In contrast, Aquinas' distributive justice focuses on how individuals
of a social community are assigned duties and shared resources. In this sense, fair
proportion rather than equal quantity determines what a person receives. Aquinas
thinks that someone with higher social status would expect a more significant
portion of goods. What is owed will be proportionate to what a person merits
based on their actions or circumstances in life.

4. Explain each of Aquinas’ Cardinal Virtues.

 Prudence – Prudence, being a cardinal virtue, serves as a primary virtue upon
which many other virtues rely. Memory, intellect, docility, shrewdness, reason,
foresight, circumspection, and caution are among those qualities. Without these
qualities, we are more likely to make cognitive mistakes that prohibit us from
acting morally. Prudence is a kind of intellectual ability that permits us to make
decisions that are congruent with our right end. It neither establishes nor desires
the goal at which we aim; because whether we desire our proper end relies on
whether we have the right kinds of appetitive inclinations. It highlights the most
suitable line of action for reaching our initially established goals.

 Temperance - In general, the word refers to a kind of moderation that is shared

by all moral virtues. Temperance, in its stricter form, refers to the moderation of
bodily pleasures, particularly those linked with eating, drinking, and sex. We have
a shared tendency to compromise our well-being for the sake of these transient
things. Thus, we require some virtue to regulate what Aquinas refers to as
concupiscible passion which is the appetite that drives us to seek what is
pleasurable and avoid what is detrimental. Temperance is that virtue because it
represents a controlled desire for physical pleasure. Temperance, like prudence, is
also a cardinal virtue.

 Courage – This is also a cardinal virtue as well. Those who have courage will
also have a high level of endurance. For one must be able to "stand immovable in
the face of perils," particularly dangers that threaten physical damage or death. A
 lack of endurance will undoubtedly impair one's capacity to withstand the trials of
life. We need courage to overcome our anxieties and face terrifying situations.
However, courage not only soothes our anxieties, but it also combats our
excessive desire to conquer them. Without courage, we would be ruled by either
illogical fear or recklessness, leaving us open to damage needlessly.

 Justice - The virtue of justice guides our interactions with others. It specifically
means a consistent or prolonged commitment to give each individual what he or
she deserves. Aside from that, Aquinas' explanation of justice is extensive,
complex, and allows for a variety of differences. For Aquinas, justice is primarily
concerned with our interactions with others, and he believes that "all the virtues
related to another person may be annexed to justice by reason of this common
aspect." The qualities Aquinas is referring to here are not only those that govern
our interactions with other people, but also with God. As a result, he contends that
religion is a virtue that comes under justice, since it entails giving God his due
respect.

5. Compare Commutative and Distributive Justice.

 The rules of commutative justice are precise and accurate. They concern the
situations where one individual acts against another. The crime, the perpetrator
and the victim are all identifiable to everyone. For example, if someone assaults
you or steals from you, their action is a violation of commutative justice. You are
the victim; they are the violator and the crime is the assault or theft.

 Distributive justice is “loose, vague and indeterminate.” It cannot be reduced to

rules and there is neither criminal nor crime when it is violated. Distributive
justice involves the fulfillment of positive liberties, which are often costly. For
example, health care is a positive liberty. If someone dies of a treatable disease,
that is a violation of distributive justice. However, no individual is directly
responsible for the violation, and no rules need be violated. If someone
involuntarily starves, it is possible no one at all will be arrested for that violation
of their rights.
Exercise # 5-6 (For Chapter V and VI)

Name: ELLAINE REMLY R. TUNGGOLH

Course and Section: BSCE 3A

Discussion

1. How do you understand Kant’s deontological Ethics?

 Only good will, especially good will to act in accordance with the moral law and

out of respect for that law rather than out of natural inclinations, is unqualifiedly

good, according to Kant. He felt that the moral rule could only be formed by

human reason and that it was a categorical imperative, or an unqualified mandate.

The ultimate categorical imperative is thus: “Act only on that maxim through

which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”

2. Distinguish Kant’s Deontological and Utilitarian Teleological ethical theories.

 Kantianism is a deontological moral theory whereas utilitarianism is a

teleological moral theory. Both Kantianism and utilitarianism are ethical theories

that express the ethical standard of an action. However, these two philosophies

take on different standpoints on ethics. Accordingly, Kantianism is considered the

opposite philosophy of Utilitarianism.

3. Distinguish Deontological Ethics from Rule Utilitarianism.

 In deontological ethics, an action is considered morally good because of some

characteristic of the action itself, not because the product of the action is good.

Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory

regardless of their consequences for human welfare Descriptive of such ethics are
 such expressions as "Duty for duty's sake," "Virtue is its own reward," and "Let

justice be done though the heavens fall." On the contrary, Rule utilitarianism

concerns the consequences of the majority of people following a certain rule that

is immoral, which would be negative. With rule utilitarianism, to determine the

ethics of an act, the questions to ask are "What would happen if there was a

universal rule that condones this action?" and "Would such a rule promote the

consequences that would best serve a moral society?"

4. Explain Kant’s Categorical Imperatives.

 Categorical Imperative is a moral law that is unconditional or absolute for all

agents, the validity or claim of which does not depend on any ulterior motive or

end. "Thou shalt not steal," for example, is categorical as distinct from the

hypothetical imperatives associated with desire, such as "Do not steal if you want

to be popular." For Kant there was only one such categorical imperative, which

he formulated in various ways. "Act only according to that maxim by which you

can at the same time will that it should become a universal law" is a purely

formal or logical statement and expresses the condition of the rationality of

conduct rather than that of its morality, which is expressed in another Kantian

formula: "So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in another,

always as an end, and never as only a means."

5. What is the Philosophy of Utilitarianism?

 Utilitarianism holds that the moral value of an act is completely decided by its

contribution to general goodness: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure

as summed up across all individuals. As a result, it is a kind of consequentialism

 in which the moral value of an action is decided by its consequence.

Utilitarianism is also known for the statement "the greatest benefit for the greatest

number of people."

6. Compare Bentham’s and Mill’s Utilitarianism.

 Jeremy Bentham developed the principles of utility by defining it as a measure of

maximizing pleasure while minimizing pain. Bentham wrote that everyone

prefers pleasure over pain. It is with this belief that utilitarian moral principles are

founded (Sandel, 2010). In developing the theory of utilitarianism, Bentham may

have meant pleasure as in "happiness" and pain as in "sadness"; however,

Bentham's rendering of utilitarianism sounded hedonistic, as if sensuality was the

measure Bentham associated with pleasure (Hinman, 2013). John Stuart Mill

reconsidered the principles of utilitarianism and suggested that pleasure should

not merely refer to sensual pleasure but also to mental pleasure, such as music,

literature, and friendship. Mill sought to make intellectual pleasures preferable to

sensual ones.

7. Discuss Hinman’s four principal differences between pleasure and happiness.

Hinman (2013) suggests there are four principal differences between pleasure and

happiness:

 Happiness is related to the mind, whereas pleasure is related to the body

(for example sexual

 Pleasure is of shorter duration than happiness. Happiness is long-term,

focusing on the satisfaction of living well, or achieving life goals.

 Happiness may encompass pleasure and pain.

  There is an evaluative element in happiness versus pleasure.

8. Explain the distinction between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism.

 Act Utilitarianism is morally right if the consequences are good. On the other

hand, Rule Utilitarianism focuses on assessing the negative effects if the majority

of people adheres to an immoral act. Although rule utilitarianism continues to

apply the consequential approach, it attempts to ensure that the act is qualified to

be universalizable.

9. Briefly explain each limitation of Utilitarianism.

 Measuring happiness is difficult. This is because happiness is subjective and

might differ due to differing situation, culture, beliefs, views, etc. One’s meaning

of happiness might be different to the other.

 Utilitarian ethics is concerned about the consequences of our actions, regardless of

the action itself. Our perception of or assessment of situations is similarly

subjective since we may anticipate different outcomes of an act. Furthermore, we

cannot know what will happen for the following few minutes after the act is

performed, thus we cannot properly designate an act of good will as morally

wrong because of its negative consequence.

 Desired ethical consequences that actually result from our actions do not always

happen immediately. There are situations that the consequence of an act takes

time before it’s observed, thus resulting to conflicting thoughts if the act is

morally right or wrong.

 Happiness should not be the only consequence or goal that matters in some ethical

dilemmas. This reflects on the rule utilitarianism principle, which seeks to stress
 on the effects if negative acts are tolerated and will be followed by the majority

just because it produced a positive result in a specific circumstance. The result

may be beneficial in that specific scenario, but it will have a detrimental impact on

everyone if that act is performed by others.

 When utilitarian decisions benefit the majority at the expense of the minority, the

minority’s rights may not be taken into account. Utilitarians focus on the benefits

an act will bring to the majority, putting minority’s rights on the verge of being

neglected.

10. To you, which is more inclined to normative ethics, Deontological Ethics or Teleological

Ethics. Explain.

 Deontological ethics, which I find to be more objective than utilitarianism, leans

more toward normative ethics. Deontological ethics also heavily relies on our

ability to use rational reasoning and decision-making in challenging situations as

opposed to a subjective assessment of the potential consequences, which we

know has a high degree of uncertainty that it will produce the outcomes that we

expect. In contrast to utilitarianism, deontological ethics also considers justice

and human rights. It may also be inferred that it abides by God's laws, which are

of higher goodness, since it only pursues a morally proper deed rather than

defending a wrong course of action because of its good results.

Exercise # 7 (For Chapters VII and VIII)

Name: ELLAINE REMLY R. TUNGGOLH

Course and Section: BSCE 3A

Discussion

1. Do Ethics and Religion need each other in order to separately operate?

 Ethics and Religion are mutually related. Religion and ethics are about the

relationship between revelation and reason. The concept that God gives

knowledge about life and its real significance is the basis of religion in some way.

From a strictly humanistic standpoint, ethics is founded on the principles of

reason: Anything that cannot be rationally verified cannot be considered

justifiable. According to this viewpoint, although religious and secular ethics do

not receive their authority from the same source, we nevertheless need to find a

method to build bridges between them since, in the absence of doing so, we are

doomed to live in a society marked by conflict and division.

2. How do you understand Matthew Arnold’s maxim, “Religion is nothing but morality

torched with emotion.”

 Matthew is attempting to claim that morality is an objective standard for

determining good and evil. Religion also instructs us on these concepts,

and religion can be defined as a combination of morals and faith. This is because

morality is described in the previous discussion as emotion-based, while morality

is an objective standard for determining good and evil (emotion). It is also

underlined that religion is something we like to base our beliefs on what we feel
 are the good and bad things given to us by God via the teachings in the holy

book. That morality is an inherent aspect of our nature that helps us to

discriminate between good and evil. However, before we learned about the Bible,

we already had morality. Thus, it may be inferred that humans always had

morality and that religion only emerged when our belief in God strengthened our

moral convictions.

3. Which do you think is right, “Religion precedes morality” or “Religion succeeds

morality”? Explain your answer.

 For me, morality succeeds over religion. If ethics did not exist, religion would not

exist. We already had preconceived notions of right and wrong before being

introduced to religious texts and teachings. Our societal beliefs have impacted our

innate ability to recognize good and evil. God or religion is an ethical precept that

results from strong feelings or a conviction in a superior being and the right

actions to be conducted by the holy book of scriptures. Likewise, only our

religious beliefs have improved our knowledge and comprehension of what is

morally right; in other words, religion heightens our moral standards.

4. From what you have read, should Religion and Ethics join together? Explain your

answer.

 I have read that religion and ethics significantly impact people's development.

Religion and ethics coexist and impact one another in human growth. Religion

without ethics is insufficient, just as an emotion without action is unbalanced and

lifeless. Ethics has the effect of polishing and purifying religion. Ethics both

affect religion and are affected by it. Ethics and religion cannot be replaced by
 each other. Both are necessary for wholly and completely developing connections

between the individual, society, and God.

5. Based on the question of relation between Ethics and Religion, how do you describe the

ethics of Hinduism?

 Dharma is at the heart of Hinduism's ethical system. This is referred to as

anything that encourages religion in general, a code of conduct, or a list of duties.

The path to freedom, the highest good, is via Dharma. The only unbreakable

moral rule in existence is the goal of selfless service to humanity. Hindu ethics is

a personal, subjective philosophy that aims to purify the mind of mental

impurities like greed and egoism to serve the greater good. Hinduism also looked

into objective ethics, which is related to societal well-being. According to the

Hindu viewpoint, objective ethics serves as a tool to help society's members

overcome vices like selfishness, cruelty, and greed and foster an environment

were pursuing the ultimate good, which transcends society, is possible. Hinduism

also discusses ethical principles that apply to everyone, regardless of

socioeconomic class or stage of life.

6. Relate and distinguish the Aristotelian and Confucian Ethical Traditions.

 Aristotle defined virtue as a character attribute that enhances a fulfilling

existence. A good life is one that is led by virtue, to put it briefly. Confucius,

though, has a unique viewpoint on what makes for a good existence.

Confucianism strongly emphasizes cultivating humanity's roots to promote

harmonious relationships. Before showing compassion to the rest of society, there

is a stronger emphasis on showing compassion to those near us. For him, virtue
 comes from doing good deeds. On the other hand, Aristotle gave more attention

to individual pleasure and how it relates to the prosperity of society as a whole.

Aristotle emphasized intellectual virtue on a practical level, but Confucius

concentrated on universal morality. Aristotle held that character is acquired rather

than attributed, contrary to Confucius' view that people are born with specific

traits. The ethical systems that Aristotle and Confucius developed are both based

on virtue, with Aristotle anticipating happiness and Confucius seeking harmony.

Despite differences in their perspectives on virtue, both Aristotle and Confucius

stress the importance of virtue in society. It is crucial to remember that the two

illustrious thinkers had similar views.

7. Do you think Buddhist Ethics is deontological or teleological? Why?

 In my opinion, Buddhism is both deontological and teleological. Both attempts to

characterize the core of moral action by establishing rigid rules or principles, and

Buddhism uses both. Deontology strongly emphasizes obligations, whereas

Teleology is mainly interested in outcomes. With responsibilities, you agree to

follow a rule of behaviour because it is assumed that the rule is acceptable.

According to Buddhism, if you want to achieve enlightenment and be free from

suffering, you must follow the eightfold path in addition to the five

commandments, which state that you must not damage or have a detrimental

effect on any sentient creatures. Buddhism instructs us to refrain from doing

things that injure others and to act with charity and a desire for peace.

8. Is Taoism’s Natural Law similar to that of Aquinas’ Natural Law? Why?

  Yes, they are similar. Through living in harmony with nature and all of its

transitions and changes, accepting and adapting to them, and therefore gaining

eternal life, Taoism reflects the fundamental or genuine character of the cosmos.

According to Taoism, man must synchronize his will with the natural

environment. It holds that morality was the foundation upon which humans were

built, and any disruption of this balance will have unfavorable effects. Aquinas

shared this belief that individuals are rational beings capable of understanding the

world via their intellect and that God created the cosmos. God endowed

humankind with the capacity for ethical decision-making as a result. According to

Aquinas, people are more likely to act honorably than evilly.

9. A president once cursed Jesus by calling Him “stupid, for allowing Himself to be nailed

on the cross.” Do you think such statement would affect the moral standard of the nation

he leads? Explain your answer.

 Yes, a great leader must be aware that his actions may reflect on the citizens of

the country he governs. He must provide an example for others to follow as the

country's leader, especially regarding moral conduct. People's moral standards or

opinions about what is good and right have always been greatly influenced by

religion. Children who are still unable to distinguish between morally good and

wrong may engage in this behavior, thus clouding the definition of what is

morally acceptable. Moreover, even though we have been taught not to invoke

God in vain, moral turbulence may result from seeing how the revered name was

treated disrespectfully by someone who had much power over the community.

10. Do you think a nation should be religious and moral? Explain your answer.
 A nation can be moral or religious since either one or both help to keep the

country in good order and harmony. If everyone knows what is morally good and

just, there will be no need to worry about a social disorder or a lack of harmony

among individuals. There must be laws and rules, whether moral or religious, to

bring peace between people. These standards must also be ethically and

spiritually compatible to prevent disputes.