Sources of Authority

Cabiso, Shanel O.
BSED II ENGLISH (2)
Several common ways of thinking about
ethics are based on the idea that the
standards of valuation are imposed by a
higher authority that commands our
obedience. In the following section, we
will explore three of such ideas: the
authority of the law, the authority of
one’s religion, and the authority of one’s
own culture.
 LAW
It is supposed that law is one’s guide to ethical
behavior. In the Philippines, Filipinos are
constrained to obey the laws of the land as stated in
the country’s criminal and civil codes. Making this
even more particular, in Cebu, residents are
constrained to follow any provincial laws or city
ordinances. One can easily imagine this becoming
even more localized to the barangay or village level,
where local or municipal layers of obligation are
there for residents to follow. The term positive law
refers to the different rules and regulations that are
posited or put forward by an authority figure that
require compliance.
● At first glance, this seems to make a lot of sense. We
recognize that there are many acts that we
immediately consider unethical (e.g., murder or theft),
which we also know are forbidden by law.
Furthermore, the law is enforced by way of a system
of sanctions administered through persons and
institutions, which all help in compelling us to obey.
Taking the law to be the basis of ethics has the
benefit of providing us with an objective standard that
is obligatory and applicable to all. So, we would not
be surprised if we were to hear someone say,
“Ethics? It is simple. Just follow whatever the law 4
RELIGION
“Love the Lord, Your God, therefore, and always heed his charge: his
statutes, decrees, and commandments.” (New American Bible)
This verse is the first line of Chapter 11 of the book of Deuteronomy. It
expresses a claim that many people of a religious sensibility find
appealing and immediately valid: the idea that one is obliged to obey
her God in all things. As a foundation for ethical values, this is
referred to as the divine command theory. The divinity called God,
Allah, or Supreme Being commands and one is obliged to obey her
Creator. There are persons and texts that one believes are linked to
the Divine. By listening to these figures and reading these writings, an
individual discovers how the Divine wants her to act. Further,
someone maintaining a more radical form of this theory might go
beyond these instruments of divine revelation and claim that God
“spoke” to her directly to instruct her what to do.
 At first glance, this seems to make a lot of sense.
Many of us had been brought up with one form of
religious upbringing or another, so it is very possible
that there is a strong inclination in us to refer to our
religious background to back up our moral valuations.
We are presented with a more-or-less clear code of
prohibitions and many of these prohibitions given by
religion-”Thou shall not kill,” “Thou shall not steal,”
and “Thou shall not commit adultery-seem to
intuitively coincide with our sense of what ethics
should rightly demand. In addition, there is an
advance here over the law because religion is not
 For instance, one may be called to forgive those
who sinned against him or be charitable to those who
have less. Further, taking religion as base of ethics
has the advantage of providing us with not only a set
of commands but also Supreme Authority that can
inspire and compel our obedience in a way that
nothing else can. The Divine can command absolute
obedience on one’s part as the implications of he
actions involve her ultimate destiny.
CULTURE
Our exposure to different societies and their cultures makes us aware
that there are ways of thinking and valuing that are different from our own,
that there is in fact a wide diversity of how different people believe it is
proper to act. Example would be how relations between men and women
can show a wide variety across different cultures, ranging from greater
liberality and equality on one hand, to greater inequality and a relation of
dominance versus submission on the other. From the reality of diversity, it
is possible for someone to jump to the further claim that the sheer variety
at work in the different ways of valuation means there is no single
universal standard for such valuations, and that this holds true as well in
the realm of ethics. Therefore, what is ethically acceptable or
unacceptable is relative to, or that is to say, dependent on one’s culture.
 There is something appealing to this way of
thinking because cultural relativism seems to
conform to what we experience, which is the reality
of the differences in how cultures make their ethical
valuations. By taking one’s culture as the standard,
we are provided a basis for our valuations. This
teaches us to be tolerant of others from different
cultures, as we realize that we are in no position to
judge whether the ethical thought or practice of
another culture is acceptable or unacceptable.
9
 First, the argument of cultural relativism is
premised on the reality of difference. Because different
cultures have different moral codes, we cannot say that
any one moral code is the right one. But is it a case of
the presence of disagreement means there are no right
or wrong answers? Isn’t it a common experience to be
confronted by a disagreement between persons and
then to have the conflict clarified later as to who is right
or wrong? In other words, disagreement may mean
that the question of who is right or wrong is not
immediately evident, but it does not necessarily mean
that there is no one correct resolution.
 If our culture was the basis for
determining right and wrong, we would be
unable to say that something within our
cultural practice was problematic, precisely
because we take our culture to be the
standard for making such judgments.
Perhaps the most evident contemporary
difficulty with cultural relativism is that we can
maintain it only by following the presumption
of culture as a single, clearly defined
substance or as something fixed and already
 As with our earlier discussions on
law and religion, this is not to set aside
culture entirely as if it were irrelevant.
Instead, we are urged to think more
carefully about how one's
understanding of her belonging to a
certain culture could be more fruitful
and meaningful for her ethical
discernment.
THANKS FOR
LISTENING!!