Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COLLEGE
& OF INFORMATION
COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY
ENGINEERING &
COURSE MODULE IN
COURSE FACILITATOR:
FB/MESSENGER:
Email:
Phone No:
2
MODULE 2
18 (Hrs)
This document is a property of NONESCOST
1
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
LESSON
What does it mean to be impartial? How can reason aid us in giving impartial moral
judgments? Let’s find that out in this Lesson.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
MOTIVATION
Directions: Read these arguments. Are these based on reason? Defend your answer.
1. "You didn't even finish high school. How could you possibly know about this?"
2. I am filing for reconsideration of the offenses complained about. Since I am a well-
known athlete, I can make your University great again.
3. Ok, Officer, there's no reason to give me a traffic ticket for going too fast because I
was just on my way to the hospital to bring blood bags to my dying child. They are
needed in a few minutes.
4. After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation
system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman
who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.
5. Linus Pauling, winner of two unshared Nobel prizes, one for chemistry, another for
peace, stated his daily medication of Vitamin C delayed the onset of his cancer by
twenty years. Therefore, vitamin C is effective in preventing cancer.
6. "UFOs are not real, because the great Carl Sagan said so." You haven't held a
steady job since 1992. Worse than that, we couldn't find a single employer who'd
provide you with a good reference."
This document is a property of NONESCOST
2
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
7. "People like you don't understand what it's like to grow up in the slums. You have no
right to argue about the gang violence on our streets."
8. "Well, it's not like you graduated from a good school, so I can see why you wouldn't
know how to properly grade a writing assignment.
9. "You're clearly just too young to understand."
10. "How can you make a decision about someone having marital problems if you've
never been married yourself!
1. Which arguments are attack on the personality of the source of the argument?
This lesson talks about how an individual should be impartial in making judgment
through the use of reason. The 7 steps of moral reasoning is presented to you as a guide
for you to make impartial decisions. How feeling affect our moral reasoning is also
presented.
TEACHING POINTS
The minimum requirements of morality are reason and impartiality. "Moral judgments
must be backed up by good reason and impartiality. "Morality requires the impartial
consideration of each individual's interests." Moral judgments, or resolving a dilemma of
moral judgments must be backed by good reason.
Reason and impartiality refer to a mental activity following the basic principle of
consistency, the lack of contradiction between one idea and another. It is a process of
deriving necessary conclusion from premises, avoiding all forms of deception or fallacy of
reasoning. It avoids ad hominem, by not attacking the personality of the opponent and
instead directing one's argument against one’s idea. Examples of argumentum ad hominem
are # 1, 4, 8 and 9 in the Activity phase of this Lesson. Reason avoids ad misericordiam,
appeal to pity, since appearing miserable does not improve an argument. Reason does not
resort to ad verecundiam, appeal to authority, one's power and influence cannot make a
wrong right. Examples of argumentum ad verecundiam are # 2. 5. 6. 7 and 10. In other
words, good reasons include consistent and coherent reasons.
A logical, impartial, objective reason avoids ambiguities like equivocation, circular
reasoning, amphibology, etc. Coherent reasoning is needed to establish truth and
This document is a property of NONESCOST
3
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
meaningfulness of moral judgments. "Morality requires impartial consideration of each
individual's interest." In arriving at a sound moral judgment you must listen to everyone
trying to speak. Biases and prejudices must be placed between brackets, suspended.
Everyone's message, silent or verbal, should be allowed to be unveiled. Everyone has
always something to tell. No one has a monopoly of the truth. A moral subject must be
seen from various perspectives and standpoints.
The following are sample methods of arriving at an ethical or moral decision, the 7
steps of Scott Rae's moral reasoning (1996) and a 7 steps of moral reasoning model
developed the Josephson Institute of Ethics.
First, gather the facts, information. "The simplest way of clarifying an ethical
dilemma is to make sure the facts are clear. Ask: Do you have all the facts that are
necessary to make a good decision? What do we know? What do we need to know?"
Second, determine the ethical issues, similar to “statement of the problem.” “....
The competing interests are what create the dilemma. Moral values and virtues must
support the competing interests in order for an ethical dilemma to exist. If you cannot
identify the underlying values/ virtues then you do not have an ethical dilemma. Often
people hold these positions strongly and with passion because of the value/virtue beneath
them.”
Third, determine what virtues/principles have a bearing on the case. This is
similar to identifying the relevant factors internal and external). “In an ethical dilemma
certain values and principles are central to the competing positions. Identify these.
Determine if some should be given more weight than others. Ask what the source for the
principle is - constitution, culture, natural law, religious tradition... These supplement biblical
principles.”
Fourth, list the alternatives or develop a list of options. “Creatively determine
possible courses of action for your dilemma. Some will almost immediately be discarded
but generally the more you list the greater potential for coming up with a really good one. It
will also help you come up with a broader selection of ideas.”
Fifth, compare the alternatives with the virtues/principles. “This step eliminates
alternatives as they are weighed by the moral principles which have a bearing on the case.
Potentially the issue will be resolved here as all alternatives except one are eliminated.
Here you must satisfy all the relevant virtues and values - so at least some of the
alternatives will be eliminated (even if you still have to go on to step 6). Often here you
have to weigh principles and virtues - make sure you have a good reason for each
weighing.”
Sixth, consider the consequences or test the options. “If you disclose the
information directly possible consequences include; - family feel alienated, cultural values
have been violated - family may take patient to another hospital - patient may 'give up' -
patient might be happy they are finally being told the truth.” If you continue withholding
information possible consequences include; - patient continues to be fearful and anxious
about the treatment - patient finds out somehow and trust is compromised - family are
happy cultural values are being respected.
In general, the following may be used to test the options: (Davis, 1999)
✔ Harm test: Does this option do less harm than the alternatives?
✔ Publicity test: Would I want my choice of this option published in the newspaper?
✔ Defensibility test: Could I defend my choice of this option before a congressional
committee or committee of peers?
✔ Reversibility test: Would I still think this option was a good choice if I were
adversely affected by it?
✔ Colleague test: What do my colleagues say when I describe my problem and
suggest this option as my solution?
✔ Professional test: What might my profession's governing body for ethics say about
this option?
This document is a property of NONESCOST
4
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
✔ Organization test: What does my company's ethics officer or legal counsel say
about this?
Seventh, make a decision. "Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might
be you have to choose the solution with the least number of problems/painful
consequences. Even when making a "good" decision you might still lose sleep over it!"
Having uphold reasoning and impartiality in morality, we can now identify what criteria
moral judgments should meet to be considered adequate. Although there is no complete
list of adequacy criteria or moral judgments, moral judgments should be logical, based on
facts and based on valid moral principles. If one is lacking from these features, a moral
judgment is less than ideal.
1. Moral Judgment Should Be Logical. This implies several things. First, our
judgments should follow from the evidence. The connection between 1) the
standard, 2) the behavior or policy, and 3) the moral judgment should be such that 1
and 2 logically entail 3. Forming logical moral judgments also means ensuring that
our moral judgments are consistent with our other beliefs.
2. Moral Judgment Should Be Based on Facts. Adequate moral judgments cannot
be made in a vacuum. We must gather as much relevant information as possible
before making them. The information supporting the moral judgment, the facts,
Moral Courage
Most of us have the basic understanding of moral courage as the ability to take action
for moral reasons despite the risk of adverse consequences. Courage is required to take
action when one has doubts or fears about the consequences of such an act. The concept
of courage, therefore, involves deliberation or careful thought.
We relate moral courage with our concept of courageous people as those who perform
courageous acts, but we can raise the question, what makes an act courageous? In James
Donald Wallace’s book Virtues and Vices (1986), Wallace defines courageous acts by
using six conditions, each of which is necessary, and which taken together are sufficient,
that is, to recognize an act as courageous.
1. The person believes that it is dangerous to do the act.
2. The person believes that doing the act is worth the risks it involves.
3. The person believes that it is possible for an individual to do or not to do the act.
4. The danger the person sees in doing the act is sufficiently formidable that most
people would find it difficult in the circumstances to do it.
5. The person is not coerced into doing the act by threats of
punishment
6. The person is under self-control, at least in the sense of not
being in a frenzy, stupor, or intoxication.
After analyzing the six conditions provided by Wallace, Mike W.
Martin, in Everyday Morality (2007), added another condition.
7. The people at least believed they were doing well, and we
admire them for their effort to pursue what is good.
Martin gave as an example Field Marshal Rommel (the desert Field Marshal Erwin Rommel aka “The
fox) who was a fearless soldier for Hitler's side during World War II. Desert Fox” (1891 – 1944)
https://www.history.com/news/8-
Martin concluded that though Field things-you-may-not-know-about-erwin-
Marshal Rommel was mistaken in believing his acts were good, rommel
there was no doubt that he believed it was his duty as a soldier to
act as he did.
Feelings in Decision-making
It may be said that an analogy between legal and moral statement may be made to
show that moral statements may treated like a factual statement. In criminal law, the
allegation that “Juan’s act of stealing is wrong” may be established by evaluating the act in
the light of the elements of the crime of stealing under the law. For instance, the law
provides that stealing is taking the property of another without the latter’s consent. So if
there is an evidence that Juan has taken a property, that the property belongs to someone
else, that the taking is without consent, then it can be decided that a crime of theft is
committed; in other words, the statement has been verified.
What then would prevent one in applying the same procedure in establishing the
truth or falsehood of a moral statement? For instance, the moral principle or rule is “stealing
is wrong” that it is explained by moral or ethics teachers that the statement is meant to be
referring to an act of taking someone else property without the owner’s consent. May not
someone’s act of stealing be verified by finding out if the actor has indeed taken someone’s
property with the latter’s consent? And that, therefore, one’s act may be judged as wrong?
The emotivist will still argue that such argument only proves that a certain individual
act has characteristic that can be described as stealing. It does not make the statement
“stealing is wrong” as a factual statement, which is correct, since all maxims or rules are
non-factual and only the particular instances evaluated on the basis of these rules would be
considered as factual.
This document is a property of NONESCOST
8
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
Managing Feelings
Aristotle wrote: “Anyone can get angry – that is easy – to do this to the right person,
to the right extent, at the right time with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for
everyone, nor is it easy. (Book II, Nicomachean Ethics). In other words your anger should
not be displaced. The moral person manages their feelings well.
1. One sticker in a truck says: “If it feels good do it.” What does this mean? Is this always
right? (10 pts)
2. Recall a moral decision you made. Did you consider your feelings? Did you end up doing
the right thing or the wrong thing? If you ended up wrongly, why? Any lesson learned?
(10pts)
3. Take us to your memory lane. Recall a moment when you made a decision which you
think is the most reasonable decision and a decision borne out of emotional responses. (10
pts)
4. When do feelings work against moral decision making? Explain (10 pts)
Activity No. 3 Case Analysis
Direction: Read, understand, and reflect on the moral dilemma below. If you were Dolores, what
would you do? Make use of the 7-step model of reasoning to arrive at a decision. (40 pts)
Humbert was the blue-eyed boy of the senior management. Everyone in the organization
knew that he was a coding-ninja, and a company that was largely reliant on its technological
know-how, he was a real asset to the organization. Everyone was offered the first glimpse of his
brilliance, when within a couple of months of his joining, the team faced the daunting task of
finding a bug in a 30,000 line code. What made matters worse was the paucity of time within
which the error was to be rectified, since the client was a large international bank and the error
was making it impossible for some users to access their bank accounts. When the senior
developers in the team gave an estimate of at least 12 hours before the bug could be spotted and
removed, Humbert requested if he could have a look and corrected the code within a mere 40
minutes! Everyone was in awe, but Humbert played it down, congratulating everyone on a great
team effort and crediting the senior developers for giving him the right direction and entrusting
him with the task.
That was part of what made Humbert so likable. It wasn’t just his technical skills; he was a
real charmer, a genuinely nice guy and he had a good sense of humor too. Very soon, he was
the apple of everyone’s eye. Humbert had joined the team as a part of recent hires, who were all
added to the work force as a part of the company strategy under which the company wanted to
bring in ‘fresh blood’. A total of 12 young graduates were hired during this period, all very skilled
at their job, but only Humbert was able to make the mark with the senior management. Humbert’s
good friend from his school, Dolores, was also a part of this team. Dolores and Humbert got
along well swimmingly and used to spend to a lot of time together, both at work and outside of it.
A few months into the job when everyone had settled in their roles, the company was in a
steady state, serving its existing clients, and was operating as a ‘fine-tuned machine’. Humbert
This document is a property of NONESCOST
9
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
being extremely skilled at his job, was able to finish his work within a few hours everyday and this
afforded him the luxury of free time at work. Realizing that he had extra time at hand, he would
often finish his work early on in the day and then spend his time reading about video games (he
was an avid gamer). However, he soon found out that he could make more ‘productive’ use of
this time, and started taking on freelancing jobs that he would do during his working hours. He
never compromised his work for his freelancing job; he would diligently make sure all his work
was done before he took on anything else. His bosses were still very happy with his performance
at work.
Dolores noticed her friend’s ‘extracurricular’ activities at work and didn’t feel very
comfortable with his conduct. She wanted to tell him that he is doing the company a disservice by
spending work hours on freelancing jobs, but wasn’t sure if it will sour their friendship. Also, given
the fact that everyone was so happy with Humbert’s work, she wasn’t sure if there was a need for
taking any action at all. But then, was it her responsibility to report any such behavior to the
appropriate authority within the company?
Source: https://sites.psu.edu/psy533wheeler/2017/02/24/u02-story-of-humbert-dolores-ethical-
workplace-dilemma/
✔ Harm test:
✔ Publicity test:
✔ Defensibility test:
✔ Reversibility test:
✔ Colleague test:
✔ Professional test:
✔ Organization test:
Rubric
Indicators Expert (40) Accomplished Capable (20) Beginner (10)
(30)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present
ASSESSMENT
DIRECTIONS: Read and analyze the questions. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.
1. Define reason and impartiality and relate it to a particular experience in which you used
reason and impartiality when you made a certain decision in that situation? (10 pts)
2. Explain. Moral courage is especially good when it contributes to the well-being of other
people. (10 pts)
This document is a property of NONESCOST
11
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
3. How have you applied creative responsibility in your approach to a moral problem? (10
pts)
Is reason dictated by will or vice versa? Let’s find out in this Lesson.
MOTIVATION
Directions: Watch the music video of “Go Up” by SB19. The YouTube link is provided
below. Answer the questions that follow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRfhzWaiQvk
1. What does it say about a person’s will to succeed even though failures may come
along the way? (25 pts)
2. What does the song tell us about the role of “will” in our decision making? (25 pts)
This lesson tackles the vital roles reason and will play in decision making. It also
discusses the concept of free will as the capacity of rational agents to choose a course of
action from among various alternatives.
This document is a property of NONESCOST
13
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
TEACHING POINTS
The moral person is endowed with an intellect and will. The will is what "disposes"
what the "the intellect proposes." Reason conducts the study, research, investigation, and
fact-finding. It uses logic, the principle of consistency, avoids fallacious reasoning to come
up with a truthful and accurate proposition. In a research study, the product or work of
reason is the body of facts gathered, organized, synthesized and evaluated. The job of the
will is to make a decisive conclusion.
The will is the faculty of the mind that is associated with decision making. It's the
one that says yes or no. This author says this, that author says that, all others are saying
the same thing. Now, decide with your will what you yourself should say or think.
Decision making which is an activity of the will can be developed. Early in life, like
children, one should already be given the opportunity to exercise one’s will, like being
trained to make choices from alternative. Do you want to eat or not? Rice or bread? Coffee
or tea? This is true of societies where a culture of choice give opportunities for the
development of the will. A culture of spoon feeding does not develop the will. Banking
education, a method of teaching where the teacher simply deposits facts and concepts and
withdraw the same periodically during quizzes and tests without encouraging the students
to think and reflect, does not promote the development of the will.
Jean Paul Sartre, the French Philosopher, and the most popular existentialist was
saying that an individual person is nothing until that individual person starts making
decisions. What ultimately constitutes who a person is are that person’s decisions. The
essence of being a person equals an individual’s bundle of decisions. Apparently, the mark
of the maturation of culture is manifested through the development of a culture of moral
strength or virtue, or will power, its free will.
"Free Will" is the "capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from
among various alternatives." Free will is the ability to choose between different possible
courses of action unimpeded, the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants. It is
the power of self-determination. When the will is free, there is freedom.
To Hornedo (1972), the stuff of the free will is a multi-dimensional power, energy, or
strength. People are free to the degree that they have energy, that physically free to the
degree that they are physically strong; materially or economically free to the degree that
they are materially or economically strong, and so on.
Emphasis is made on what freedom is, and not on what it is not. To say that one is
free when there is an absence of obstacle is to give a picture of a weak person who cannot
walk to get out one’s room despite an open door. Freedom must not only be understood as
the absence of obstacle; it must be an autonomous energy. It is useless talking about being
free to
move, walk, if you have not strength to move or walk. It is useless saying you are free to go
to Manila by bus, if you have no money for your fare. Freedom implies power, energy, and
strength in all human dimensions, as the stuff of freedom. A free person is one who is
physically healthy and strong, psychologically normal, financially stable. It is useless
shouting in the streets for "economic freedom" if one is economically weak. In terms of
morality, moral strength is moral freedom. Morally strong people would not allow a tyrant to
thrive or last long. In the words of Jose Rizal is the statement, "there can be no tyrants
where there can be no slaves."
The Courage To Be
Activity No. 2
1. In a 3-5 sentence essay, interpret Robert Frost’s immortal lines in the context of making
moral decisions. (15 pts)
Rubric
Indicators Expert (15) Accomplished Capable (8) Beginner (4)
(12)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present
In a 3 paragraph essay, answer this question: How did I decide and what did I
actually do during my most important experience in the past year? (30 pts)
Rubric
Indicators Expert (4) Accomplished Capable (2) Beginner (1)
(3)
DIRECTION: Read and analyze the questions. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.
1. St. Paul said: “I know the good to do but why is it that I do that opposite of the good that I
know?”
a) Do you experience that same? Does this means unity of the intellect and will or lack of
unity? Exlain. (15 pts)
3. Like St. Paul have you also experienced knowing the good to do but ended up doing the
opposite of the good that you know? What have you been doing to strengthen your will?
(15 pts).
MOTIVATION
Directions: Match the items in Column 1 with Column 2. Repeation of answer is allowed.
Column 1 Ethical Statement Column 2 Ethical Frameworks
___1. The ethical person develops good character. A. Virtue on Character Ethics of
Aristotle
___2. An act is ethical if it is an obligation expected of B. Natural Law or Commandement
every person. Ethics of St. Thomas
___5. That which is ethical is that which has good E. Love and Justice Framework
consequences.
The activity above is on various ethical frameworks. Based on the activity that you just did,
what do you think is the meaning of ethical framework?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
PRESENTATION
This lesson introduces you to the basic concepts of the leading ethical frameworks.
An ethical framework guides an individual in answering these two questions: "What I ought
to do?" and “Why I ought to do so"? So ethical frameworks serve as guideposts in moral
life.
As you read along the lessons below, try to figure out what ethical framework you
adhere to, if there’s any.
Aristotle
Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/wo
Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St. Thomas rld/europe/greece-aristotle-tomb.html
For St. Thomas, what is right is what follows the natural law, the
rule which says, “do good and avoid evil.” In knowing the good as distinguished from evil,
one is guided by the Ten Commandments which is summed up as loving God and one's
fellowmen.
Imagine a person who is always knows what to say, can diffuse a tensed situation,
deliver tough news gracefully, confident without being arrogant, brave but not reckless and
generous but never extravagant. This is the type of person that everybody wants to be
around and and to be like. Someone who seems to have mastered the art of being a
person. This may sound like an impossible feat, but Aristotle believed that, while rare, these
people do exist. And they are what we all should aspire to be: virtues. How?
Virtue ethics does not only deal with the rightness or wrongness of individual actions. It
provides guidance as to the sort of characteristics and behaviors a good person will
seek to achieve. In that way, virtue ethics is concerned with the whole of a person's life,
rather than particular episodes or actions. A good person is someone who lives
virtuously - who possesses and lives the virtues.
Virtue ethics uses the following as a framework for ethical decision making. This is how it is
done:
In the Virtue framework, we try to identify the character traits (either positive or
negative) that might motivate us in a given situation. We are concerned with what kind
of person we should be and what our actions indicate about our character. We define
ethical behavior as whatever a virtuous person would do in the situation, and we seek
to develop similar virtues.
Obviously, this framework is useful in situations that ask what sort of person one
should be. As a way of making sense of the world, it allows for a wide range of
behaviors to be called ethical, as there might be many different types of good
character and many paths to developing it. Consequently, it takes into account all
parts of human experience and their role in ethical deliberation, as it believes that all
of one's experiences, emotions, and thoughts can influence the development of one's
character.
Stated similarly, virtue ethics is "the ethics of behavior" which "focuses on the
character of the persons involved in the decision or action. The person in question has
good character, and genuine motivation and if the intentions, an individual is behaving
ethically." The rightness or wrongness of one’s action, or the goodness or badness of one's
personality depends on the individual character, motivations and intentions.
Virtue ethics, "is an ethics whose goal is to determine what is essential to being a
well-functioning or flourishing human person. Virtue ethics stresses an ideal for humans or
persons. As an ethics of ideals or excellences, it is an optimistic and positive type of
ethics."
Virtue as a Mean
For Aristotle, virtue is the Golden Mean between two extremes. The virtue of
courage is a mean between two extremes of deficiency and extreme, namely, cowardice
and foolhardiness, respectively. Too little is cowardice and too much courage is
foolhardiness
Aquinas thought morality was important for everyone, and that being a good person
was a vital part of God’s plan for each of us. But Aquinas also knew that not everyone had
been exposed to the Bible, or had even heard of God. How could people follow God’s
moral rules – also known as divine commandments – if they didn’t even know about the
person who made the commandments? So Aquinas theorized that God made us pre-
loaded with the tools we need to know what’s Good. This idea became known as the
natural law theory.
In summary, we have an eternal law, God's law for the whole creation, which we
cannot fully grasp given our limitation. But with our gift of reason we have a grasp of that
eternal law, that is natural law, Divine law is decreed by God while human law is decreed
by man.
Law Defined
St. Thomas explained that the natural law is promulgated through the light of reason.
Positive laws require for their promulgation a sign external to man. Laws that are enacted
are called positive laws. St. Thomas defined law in general as “an ordinance of reason
which is for the common good, and has been promulgated by one having charge of the
community.” For a law to be a law, it must have the four requisites, namely, a) ordinance
(order, command) of reason, b) for the common good, c) promulgation, and d) by one
who has charge of the community. Based on the definition, an unreasonable law is not
law; a law that favors one to the prejudice of another or does not equally protect all is not a
law; a law that is not promulgated or published or made known to all, is not a law; and a
law that is enacted by unauthorized persons is not a law.
A law must be a product of reason not purely of emotion. When the heart rules the
mind, we can be highly unreasonable. A law is promulgated for the common good because
we are meant to be social, we belong to a community. A law that favors the male gender at
the expense of the female gender cannot be a law. A law must be promulgated by one
whose primary task is to care for the people, the community. The primary task of our
lawmakers is to care for and protect their people by legislating laws for the common good.
The law must be made known or communicated to all people to ensure correct
understanding and compliance. A law that is promulgated does not take effect immediately.
This document is a property of NONESCOST
23
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
In the Philippines, laws take effect after fifteen days following the completion of the
publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation unless it is
otherwise provided.
(https://batasnatin.com/law-libraray/civil-law/persons-and-family/82-effectivity-of-laws.html,
Retrieved 6-18-19)
While the natural law theory as advanced by Thomas Aquinas states that morality
comes from us but only because we were made by God, who preloaded us with moral
sensibilities, many other thinkers have argued that humanity’s moral code doesn’t come
from some supernatural force. Eightenth century German philosopher Immanuel Kant, for
one, thought religion and morality were a terrible pairing, and if anything, the two should be
kept apart. Instead Kant argued, in order to determine what’s right, you have to use reason.
Kant's Ethics is now referred to as deontological. The term deontological has its root
from the Greek “deon” which means “duty:” Hence deontological ethics focuses on "duty,
obligation, and rights" instead of consequences or ends. An act that proceeds from the will
which wills it because it can be the will of all is a right action. Willing and doing the will of all
is a duty, regardless of the consequences. The following clarifies Kant's duty-based
approach:
The example, borrowing money with no intention to pay back, cannot be universalized
and therefore cannot be ethical. If this becomes universalized, there will be no more
lenders and all banks will close.
Good will
Kant says, “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it,
which”can be called good without qualification, except a good will.” Kant's criteria or
framework of what is right or wrong is “good will”. An act is said to be right or wrong
depending on whether it is done with or without good will. The rightness or wrongness of an
action depends on one's good will or intentions. The usual criticism, or weakness cited,
This document is a property of NONESCOST
25
Module 2 | Page
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT, MAED
regarding this concept is that “The road to hell is paved with
good intentions.” Is good will enough?
Categorical Imperative
Kant holds that the fundamental principle of our moral
duties is a categorical imperative. It is an imperative because it
is a command addressed to agents who could follow it but
might not (e.g., “Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.”). It Retrieved from
https://theflossopher.com/the-highest-
is categorical in virtue of applying to us unconditionally, or good-respect-for-humanity
simply because we possesses rational wills, without reference
to any ends that we might or might not have. It does not, in other words, apply to us on the
condition that we have antecedently adopted some goal for ourselves.
To serve the will as a principle Kant has two (2) versions of the categorical
imperative. The first version states “I ought never to act except in such a way that I could
also will that my maxim should become a universal law.” If one cannot wish or want that a
certain rule or maxim becomes the maxim of all, that it is not right to follow it. For instance,
one cannot will that "thou shalt steal" becomes a rule to be followed by all because others
may ultimately and steal one’s property. One cannot wish that “killing” becomes the maxim
of all because one would not of course wish that someone will come to kill that person. This
is the principle which motivates a good will, and which Kant holds to be the fundamental
principle of all of morality.
The second version is as follows: “Always treat humanity, whether in your own
person or that of another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an
end.” Treating the another merely as a means to an end means equating an individual to a
mere instrument, a tool, an object which is cast aside after use, or can be sold or
exchanged when no longer needed, or has value only for as long as it is useful. Such act
makes one a "user." In contemporary philosophy, like Marcel or Buber's term, it is treating
the other as an IT, a thing. That's why they call the act as “thing-ization.” In the parable of
"Hope for the Flowers" by Trina Paulus, Stripe's climbing the caterpillar's pillar to reach to
top, where all that could be seen as a reward of climbing are other caterpillar's pillars, was
no other way than stepping on other caterpillars as a means of moving up higher.
Ought implies can. This means that If and only if we can or are free to act in certain
ways can we be commanded to do so. This is one more moral principle ascribed to Kant,
derived from two passages in one’s works. One is stated as follows: "For if the moral law
commands that we ought to be better human beings now, it inescapably follows that we
must be capable of being better human beings." Another one states as follows:
“The action to which the ‘ought’ applies must indeed be possible under natural conditions.”
The Situation Ethics author, Joseph Fletcher, used this maxim several times to illustrate
one’s situationism. In full statement the saying would be, “If I ought to do something, then I
can do it.” By way of logical analysis, the statement means, one's ability to do something is
a necessary condition for a person’s being obliged to do it. In Fletcher's terms, “you are
obliged to do only what you can where you are.”
“I can” may also be interpreted to mean one's degree of freedom, if by freedom we
understand as what Hornedo said about it, “the autonomous energy of being.” Since the
degree of one's freedom is the degree of one's responsibility. Hornedo says, the stuff of
freedom is energy or strenght. It follows that the degree of one's obligation is also the
degree of one's freedom. One can no more be responsible than what one can freely, and
voluntarily do.
Rubric
Indicators Expert (25) Accomplished (18) Capable (12) Beginner (5)
Death is an inevitable part of human existence that all people must face, and for
most of us, the time and place of this death is unknown. But what if someone did know the
time and place? What if that someone was a doctor or a nurse, or the very person that was
going to experience death? Is euthanasia the way to go? Take for example an elderly,
eighty-year-old woman who was suffering from dementia. The woman was sent to a
nursing home and had expressed a want to possibly be euthanized when she thought the
time was right. Would her action be ethical if we judge it based on the frameworks of Virtue
Ethics and Right Theory?
To answer the question, you must select 5 adults and take their on the case
above. You formulate your question/s to elicit the needed responses. Educate them if you
must about virtue ethics and right theory for them to properly respond on your questions.
Present your findings via Powerpoint presentation. It is important that the answer of the
respondents must reflect the principles set forth by Virtue Ethics and Right Theory. Follow
the format below in presenting your output
I. Introduction – The introduction contains a topic sentence, a thesis statement,
then three to five reasons, details and/or facts supporting your research followed
by a conclusion. It should be relatively brief, concise and clear.
II. Analysis – This part contains the assertions (our points of view), examples
(evidence that supports these points of view), explanations (justifications of these
points of view), and significance (discussions of why these points of view matter).
This is not the transcript of the interview.
III. Summary – A summary states the main point of the text/interview as you see it.
A summary is written in your own words.
IV. Conclusion – This part contains the topic sentence. Fresh rephrasing of thesis
statement. Supporting sentences. Summarize or wrap up the main points in the
body of the essay. Explain how ideas fit together. Closing sentence. Final words.
Connects back to the introduction. Provides a sense of closure.
V. Proof of Interview – Show your evidence that you interviewed whether face to
face or through chat. Transcript of the interview must be presented as well.
Rubric
Indicators Expert (50) Accomplished Capable (25) Beginner (10)
(38)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an extraordinary in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
style and voice; style and voice; gives some new information
very informative somewhat information but and very poorly
and well-organized informative and poorly organized organized
organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical errors.
grammatical errors grammatical errors
is present
In a 4 paragraph essay, compare and contrast a legal from a moral right. (20 pts)
Rubric
Indicators Expert (20) Accomplished Capable (10) Beginner (5)
(15)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an extraordinary in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
style and voice; style and voice; gives some new information
very informative somewhat information but and very poorly
and well-organized informative and poorly organized organized
organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors errors.
is present
DIRECTION: Read and analyze the question. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.
Case Analysis
Identify what ethical action a moral agent should do using the frameworks from
Natural Law of St. Thomas, Duty Ethics of Kant, and Value Ethics of Aristotle. (10 pts for
each ethical framework) Express and substantiate your thoughts through a 3 to 5 –
sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.
Grammar Usage and Virtually no spelling, Few spelling, A number of spelling, So many spelling,
Mechanics punctuation, or punctuation, or punctuation, or punctuation, or
grammatical errors grammatical errors grammatical errors is grammatical errors.
present
More than 70% of the world’s countries have abolished capital punishment in law or
practice. However, the death penalty continues to exist in many parts of the world,
especially in countries with large populations and those with authoritarian rule. In recent
decades, there has been a clear trend away from capital punishment, as many countries
have either abolished the death penalty or discontinued its use. (Source:
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international)
In the Philippines, it is a case of imposing death penalty, then abolishing it until the present
when the bill reinstating the death penalty stalled in the Senate in April 2017, where it did
not get enough votes.
What is an ethical stand on death penalty?
Aristotle’s Value
ethics
Julie is 21 years old. She was impregnated by her boyfriend. If here parents come to know
of this, she claims they will disown her. She is expected to graduate at the end of the year
which is exactly the month of her expected delivery. Her boyfriend has abandoned her and
refuses to accept responsibility. Julie plans to have abortion which she thinks is the only
solution to her problem.