MODULE 4: The Act

Module 4 is devoted for the elaborate consideration of the importance of reason in making
moral decisions. While recognizing the significance of feelings or emotions in making
decisions, the proper use of reason and our ability to analyse in moral situations are given
more priority. The module specifically aims to:
(1) point out the obstacles in making the right decisions;
(2) suggest ways to come up with the right decision;
(3) show the role of reason and emotion in moral decisions;
(4) present steps in making moral decisions; and
(5) argue for the importance of having moral courage and will.

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of Module 4, you should be able to:

1. elaborate the significance of emotions and reason in making moral decisions;
2. outline the 7 steps of Scott Rae’s Moral Reasoning Model;
3. apply Scott Rae’s 7-step Moral Reasoning Model in certain moral dillemmas;
4. appraise the significance of having moral courage and will; and
5. evaluate moral situations with impartial eyes.

 4.1. a. Feeling and Moral Decision-Making

There is always a way to determine what is right from what is not right, to distinguish what is
just from what is unjust, what is ought to be done and what is ought not to be done, and what
is ethical from what is unethical.
In the corporate world, the appropriateness of one’s action can be decided vis a vis
the organization’s vision-mission together with its core values. In religion, what is right is
judged based on the members’ code, creed, and professed conduct. In legal matters, we can
know the truth based on what the law and jurisprudence say. In culture, what is right is
adjudged based on the good custom, beliefs, and practices that members of the said culture
claim as acceptable.
These claims are debatable since everything in philosophy can be questioned but our
proximate nearness to what is right becomes closer. We must remember, ethics is not just in
words or just academic in nature. It also includes our thoughts and how we translate into
action what we think and say.
Feelings as Instinctive and Trained Response to Moral Dilemmas
Feelings are important. It is an evidence of our being human. We feel sad upon
learning that there are about 50-200 species of plant, insect, bird, and mammal becoming
extinct every day or for 350-1,400 in a week, or 1,500-6,000 in a month and 18,000-73,000 in
a year. We feel happy when modern medicine can separate conjoined twins and allow them to
have separate lives to live. We are amazed to know that the longest name of a city is Krung
Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin MahintharaYuthaya Mahadilok Phop
Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman and we
know this city through its shortened name as Bangkok, Thailand.
 We wonder if humans have the capacity to create a machine that can convert all
human garbage to something useful. If we feel inconvenient upon knowing the number of
animal species getting extinct every day, if we have no reaction to the news of conjoined
twins being separated, if we have no amazement over the wonderful inventions and human
creations, our humanity is questionable.
Emotion results in feeling and this human ability to feel is wonderful. Feeling gives
color to our life. It comes as a natural reaction to our encounter with ourselves, others, and
anything around us. When we receive high grades as a result of our hard work, we feel elated
and we rejoice. When our grades are low because we take for granted our academics, we feel
down and regret our shortcoming.
When we see pictures of victims of crimes and violence such as the carnage of the 44
members of the Special Action Force in Tukanalipao Mamasapano, Maguindanao on January
25, 2015, or the worst media related violence in the whole word in what is called
Maguindanao Massacre which caused the death of 58 people comprising of Esmael
Mangudadatu’s family members, civilians and Media people in November 23, 2009, we feel
sorry for the victims of these tragedies and feel a burning anger in our hearts.
In the same manner, we are moved to act when we see environmental destructions
such as the miners from Benguet and the nearby provinces letting go of their chemical wastes
down to the lowlands threatening lives and causing even deaths.
When we learn that there were about 350,000 children getting paralyzed yearly in the
1980’s because of polio, we are shocked. But when we learn that in 2017, there were only
about 19 serious polio cases were reported, we are elated with the development that we are
becoming successful against this human pestilence.
In the same manner, we became happy to know that the human race is gaining
acceptance of respecting the rights of women and minorities. Recently, Saudi Arabia allowed
women to drive while Egypt came up with laws giving equal rights about inheritance to men
and women. In Jordan and Lebanon, laws that set free rapists who marry their victims were
repealed. Gender equality is now gaining support worldwide and this is a good development
that tells us to keep hoping for a brighter future.
Our emotions which lead to all kinds of feeling point to our humanity. We cannot
imagine what life is like if we do not have feelings at all. It is beyond question that emotion is
an important aspect of our humanity.
In previous discussions, we mentioned that reason is the basis of decision-making.
This means that there is a certain logic in analyzing situations of life; and, in logical
interpretation, we avoid fallacies or errors in thinking, wishful actions, invalid claims, and
misjudgment in determining rightful actions. In logical thinking, priority is right judgment
and proper actions and not based on mere intuitive knowledge and hypothetical or assumptive
analysis. In short, conclusion is achieved by analyzing premises that are logically coherent
and valid.

Philosophers through the years debate on issues and concerns relative to emotion and
reason. Traditional understanding emphasized that emotion is inferior to reason. Emotion is
said to be fleeting and can be dangerous while reason is superior and reliable. Conventional
thinking states that emotion must be controlled and tamed while reason must be improved and
perfected. But in spite of their academic discussions, no consensus yet is arrived at on the
connection between the two.
 The debates between and among the philosophers seem legitimate but we might as
well leave them with their mental skirmishes. More practical thinkers would see their effort as
an exercise in futility since it will never end. To capture the connection between emotion and
reason in a box may not be possible but to approach the problem on the level of our day to
day experiences can make sense.
We should focus instead on what emotion and reason can do to us in our everyday
living. We might as well see how emotion and reason work together in real life. We might as
well focus on the impacts of emotion and reason in our everyday encounter with our fellow
human beings together with the ethical decisions we make when confronted with true to life
concerns.
Again, experience tells us that feeling leads to thinking and thinking will further push
us to reflect deeper on what to do and what not to do. Thinking will also trigger what we feel
and this feeling can push us further to think. Even without deep philosophical insights and
debates, it is clear that emotion and thinking are interconnected.
Experience shows that emotion is connected with thinking. Those who insist that the
two are entirely different and independent may be correct and we do not contradict them. We
simply maintain that there is a connection between the two. Our day to day experiences tell us
that our feeling will usually trigger us to think and what we think will usually have an impact
to what we feel.
Our emotion that comes in terms of what we feel serve as a triggering device to make
us think. When we learn for example that our sickly brother is bullied in school, we react and
feel bad about it. We may experience anger and shed tears as we pity our brother. This natural
reaction will push us to think. It will trigger our mind to think on what must be done. We may
think of confront the bullies themselves. We may also think of reporting it to the school
authorities or we may simply think of letting it go since we do not want further trouble.
Here is another example to illustrate the point that feeling can trigger us to think.
When a gentleman sees someone attractive, there comes in him the natural feeling of
admiration. This feeling of admiration and eventually attraction will ignite him to think on
what to do. His feelings will push him to come up with a plan and eventually to do his first
move. He might start asking, “How can I know her name? Is giving her a flower a good
move? Will I talk to her personally or through someone else?”
What we think can also result in what we feel. When we think of going to college and
pursue medicine, we may feel depressed upon realizing that the tuition fees and other fees in
medical schools are too high. But this depression will turn into hope and happiness if we
found that there are people willing to help determined students to pursue their goals.

Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirements of Ethics

Plato told a story about Socrates who encounters a young man named Euthyphro
outside the court of Athens. Socrates was amazed upon learning that Euthyprho is there in
court because he will prosecute his own father for murder. Everybody during those times
thought that blood relationship will override any conflict that involves a family member. But
the contrast is true in the case of Euthyprho. For this young man, a crime is a crime and so
with murder. Anyone who commits murder must be prosecuted even if the perpetrator is
one’s own father.
 The narrative tells that impartial ethical stand never takes personal stand since it only
pursues what is true and just. Impartiality neither plays favorites nor caters to some people’s
needs by giving in to their demands while denying others from enjoying the same because of
personal preferences. Impartiality tells us never to manipulate rules, power, and favor to
achieve unjust advantage for ourselves and those whom we favor.
The concern about impartiality arises because of our human nature of self-
preservation. Human beings want to protect their own life, liberty, and property together with
the interest of those who are dear to them. With this premise, judges, elders, and leaders
acting as decision makers must remain impartial at all times. Impartiality is often understood
as fair-mindedness or being objective. It rules against rendering decisions based on bias,
prejudice, and self-serving interest.
Ethical decisions must be just and any decision is just if it is impartial. Impartiality is
often equated with fair-mindedness. One who is impartial is not biased, free from prejudice,
and allows objectivity to rule at all times. Impartiality is a necessary element in any judicial
system. Judges made a sworn statement prior to their assumption to office to observe
impartiality in the performance of their duty. This however, is easier said than done based on
what we observe every day.
Our day to day experiences tell us that impartiality is not a simple concept to observe.
In the celebrated quo warranto case filed against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, the
eight (8) justices who voted for her removal claim impartiality in their decision. In fact, they
invoked the Philippine Constitution as their objective basis in arriving at their decision. On
the other hand, those who question the removal of the Chief Justice claim that the 8 justices
are biased and were never impartial. They also invoked the Constitution as their basis to point
out the error and partiality of the 8 Supreme Court Justices.
Aside from the difficulties encountered in the actual application of impartiality,
several philosophers have both complementary and conflicting ideas on what impartiality is.
We need then to clarify the same for purposes of relating it with sound ethical decision
making.
Mohism, an influential philosophical, social, and religious movement flourished in the
Warring States in ancient China within 479–221 B.C.E. promoted “impartial care.” Mohists
emphasize that every person should equally care for everyone. It is only when a person does
not discriminate on anyone that he/she becomes truly righteous. A benevolent person must
promote what is universally good for all and refrain from committing any societal evil action.
Adam Smith (1723-1790)
He was a Scottish philosopher in the 18 th century who came up with a moral point of view
popularly known as the “Impartial Spectator.” He arrived at this point of view to highlight
how a person can objectively make a judgment on person’s behavior and actions. To be an
“impartial spectator” is to empathize with the person whose behaviors and actions are subject
to our judgment. We must imagine ourselves in the circumstance of the person whom we
should judge. Our approval or non-approval of a person’s behavior depends on the decision
we make if we were the one’s involved in his/her situation. If we were in the person’s
situation and we performed the same action just like what the person did, the same is
acceptable. If we did otherwise because we claim that this behavior or action is wrong then,
the behavior or action is not acceptable.
We have the tendency to sustain and defend our ideas when they conflict with other
people’s ideas. Adam’s Smith proposes a solution by saying that “we need to move beyond
“literal impartial spectator” to reach some ideal by which we can judge both our actions and
that of others. His work is an honest attempt to lead people to become impartial and objective
in dealing with ethical concerns.

4.2. Scott Rae’s 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model

The previous topic dealt with the significance of being impartial and striking a
balance between using one’s feelings and reasoning when it comes to moral decision-making.
One does not only make a decision in a moral dilemma (or in any situation for that matter) by
simply relying on one’s gut-feeling; nor should one only be constantly logical devoid of any
emotional consideration in making moral decisions. Nevertheless, it is necessary to exercise
careful thinking when it comes to moral analysis, evaluation, and decision-making: mindful
of the persons involved, the act itself, the applicable principles, and the overall context of the
situation in which any moral decision is to be made. Scott Rae, in his book, Moral Choices
(2018), proposed a moral reasoning model that could be used as a guide in making moral
decisions. Rae’s moral reasoning model does not guide one to an absolutely correct or “right”
answer or decision to a moral dilemma; rather, his model may guide an individual to ask the
right questions to ethical deliberation (Rae, 2018).

Scott Rae’s model for moral reasoning presents a 7-step approach to moral analyses
and evaluation. It is oriented towards virtues and principles with consideration of
consequences as a supporting role (Rae 2018). The 7-step model is as follows:

1. Gather the Facts

 It is essential that in moral decision- making, one has to know the general facts of the
moral situation, before coming up with a moral analysis, more so, a decision or an
evaluation.

 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? In this light it might become clear that the
dilemma is not ethical but about communication or strategy (Rae, 2018).

2. Determine the ethical issues

 After having identified the facts and overall context of the moral situation, the ethical
issue/s involved in the situation, must be clearly stated in order to specify what issue
one has to make a decision to. This section must likewise clearly state the major
moral dilemma involved in the case.

 Ethical interests are stated in terms of legitimate competing interests or goods. 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 (Rae 2018).

3. Determine what virtues / principles have a bearing on the case

 Applicable ethical values and principles relevant to the case must be identified and
briefly explained in order to justify how such principles could be used in coming up
with a decision concerning the moral dilemma later on. In addition, the sources of
 these principles must be acknowledged likewise. These values, principles could come
from: (1) established philosophical ethical principles; (2) socio-cultural norms; (3)
socio-political norms and laws; (4) religious traditions; and others.

 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 (Rae 2018).

4. List the alternatives

 After having identified relevant values, virtues, and principles involving the moral
situation, possible alternative courses of actions must then be proposed and briefly
explained. These suggested courses of actions must then be evaluated based on its
applicability, sensibility, practicality before selecting one as the course of action or
decision to be made regarding the moral situation.

 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 (Rae 2018).

5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues / principles

 The initial list of suggested courses of actions must then be evaluated from the
vantage point of the identified ethical values and 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 weight principles and virtues - make
sure you have a good reason for each weighting (Rae 2018).

6. Consider the consequences

 If principles have not yielded a clear decision consider the consequences of your
alternatives. Take the alternatives and work out the positive and negative
consequences of each. Estimate how beneficial each positive and negative
consequences are – some might have greater weight than others (Rae 2018).

7. Make a decision (including one’s justification for the decision)

 After having analyzed the moral dilemma situation (from steps 1 thru 6), one must
now make a decision based on what has been previously discussed and must clearly
justify the decision that has been made.

 Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might be you have to choose the
solution with the least number of problems / painful consequences (Rae 2018).

 4.3 Impediments to Ethical Decision Making

 There are instances when our reason runs counter with what we do. There are also
instances when our will does not jibe with what we know as proper. As a result, there are
times we end up consciously doing that we know as wrong and refrain from doing what we
know as right.

Here are some known hindrances why we fail to execute what is ethical and
consciously do what is unethical. This enumeration is not exclusive. There are others
hindrances out there that we encounter in our everyday life. You are hereby asked to
enumerate more based on your daily experiences.

1. Egocentrism
Every person generally focuses on her own thinking and feeling. We experience the
world vis a vis our feelings of pains and pleasure, joy and sadness, and what we long for and
what we dislike. Our experience is heavily influenced by how we think and feel and this
thinking and feeling influence a lot our decision-making.

If I am a teacher, it’s very easy to be engrossed with my tasks and needs and I may
not see things from the parents’ and administrators’ points of view. Ethical decision making
needs to see points of view that are opposed to our own. We experience that when we focus
on our reasoning and feeling, we will not hear and see what others are saying and doing.

When too much focus is given to the self, we fail to see objectively what surrounds
us. If we fall in this trap, we lose our objectivity and become one sided towards our personal
concern.

2. Failure to go with our developmental Maturity

Our thinking and decision-making capability grow side by side with our age. In the
words of Dr. Carlos Medina (1998), “We keep on defining and re-defining our plausibility
context.” This means we undergo different stages in our lives. As children, we think, act, and
speak like children. Our world is focused on the children’s world characterized by toys,
kiddie fun activities and food. When we become adolescents, we leave our children’s world
behind to embrace a new world belonging to the young and energetic people. We start to
outgrow our love for toys and kiddie stuffs. We start to see the worlds using the lens of young
people. When we turn adults, we leave the adolescent life behind and become more serious
with life.

The problem on ethical decision-making crops up if we fail to grow. When we

continue to use the pattern in deciding and dealing with our concerns using our younger day
strategies, we will experience problem. If we deal with an adolescent concern using a child’s
reasoning or an adult concern using a child or adolescent perspective, we will encounter
problems.

3. Refusal to let go of our wrongful thinking and see things objectively

One who says he/she does not believe in hell because he/she’s never been there is a
very difficult person to convince. One who says that there can be no global warming because
nobody proved that the earth is getting warmer through a scientific instrument all at the same
time in a global scope is a person not worthy of our time for discussion purposes. If a person
refuses to believe, no amount of convincing effort can change her/his mind.
If we only base our decision on what we have experienced, our decision can turn
faulty because our experience is often times very limited. There are those who create a picture
of what the world is through what they virtually hear and see and just use them as bases on
what they claim as true. Again, this is very limited because what we hear and see virtually
together with the information we derive from social media is often times not so reliable.
Moral Courage and Will

Even if the person is very intelligent and has a lot of ideas but s/he lack the will and
power to implement his ideas, then the ideas remain to be abstract. The will is important to
make knowledge possible. This explains why we consider an action to be a human act. Our
Knowledge as an awareness or being conscious of one’s actions including its possible
consequences requires human will so that it becomes palatable. Since the act of knowing is
always consciousness of something which is inevitably linked to the subject or the knower,
then It is not enough for an individual to know what is good. What really count are his
good acts. Hence, an insane person and a three-year old child are not liable for their actions
since they are not capable of acting with proper knowledge. Their actions can never be
considered as immoral. College students and professionals are expected to be possessors of
knowledge; thus, they cannot claim excuses for their immoral actions. They are liable for the
consequences of their actions. According to Aristotle, knowledge is the first element of
ethical practice. This knowledge provides a framework for deliberating about the most
appropriate technique(s) by which the good can be attained.

But, it should be noted that; although, knowledge is a requirement for considering an

act to be a human act, being knowledgeable or being aware of what is ethical or moral is not a
guarantee that the person is already considered as an ethical or moral person.

The Freedom of the Will, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, this is the power which
human beings have in determining their actions according to the judgment of their reasons.
This always involves a choice or an option of whether to do or not to do a certain action.
Without this freedom of choice, then responsibility and/or liability on the part of the
individual would be meaningless. Hence, insane people who have no control of their minds
and children who have no idea of what they are doing or are not free to do or not to do, are
not responsible for their actions. On the other hand, matured people, college students and
professionals are expected to be free from doing or not doing; thus, they are responsible or
liable for their actions.

To develop the will, voluntariness is required which is an act of consenting or

accepting a certain action whether it is done whole-heartedly, half-heartedly, or non-
heartedly. According to Aristotle, the moral evaluation of an action presupposes the
attribution of responsibility to a human agent; thus, responsible action must be undertaken
voluntarily (Nicomachean Ethics III). It is then important to sharpen the “will” so that that we
can become consistent in doing the right and the good.