SSP4 MIDTERM 02 (NICOL, MA. KRECIA B.
-20210137) Level 1: PRE-CONVENTIONAL MORALITY (pre-moral)
STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
According to Manuel Velasquez, known as the father of
academic business ethics and a Charles J. Dirksen
Professor of Business Ethics at the Santa Clara
University. it is only as mature adults that any of us can
inspect the moral values and standards we have
inherited and their consequences.
Then we can broaden our interest base to include not
just our immediate circle of friends and relatives but all
people. At his point, morality is grounded in universal
principles that impartially take into account the
interests of all people.
STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
The stages of moral development were more precisely
identified by some psychologists and among the best
theory was that by Lawrence Kohlberg (pioneered
stages of development)
He groups his stages of moral development into the
following three level, distinguished by what defines
right or moral action. The second stage is more
advanced from of the general orientation of each level
-Right and wrong determined by rewards/punishment
STAGE 1: Punishment/obedience. Whatever
leads to punishment is wrong
STAGE 2: Rewards. The right way to behave is
the way that is rewarded
Level 2: Conventional Morality
-Views of others matter. Avoidance of blame seeking
approval
STAGE 3: Good intentions. Behaving in ways
that conform to "good behavior”.
STAGE 4: Obedience to authority. Importance
of “doing one’s duty”
(17-20 yrs. old)
LEVEL 3: Post-Conventional Morality
-Abstract notions of justice. Rights of others can
override obedience to laws rules. (Beyond the rules)
STAGE 5: Difference between moral rights and
legal rights. Recognition that rules should
sometimes be broken.
(Morality vs law)
STAGE 6: Individual Principles of conscience.
Takes account of likely views of everyone
affected by a moral decision.
(Adult age, 30 and above)
Collected learnings developed in this stage
“Papunta ka palang, pabalik na ako”

PRE-MORAL/PRE-CONVENTIONAL
STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE ORIENTATION
Children or adults base their decisions on personal fear
and the avoidance of punishment. There is little of any
awareness that others have needs and desires similar to
one's own. The physical dimensions of an act or its
consequences largely determine its degree of badness.
(What is right is right, what is wrong is wrong. We don’t
determine the reason behind the act)
STAGE 2: SELF-GRATIFICATION ORIENTATION
This stage asserts that individuals are concerned only
primarily with satisfying their own needs. Being sharply
sensitive to outcomes, they view actions as right when it
promotes one's self-interest.
(e.g., praising children for what good they did)
LEVEL 2: CONVENTIONAL
STAGE 3: APPROVAL-OTHERS ORIENTAION .
At this stage, persons internalize the values of others,
such as parents and peer groups. They resolve moral
dilemmas by determining how those whom they admire
would behave or want them to behave. To gain the
approval of others by praising them is central of this
stage.
STAGE 4: LAW-AND-ORDER ORIENTATION
Persons belonging to this stage base their thinking on
the dictates of establishing authority: the police,
teachers, the President, The Scripture. They also
maintain that rules and obligations are necessary for a
stable society. They respect the law, which they
perceive as fixed and immutable, not as a social
contract subject to change.
(What is wrong by the law is wrong)
LEVEL 3: PRINCIPLES/POST CONVENTIONAL
STAGE 5: SOCIAL-CONTRACT ORIENTATION
The individual recognizes an implied agreement existing
between individuals and society-a social contract
whereby the State acquires its legitimacy through the
consent of the governed. Rules are expectations,
therefore, contain an arbitrary elements: They are
made for social our poses and these purposes occur.
(Doing the right thing to get what you are expecting.
e.g., working for a salary
-doing something na may mapapala)
Early 20’s seeking for self/social-gratification (not
mature enough)
STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL-ETHCAL-PRINCIPLES
ORIENTATION
In this last stage of orientation, the person has fully
internalized moral principles held as universally valid.
Right action is defined in terms of these principles,
chosen because of their logical comprehensiveness.
their universality, and their consistency.
(Maturing stage)
Most of the thing is not universally right
e.g., parents always giving advice to their children
(Have a competitive grade)
 THE ACT
HUMAN ACT AND ACT OF MAN
A human act is one that proceeds from the deliberate
free will of man. It is an act that is deliberate and
knowing performed by one having the use of reason.
Therefore, both intellect and will are in play. It is an act
proper to man as man.
(Kinikilos ng tao, bilang isang tao)
An act of man is one that is not dependent upon
Intellect and free will. If is Condone by a human person
but is not proper to him as a person because it does
stem from those faculties which are peculiar to man
namely intellect and will.
Human act is ginagawa bilang isang tao,
On the other hand, act of man is ginagawa mo dahil
ikaw ay biologically man(human being)
Human act requires morality, while Act of man don’t.
Act of men: human act that animals also do (walk, eat,
sleep, etc.) animals act base on instinct.
Human act: only human can do (helping others, lying,
stealing, etc.) through deliberate and free will
For an act to be considered a human act, it must
possess the following essential attributes:
1. It must be performed by a conscious agent who is
aware of what he is doing and of its consequences.
2. It must be performed by an agent who is acting
freely, that is by his own volition and powers.
3. It must be performed by an agent who decides
willfully to perform the act.
Human act must, therefore be knowing free and willful.
The lack of any of these renders an act defective and
less voluntary.
ELEMENTS DETERMINING MORALITY
1. THE ACT ITSELF. It will be seen rather easily that in
order to judge the morality of a human act, we must
first consider the act itself. Helping an elderly person
cross the street, is always seen as morally good.
Circumstances or purpose might make it evil, but the
act itself is good one.
2. PURPOSE. Now let us consider the purpose, or end of
an act. The purpose of a human act is the reason for
which the act is performed. In other words, the
purpose is the intention of the agent, A businessman
lies to his clients to make more money. A nurse lies to a
patient because she fears that truth will disturb his
peace of mind.
3. CIRCUMSTANCES. There is an old saying
circumstances alter cases. That is true and that is why
the morality of a human act must be judged in the light
of circumstances. From the moral point of view, the
circumstances of a human act are those factors, distinct
from the act itself and from the purpose, which may
affect the morality of the act.
CRITERIA FOR MORAL JUDGMENT
A physician decides not to inform a patient that his
illness is grave. Along with the medical judgment the
physician also judges that this is the morally good thing
to do in the circumstances. Another person interested
in the case disagrees, claiming that the physician has a
moral obligation in this case to let the patient know the
true gravity of his illness. In response, the physician
gives reasons why it is morally good to withhold that
information.
Such reasons used to argue in favor of a moral
judgment is the criteria for moral judgment. Two people
who disagree about a moral judgment may appeal to
differing, even contradictory, criteria are correct?
Physician is obligated to tell but there is reason that
has something to do with his moral judgement
CRITERIA FOR MORAL JUDGMENT:

1. The Judgment- The judgment of what is morally good

or bad in a particular case is the judgment of
conscience.

(Looking on what is already happened)

2. Choice- The choice is something distinct from the

judgment of conscience.

(Bakit hindi niya sinabi)

Makokonsensya o hindi

3. Objective - Include the act itself and those realities

which are affected by the act and which should be
considered in deciding whether the act is morally good
or bad.

(Reason behind the judgement)

What is the effect of the judgement

An act may have an indefinite number of effects. A

world to one's friend affects his actions, which changes
a situation: which influences someone else, and so on
perhaps to the end of human history.

(Domino effect)

One cannot consider every effect of an act. One can be

obliged to consider only those effects which are
foreseeable and morally significant to some degree
which we will try to specify here.

By the objective elements of a moral act, we mean

those realities affected by the act insofar as the effects
are to some extend foreseeable and may significant.
EXPLAIN THE FF STATEMENTS: more likely it’s just us fooling ourselves. So
instead of masking, it’s better to be true to
A. “Men are good in one way, but bad in many” -
ourselves but not to extent that we will cause
Aristotle
harm to others.
-men can direct his interest in one thing making
it his expertise, having the skills and knowledge,
D. “The good person loves people and uses things,
but on the other hand he is not obligated to be
while the bad person love things and uses
an expert on other things making him bad in
people” -Sydney J. Harris
many. But one thing for sure is that it is okay
-For a person who is aiming high, some of them
not to be good at anything, one is enough to be
do anything in order to get their wants in life.
contented and happy.
People might use other people by their own
benefit to achieve what they wanted, but
B. “The value or worth of a man is, as of things, his
people who values friendship and relationship
price” -Thomas Hobbes
same as to his/her goals in life are more likely
-the value we give to our selves and to others
wants to be successful along with his/her
are a result of our judgment to ourselves and to
friends and relationship he/she also values.
them.
E. If we were shielded from the consequences of
our actions, would that change the way we
Most men place the most value on themselves, yet their should act?
actual worth is no more than what others place on -Every action we always do has a bad or good
them. The value we place on one another is frequently consequences. And if we are shielded from
referred to as honoring and dishonoring. To esteem a these consequences, people will tend to ignore
man highly is to respect him; to value him lowly is to what is right and what is wrong, as a result
disgrace him. However, in this scenario, high and low there will be chaos. People will do whatever
are to be regarded in relation to the rate that each things they wanted. Individuals who are more
individual sets for himself. And dignity refers to a man's likely to do still goods things will have a conflict
worth, which is the value placed on him by others. with people who wants to do bad things. Rules,
To convey any expression of love or fear for someone is Laws, morals are what making people to always
to honor; to esteem both love and fear. To contemn, or prevent on making a crime.
to love or dread less than he expects, is to disgrace; it is
to undervalue.

C. “The measure of individual’s real character is

what that person does when he or she knows
that no one else will find out” -MacAulay
-We are used to having a mask in front of
others, to conceal things that may give off bad
impression to others as a result we often tell
people the things they wanted to hear instead
to those things we really wanted to say. Our
authentic self is often mask with people we are
only previously met, and circumstances that
made us to conceal what we really are. To give
the impression people are likely to like, more
than our authentic self is often what we do. But
no matter how we present ourselves to others,
if it’s not coming to our authentic self, then it
https://www.scribd.com/document/466094932/
ETHICS-EXERcISE-7-docx

https://www.coursehero.com/u/file/103198447/SPLP-
2docx/?justUnlocked=1