1

MODULE I General Introduction

A. Philosophy in general

1. Nominal definition ( a definition that explains what a name or term means)

Philosophy as a term is taken from the two Greek Words: “Philos”- which means love or friend and
“Sophia”- which means wisdom or knowledge. So philosophy can be defined nominally as “love of
wisdom”.

2. Real definition (a definition that explains what a thing is which will include the essential character of a
thing or reality)

Philosophy is the science of the ultimate reason(s) of being(S) as acquired by the aid of human intellect
alone.

3. Explanation of the real definition

Four important elements in the real definition that require elaboration

a. First, “As a science” – Philosophy is a science not according to our present inductive and empirical
sense of science. It is a science according to the Aristotelian and Thomistic sense of science.For these
two great thinkers, science is knowledge but not every knowledge is science. There are few
requirements for knowledge to be a science: one, it must be certain and demonstrated knowledge
which means you are one hundred percent sure about it and it can be transmitted from one person
to another because it is demonstrable and explainable; two, It must be a systematized knowledge or
an organized knowledge and not a mere aggregation of data and three, It must be a causal
knowledge that tells us why things are as they are and not a bare statement of facts or a mere
description of events. For these reasons, we consider philosophy as a science.
b. Second, “ultimate reason” – In our search for knowledge and truth, we will not only be aiming
toward the proximate or immediate causes of things. Rather, we will be aiming toward the deepest
causes of things or the deepest reasons why things come into being or why particular events are
taking place. That is why if you are going to compare a lawyer and a philosopher, a lawyer may know
that a certain law exists but a philosopher knows why a certain law exists.
c. Third important element in the real definition of philosophy is the term “being”. What do we mean
by the term “being”? From the stand point of philosophy, being means anything that exists or may
exist; it means anything that can think of be it corporeal or incorporeal, material or immaterial. Here
we can see how wide is the scope of our study in philosophy from most insignificant insect to the
most sublime reality that is God.
d. Fourth important element is the phrase “by the aid of human intellect alone”. This would mean that
in our philosophical pursuit for knowledge, our sole source of information or truth is our human
capacity to think. So we will not be usingthe authority of man nor of God to prove our claim. We will
not be using any sacred book containing the divine revelation of God like the Bible for the Christians
or the Quran for the Muslims because if we will do it we will be entering into another realm of
discipline that is theology. So as far as philosophy is concern we will only be relying on our capacity
to think.
4. Divisions of Philosophy

a. Pure Philosophy

There are branches of pure philosophy namely:

(1) Anthropology (The word is taken from the two Greek words; “anthropos” which means “man” or
“humanity and “logia” which means “study”. So, nominally anthropology is a study about man.)
The formal object of our study in anthropology is man both body and soul.
(2) Cosmology (from the Greek word “Cosmos” which means world or universe) It is a study about
the physical world or physical universe. Its counterparts in the field of science could be
astronomy, astrology and geology.
(3) Aesthetics(from the Greek word “aisthetikos” meaning sensitive, sentient pertaining to sense
perception) It is a study about beauty and creation.
(4) Rational Psychology is a study focused on the human soul – the nature of the human soul.
 2

(5) Epistemology (from the Greek word “episteme” which means knowledge) It is a study on how to
acquire pure knowledge. It is a study on the process of knowing or learning.
(6) Ontology (from the two Greek words “on” which means being and “logia” which means study.)It
is a study about being in its most general form.
(7) Metaphysics (from the two Greek words “meta” which means beyond or after and “physika”
which means physics or body) It is a study on what is beyond the physical aspects of reality. It
examines the fundamental nature of reality; the relationship between mind and matter, between
substance and attribute.
(8) Theodicy(from the two Greek words “theos” which means God and “dike” which means trial or
judgment) Literally Theodicy is justifying God. It is a study about the nature of God.
(9) Logic (from the Greek word ‘logos” which means word or reason) It is a study about the nature
of our thoughts.
(10)Ethics (from the Greek word “ethos” which means custom) Ethics is a study about human
conduct.

b. Applied Philosophy

When the results of pure philosophy are applied to the different topics and problems of any other
fields of discipline or study, the result is applied philosophy.
Examples:
(1) When the results of one’s philosophical pursuit about the nature of God is applied in the field of
religion then what you get is Philosophy of religion. Philosophy of religion is an example of an
applied philosophy.
(2) When the results of one’s epistemological studies will be applied in the field of education, what
you will get is Philosophy of education. So philosophy of history, philosophy of business,
philosophy of economics and etc. are examples of applied philosophy.

B. Ethics in Particular

1. Postulates of Ethics

a. The existence of God

God is the source of our existence and the ultimate end. He is the Supreme Law Giver and the
Absolute Judge. During the end times everything will be accounted for. It is said in the Divine
revelation of God as contained in the New Testament of the Bible, “during the judgment day not an
iota of the law will be forgotten”.

b. Immortality of the human soul

A number of world religions claim about the immortality of the human soul. So that many of us
believe that the human soul outlives earthly existence. This life after death will be characterized by
everlasting happiness in heaven for the righteous ones and eternal damnation in hell for the
evildoers. If we will take the opposite position – if there is no life after death, we will lose the
sufficient reason to do good because to do good is hard and difficult to do evil is easy and enjoyable.
And besides, in this world we can see many good people died unrewarded and many evildoers go
unpunished. But because we strongly believe about the immortality of the human soul then we have
all the reasons to always chose and do what is good and to avoid what is evil. Consequently we have
all the reasons to study ethics because the study of ethics will teach us the rightness and the
wrongness – the goodness and the badness of human actions.

c. Freedom of the will

Every human being is free. This is our basic presupposition that man is free. We are capable of
making evaluation, judgment and choice. We can make a choice between what is right and what is
wrong – between good and evil. If man is not free then there is no reason for us to study what is
right and what is wrong – what is good and what is evil in ethics anyway we cannot make a choice.
But man is free. Therefore, we have all the reasons to study ethics to heighten our ethical or moral
sensitivity in making ethical choices for us to always opt for the good and avoid evil.
 3

2. The distinction between human act and act of man

a. Human act

Human act is an action performed with knowledge, freedom and intention. This is the only type of
human action that can be subjected to moral evaluation. It can be evaluated as right or wrong – good
or bad. The moral agent in this case is taken fully responsible for his/her action. As a consequence
the moral agent deserves all the merits of his/her good action and moral culpability and demerits of
his evil action. In other words, the moral agent deserves the affirmation or reward for his/her good
action and blame or punishment for his/her bad action.

Example (1)
The action of the Good Samaritan in the gospel when he decided to help the victim of robbery. The
action of the Good Samaritan is a good act. He did it with full knowledge, freedom and intention that
means he was fully aware of what he was doing, he was not compelled to do so and it was his
intention to help the victim. His action is an example of a human act and thus he deserves all the
affirmations and merits of his good action.

Example (2)
One early morning, John Glenn an athletic young man was jogging along the highway. Incidentally he
knocked into an elderly woman who was also doing her daily routine of brisk walking along the
highway. The incident was a blessing in disguise because the woman was pushed sideward to the
shoulder of the road that saved her from being sideswiped by a rushing reckless motorcycle rider.
Now, the question is, did John Glenn deserve the merit of his seeming heroic act? The answer is no.
John Glenn did not do it deliberately, he was not exercising his freedom and he did not intend to do
it. He was not responsible for the good action and therefore he did not deserve the affirmation and
reward of his action. On the part of the elderly woman, she owed no sense of gratitude to John
Glenn as the heroic action of John Glenn is incidental, undeliberate, without the use of freedom and
unintentional.

Example (3)
A father was dreaming. In his dream he was being attacked by his enemies so he defended himself
by stabbing and beheading his attackers. The dream lead to a very tragic event because when he
woke up it was his wife and two children that he had beheaded. Question, is the father morally
culpable? The answer is no, because the action was done without knowledge, freedom and intention
because it was taking place while he was asleep. From the stand point of morality, the father has no
moral responsibility to what had happened to his wife and children. But from the legal point of view
he has to prove his innocence that indeed it all happened while he was asleep otherwise he will be
guilty of parricide, a crime punishable by reclusion Perpetua or life imprisonment.

b. Act of man

Act of man is an action performed without knowledge, freedom and intention. Usually these actions
are natural bodily processes like the blood circulation, metabolism, growth and etc. These actions
are performed by the body without our awareness and they do not require the exercise of our
freedom and volition. These actions cannot be subjected to moral evaluation. They cannot be
considered morally right or morally wrong – morally good or morally evil.

More Examples:
The act of defecating
The act of spitting
The act of coughing
Digestion of food that you eat

Exercise 1

Please follow the instructions strictly especially on the limit of the sentences of your answers.
Use font size 12. The deadline for the submission of this exercise will be announced in our
 4
Philosophy is an activity people undertake when they seek to
Google Classroom or through our group chat (gc). understand fundamental truth about themselves, the world which
they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other.
(1) Give the real definition of philosophy.
(2) In your own words explain the four important elements of the real definition of philosophy. (limit your
discussion for each of the four elements in two sentences only)
(3) In your own words explain the distinction between the human act and act of man. (Limit your discussion
in five sentences)
(4) In your own words explain the three postulates of ethics. ( Limit your discussion in 5 sentences)

(An excerpt from the book entitled, “Ethics”, by Pasco, Marc Oliver D. et all, 2018)

C. Cultural Conception of the Good

Prelim. Remarks:
(1) There is a basic presupposition that everyonealready have a sense of what is good and bad behavior and
that everyone have already an instinct about what one ought to do and what one’s duties are.
(2) Why is there a need to spend time thinking about what already inherent in everyone’s mind?

1. Tradition

Firstly, there are traditions that guide one’s actions. Traditions are part of culture. It is unthinkable for
anyone not to have grown up with some sense of good and evil, proper and improper, “the ought” and
“ought not”. People mostly think that they know exactly their basis of the good and that this basis of the
good is reasonable. However, a person’s understanding of the good hardly ever goes unquestioned,
especially in today’s world.

Example (1). Devoting one’s life to one’s parent’s needs seems perfectly logical until one’s wife who grew
up in a different tradition, questions it.

Example (2). The contractualization of labor for greater profit seems the most reasonable course of action
until one encounters the sufferings of people who have to face the end of their contracts every five
months.

Example (3). The subtle harassment of women, such as ogling and throwing lewd jokes, seems harmless
until a woman files a case against an offenderin Quezon City where ordinances against harassment exist.

People like to think that their traditions are already clear and unquestionable to serve as basis for how
they should act. This is because people grow up with traditions.

2. Culture

Culture is a system of codes that gives the world meaning and shapes the behavior of people. It also
determines proper behavior.
 This includes what we eat and how we prepare food, how we talk and what language we use, what
we make and how we make and utilize things;
 How we understand the meaning of life and death and how we recognize the ultimate meaning of life.
Culture is our code that shapes how we understand, what life is worth living, and what it means to be
human. These are some of the ways culture shapes the way people act.

Example (1)
In the province of Pampanga, penitents line the streets during Holy Week to whip themselves. For them,
it is a way to participate in Christ’s sacrifice and by doing so, they cleanse themselves of their sins and are
spared from punishment. Mostly, people who engage in these practices come from the more traditional
communities influenced by Spanish-style Catholicism and the so-called animistic world view. Other
Catholics who are educated in more Westernized modern systems, do not feel the need to engage in such
practice and even judge the flagellant as “backward”. However, the flagellation is perfectly natural and
acceptable to those who practice it because in their culture, flagellation is a way to participate in Christ’s
existence and in a way, participate in His Being and Power.
 5

Example (2)

In some cultures, engaging in sexual activities for excitement and fun is amoral. Sexual partners may not
always have serious relationship with each other and merely “hook-up” for fun, and that is perfectly
acceptable as long as contraceptives are used and partners protect themselves against diseases.
Therefore the meaning of sexual activity in these cultures is not necessarily connected to love and
procreation, lineage propagation and property transmission.

In other cultures, which are more agricultural or where the transmission of property is important perhaps
sex as a leisure activity is less acceptable. Also, in cultures where monogamy is associated with romantic
love and personal flourishing, sex is often related to committed relationships, although no always to
marriage.

Among these people, their system of meanings coded by their culture shapes how they understand sex
and acceptable sexual behavior. Some people cannot even conceive of sex as a leisure activity because in
their culture, the idea or set of behavior related to it does not exist. The experience of sex as fun is not
even a real experience for them because it is not part of the experiences that their culture provides.

Example (3)

Wife beating is another kind of behavior that is culturally determined. In some culture where the status
of women is that of property or is tightly controlled because of the importance of lineage, it is customary
that women accept their husband’s authority, submit to their will, and serve all their needs. So women
can be forced to have sex with their husbands. Women accept the fact that they cannot move in public
without a male chaperon; that they cannot own real estate as individuals; they cannot travel without a
male family member’s permission; and they can be beaten for whatever reason their husbands deem
right without recourse to any relief.

In other cultures where women’s happiness and fulfillment are valued above those of the clan or the
community, all of those aforementioned acts are considered violence, violation of basic rights and crimes.
People from cultures whose women are more “liberated” cannot begin to understand how women of the
“non- liberated” cultures accept such abuse. But because the culture of the “non-liberated” women
shape their perceptions of the relationships between men and women, their rights and duties, and their
feelings regarding the “strictness” of their husbands, it is possible that they do not feel being abused or
violated.

It can therefore be noted that the conception of the good is shaped by culture as it is the very basic
system of codes that shapes human behavior. But this could be dangerous in a way because not all
cultures and their conception of the good reflect the good or what ought to be. Some cultures can be
destructive to human beings. For instance, some cultures tend to encourage war and colonial plunder.
Others encourage overconsumption and exploitation of the poor for profit. Because of these people’s
culture, they are oriented toward violent behavior and do not even realize that they do violence toward
their neighbors. Most corrupt government officials do not think that they are doing harm because they
were formed in a culture where self-interest allows for violation of rules of governance and the common
good.

Thus, one cannot rely solely on one’s culture to come to a genuine understanding of the good. There is
always the possibility that one’s cultural conception of the good can lead to destructiveness and violence.

But whose conception of the good is “the good”? Usually, the good is defined by a dominant system or
group. The good is defined by what has worked for people to flourish. People value cooperation over
conflict because it makes human survival easier. People value arranged marriages to build alliances.
Thus, what people usually believe to be the good is usually what is useful and effective for survival and
flourishing. But people are not only concerned about the useful and effective. People also seek to realize
what they consider to be ethical acts that lead to human flourishing.

How does one know what is actually the good that genuinely leads to human flourishing?
Here, the significance of our study in Ethics is highlighted. The discipline of ethics provides
people with a basis upon which to discern their own accepted ethical systems and a basis for
broadening their own conception of the good.

D. What is Ethics?
 6

1. Ethical Reflection
 What do people think about when they think ethically? What is the experience on which ethical
reflection is grounded? It is grounded on the experience of a free person who have to act in
difficult situations. It happens when a person is pushed to know not only the best way to realize
something but he is pushed to know the way that realizes the good.
 The good does not always mean the easiest way or the most expedient way. Ethical norms or
guides and the question of the good and evil arise when people need to act as free persons. Not
all actions are inherently ethical. Actions only require ethical reflection when they are free acts
that involve a person’s desire to realize the good.

2. The good
 The question of the good is not a question of what is practical and what is realizable as an end.
The questions of the good refer to a person’s freedom and ability to live according to what he/she
considers to be good. In different ages of human civilizations, the particular norms of the good
have taken on different forms.
 These norms of the good may have assume different forms in the different ages of civilization but
at the heart of these varied forms is the human realization that man’s free action is defined by
what one ought to do. What one ought to do is not the easiest way and what is commonly
practiced by other people. What we ought to do is achieved when a person act in a way that
realizes his capacity to freely and creatively conform to the order of things.
 These order of thing may be grounded on a transcendent order, an order from the above or from
the divine or an order according to the dictates of reason. In other words our free actions are
actions that conforms either to the order from above or according to the norms of right reason.
 Our ethical concern arise when we think that our actions must authentically fulfill our freedom to
live an authentic human existence.For example, eating and breathing are not considered ethical
or unethical because they are just functions of the body. The rest of the irrational animals or the
brutes are doing them. In other words, eating and breathing do not make us authentically
human.
 However when eating is thought of in relation to human freedom, our ethical concern comes in.
For instance, eating of food produced by people who are exploited. They are underpaid workers
for the factory owners to earn more profits. On top of this, they are taking the raw materials at
the expense of polluting the waters of the community.
 So whoever eats that product participates in the exploitation and destruction because buying the
food supports the activity of the manufacturer. In this case eating becomes an ethical concern
because although eating is a bodily function, eating this exploitatively produced food is a free
choice. In other words there is the exercise of one’s freedom.
 It entails the human capacity to choose what makes one good or what makes one bad. It also
entails how human beings have a choice to be creative or to be destructive towards others.
 Therefore, ethics has something to do with the person working freely to become perfect, freely
working for the actualization of his potentialities as a human being and freely doing what is right
towards others. In other words, ethics has something to do with the person freely fulfilling his full
potentials as a human being.
 Ethics is not about being efficient or achieving certain goals. Ethics is about realizing what people
think to be the good.
 We realize that life is not just about existing and survival and our actions are not just about
expediency (doing things the fastest way possible). We know and we understand that there is this
thing, “the good”that we need to realize for us to become a genuinely human being and for us to
build better societies.
 This course explores how philosophers have tried to explain this mysterious intuition of the good
and what they understood about “the good” were the paths that can lead us to life lived
according to the good.
E. The moral Act

1. Human beings as complex beings

 We, human beings are complex beings. Unlike other organisms that are simply driven by the
survival instinct, we human beings experience the world in a variety of ways through a variety of
perceptive capacities – e.g. senses (sensual), feelings (emotional) and intellect (rationality).
 Bacteria are driven solely to replicate themselves; plants seek only nourishment and growth and
animals seek to address their hunger and reproduce themselves. But we human beings, we have
the rationality which allows us to reckon or evaluate reality with imaginative and calculative
 7

lenses. For example, when we look at a huge rock, we can imagine the statue of Moses that can
be made out of it through our artistic activity of sculpture at the same time we can make a
calculation on the volume of that huge rock.
 Aside from our rationality we have our feelings which will also play a crucial role in determining
the way we deal with various situations we will be experiencing. We do not simply know the
world and other people; we also feel their existence and their values. We do not look at a human
being like a thing to be used and exploited. Rather we look at him or her as a precious being who
deserves our love and respect.
 We feel the existence and the value of other people. This is the reason why we are pleased when
others compliment us for a job well done. We get angry when we are accused of a wrong doing
we did not do. We become afraid when we are threatened by someone. We feel anguish and
despair in moments of seemingly unsurmountable hardships and difficulties. Most of the time,
we act based on how we feel. This is something we share with animals to a certain degree. We
seek food when we are hungry and we wish for companionship when we are lonely.
 But unlike animals that are instinctively programmed to act in accordance with how they feel, we
have the capacity to reflexively examine a situation before proceeding to act with how we feel. In
other words, although feelings provide us with an initial reckoning of a situation, they should not
be the sole basis for our motives and actions.

2. Feelings and Reason

 A person who is in a state of rage towards a perceived enemy or competitor is likely is likely
unable to process the possible consequences of his or her actions done impulsively.
 Feelings seek immediate fulfillment, and it is our reason that tempers these compulsions.
Feelings without reason are blind. Our reason set the course for making ethical and impartial
decisions especially in moral situations although it is not the sole determining factor in coming up
with such decisions.Reason and feeling must constructively complement each other whenever we
are making choices.
 When feeling such as anger, jealousy and shame are out of control, hence without the proper
guidance of reason, one’s moral capacities become short-sighted and limited. Reason puts these
emotions in their proper places seeking not to discredit their validity but calibrating them in such
a way that they do not become the primary motive or driving force in making moral decisions.

 Example: A traffic incidence in CDO

Sometime in December of 2018 on our way for a family Christmas vacation in our home
town in Zamboanga del Norte, we met an untoward traffic incident along the Bulua
Highway at CDO.I was driving at the outer lane of the highway when all of a sudden a
family van from the inner lane turn right cross cutting our lane. With God’s grace I was
able to apply the break, maneuver the steering wheel and stop perpendicular to the
family van without touching it at the shoulder of the highway. Unexpectedly the
passenger window of the family van opened, here comes a woman with a horrible face so
angry shouting at us as I can see in the expression of her face. I was caught surprised of
her actuations because it was not my mistake, it’s theirs. Luckily I was not able to open
my window so I didn’t hear anything of all the “bullshits” uttered by that woman.
Honestly deep inside I was angry and I was driven to succumb to my anger and to
retaliate. But on the other hand, thinking that we still have a very long drive from
Cagayan to our place, I decided not to mind her. We went on with our long trip but of
course with so many questions in mind. What were those she was murmuring about?
Why was she so angry when she was not supposed to be angry? Fittingly and supposedly
we should be the ones who should be angry. Nevertheless thanks be to God for the gift
of patience. We were save from trouble and we arrived at our destination safe and
sound.
 For me, that family experience of ours was a concrete example of a moral decision in which my
emotion was tempered by my reason. My feeling and my reason go hand in hand to arrive at the
decision not to mind that woman and to avoid the possibility of trouble.
 Reason in and by itself is not a sufficient instrument in assessing moral situations. Reason can
sometimes be blinded in implementing and following its own strict rules that it becomes
incapable of empathy for the other.
 While it is morally wrong for someone to steal food out of hunger, to punish a person for the act
of stealing without even trying to listen to his/her reasons for committing such an act may be
considered cold and cruel. That is not to say that the act of stealing is deemed right after one
 8

finds out why that someone stole. It is then viewed as a complex act, connected to a web of
various circumstantial factors and motives.
 A person’s act of stealing may, in fact appear to be a symptom of a greater injustice in one’s
society prompting one to do good not by simply punishing an immoral act but by proactively
seeking justice for the disadvantaged people who are pushed by poverty and social injustice to
feed themselves by stealing.
 In other words, reason, while a reliable ground for moral judgment, needs the feeling of empathy
to come up not just with a moral but also just decision. Moral situations often involve not just
one but others as well. Our decisions have consequences and these have an effect on others.
 Matters of moral import need to be analyzed with a perspective that takes the welfare and
feelings of others into consideration. What is good for one may not be good for others.

 Example: A motor-rela driver.

If a motor-rela driver thinks it is only right for him to get as many passengers as he can in
order to address the needs of his family of by breaking a few traffic rules that to his mind
harms nobody (he does not run anyone over or he does not bump other vehicles on the
road), his reasoning may be construed as narrow and selfish. The inconvenience and
stress, he causes other drivers by picking up and dropping off of passengers anywhere
and anytime as he pleases actually harm others more than he thinks.

Possible effects:
(1) Some people may come late for work and get fired because of this habit.
(2) Some drivers may feel too much stress which endangers their lives and this has an
effect on people that depend on them.
 In other words, if one’s reasoning does not consider the interests of people that are affected
by his actions, then he/she is actually being prejudicial to his/her own interests
 Saying that the actions do not harm anybody is not a sufficient moral justification until one
actually take into rational account the effects of the actions on others.
 Morality involves impartiality because it ensures that all interests are accounted for, weighed
rationally and assessed without prejudice. Prejudices make decisions partial. Reason must
recognize not only the good oneself but also the good of others.
 One way of ensuring the rationality and impartiality of moral decisions is to follow the seven
steps moral reasoning model which can serve as a guide in making choices of moral import.
(1) Stop and think. Before you make any decision, take a moment to think about the
situation itself. What is your place in that given situation? What are other surrounding
factors that you need to consider? For instance, the people who will be involvedand the
potential effects of your decision towards these people.
This step requires a step back from the situation to reflect in order to be sure that you do
not act out impulse or out of your emotion only.
(2) Clarify goals.It is necessary that you should clarify your goals. You make a distinction of
your short-term goals and your long-term goals. We often decide on the basis of what we
want to accomplish. Some times in the heat of the moment, our short term wants eclipse
our long-term goals. That is why, you must determine if you are willing to sacrifice more
important goals in life to achieve your short-term goals.
For example: You are seeking retribution for the harm caused by another person, you
have to think about the long-term consequence of revenge on your character as a person
in the long run.
(3) Determine facts. Make sure you gather enough information before you make a choice.
An intelligent choice is one that is supported with verified facts. You must first be certain
that what you know is enough basis for your action. Without verifying facts, you may
regret your choice in the future once various aspects of the situation come to light. (Mao,
nangusahaymoingon ta usahay, Sus! Kabalo pa
langkodaanngaingonanidiaynidiligyuduntakomohimoani..)
Never make a choice on the basis of hearsay. Make sure that your sources of information
are credible and have integrity.
(4) Develop options.Once you are clarified of your goals and you already have enough
verified information, you try to come up with alternative options to exhaust all possible
courses of action. Most of the time, the pressure of the situation may make you feel that
you are left with less options than you think. Clear your mind and try to think of other
 9

creative ways of clarifying your motives and implementing your actions with the least
ethical compromise.
(5) Consider consequences. Filter your choices and categorize the ethical from the non-
ethical choices bearing in mind both your motives and potential consequences of your
action. Think of long-term consequences and act in accordance with the principles of
justice and fairness. Consequences are historical realities that bear upon the lives of
others. Consequences as historical realities are not only your personal history but the
history of others who will be involved and get affected by your action. Your decision
turns something in your mind into reality. Be sure you do not regret the decision you
have conferred reality upon.
(6) Choose. You make a decision. There are times when you find it hard to make a choice -
(when you are as if, turned between two lovers….. ). You try to consult with people who
may have knowledge or experience of your situation – people whose knowledge about
the matter has already been tested by experience. Find people with virtuous character
and compare your reasoning with your moral analysis. Once you make up your mind
summon the will to do the right thing even if it is hard and seemingly counter-intuitive.
(7) Monitor and modify.After the decision has been made and put into action, monitor what
happens after. If there is something that needs to be modified --action or behavior, be
humble enough to do so as necessary. Pride me come in the way of admitting that you
might have not thought out a decision well enough. As you become more aware of the
consequences of your actions, especially on the matters that affect other people, be
strong in your determination to make some changes to rectify any shortcomings. Do not
hesitate to revise your decisions in light of new developments in the situation.

 These seven steps can help us ensure that we do not take moral decisions lightly. They shed
light on the various aspects of moral situations that we have to consider before making a
decision. One important element in a moral decision making is our will to commit to an
action based on moral principles.
 We must have the necessary resolution to put your choices in motion after a long process of
deliberation. Goodwill must be enacted and applied to make a difference in the world of
practical moral affairs.
 While feelings and reason set up the theoretical basis for moral action, it is the will which
implements your decision and projects your motives into reality. It is not enough to want to
do the good, you must actually do it not only for your sake but for the benefit of those that
may bear the consequences of your decision.
 So every action that we will take no matter how private and personal it may be will always
have social repercussion. Ones action will always affect both the person concerned and other
people.
 To a great extent, you owe it to others to do the right thing. It shows how much you respect
them that you cannot allow yourself to not do something that may benefit them. It is only by
habituating yourself to doing good that your will becomes used to propelling your decisions
into actions. The will is like a muscle that you must constantly exercise in order to develop
and strengthen.
 Moral courage is the result of a morally developed will. It is the capacity to initiate and
sustain your resolution whenever you are certain of doing the good. However there are many
factors that can derailyou from consistently standing by your moral principles. One of these is
intimidation from others. Sometimes we experience the pressure to deviate from what we
consider as right because a great number of peoplein our community did not possess the
same moral conviction as you do.
 But remember that a person of moral courage is not afraidto stand his/her ground in matters
that involve doing what is right and just. Moral courage is what some of our heroes displayed
in the face of dictators and colonizers. Moral courage is a kind of virtue that enables one to
be ethical not just in thoughts but more importantly in deeds.

F. From the Act to the Person

1. The importance of “personhood”

 Contemporary ethicists point to the importance of “Personhood”. It is the human being himself/
herself who gives meaning to the acts and it is also the human being who receives significance from
the acts that he/she executes.
 10

 Human acts and personhood are always bound together and they are inseparable. But the
personhood has the primacy over human acts. Human acts are human because the center of identity
and integrity that grounds them is the person. Human acts are particular actions that flow from the
personhood of the human being.

2. The role of the human acts to the person

 Human acts, in turn, determine the reality of the person. Human acts are significant to the person.
Human beings as doers of moral acts are responsible not only for what they do but also for the
persons that they grow into through their moral acts. In other words, you as a human being is not
only responsible for what you do but also to the kind of person you become because of your action.
 Human acts are relevant to the kind of person one becomes. Particular moral actions shape the
“person” that one desires. Therefore in ethics, it is not only “good moral actions” that are important.
Asking students about “the kind of person” they want to become is more meaningful and significant
in our study of Ethics.
 We have the tendency to think of other people as victims of a wrong decision or bad actions of a
particular moral agent. It should be noted however, that in the relationship between personhood and
moral actions, as previously mentioned, the moral agent himself/herself is the first victim of a bad
decision or a wrong action.
 However the depth of personhood cannot be fully objectivized and it always escapes
conceptualization. Kant insists in this mysterious center that is in the human person that he refuses
to say that the person is inherently evil. For Kant, the human person’s inexhaustible ability to always
change for the better is a source of surprise even for the moral agent.
 No matter how much a human person is conditioned by culture and environment, there is within that
person a source for change and a turning towards the good.
 This is confirmed by the conversion and even cultural revolutions that happen in human history.
Exercise 2

You write a one-page reflection paper, double space and use font 12 on this particular topic, “The two good
things in my personthat can contribute in the building of a better society”. Do a self-examination and be honest
to yourself.