GEC 18 (ETHICS)

CHAPTER II:
AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS
SOURCES:

BULAONG, OSCAR JR. G. ET AL. ETHICS: FOUNDATIONS OF MORAL VALUATION. 1ST ED. QUEZON CITY: REX PRINTING
COMPANY, INC., 2018.

SEARLE, JOHN R. MIND: A BRIEF INTRODUCTION. FUNDAMENTALS OF PHILOSOPHY SERIES. NEW YORK: OXFORD UNIVERSITY
PRESS, INC., 2004.
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

LUGWIG WITTGENSTEIN STATES IN HIS BOOK TRACTATUS LOGICO-PHILOSOPHICUS

THAT “THE LIMITS OF MY LANGUAGE MEAN THE LIMITS OF MY WORLD.”

TWO CENTRAL APPLICATIONS OF LANGUAGE

THE APPLICATION OF LANGUAGE HAS ITS CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS.

1. NATURAL SCIENCES – LANGUAGE IS USED IN ITS ACCURATE, EFFICIENT, AND PRECISE

SENSE.

SCIENTIFIC TRUTH – OBJECTIVE (DESCRIPTIVE IN NATURE).

EXAMPLE: IN BIOLOGICAL ANATOMY, HOW MANY BONES ARE IN A FULLY GROWN HUMAN BEING?
THERE ARE 206 TO 213 BONES FROM 300 BONES OF A BABY’S BODY.
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

2. SOCIAL SCIENCES – LANGUAGE IS USED IN ITS INACCURATE, INEFFICIENT, AND IMPRECISE

SENSE. MEANING TO SAY, LANGUAGE IN THIS CONTEXT IS LIMITED IN ITS
DEMONSTRATION TO PRESENT CONCEPTS AND IDEAS WITH CLARITY.

TRADITIONAL TRUTH – SUBJECTIVE (PRAGMATIC IN NATURE).

EXAMPLE: IN ONE OF PHILOSOPHY’S BRANCHES ETHICS, WHAT IS GOOD/RIGHT AND

BAD/WRONG?
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

AN EVIDENCE TO THIS IS HOW WE MAKE USE OF LANGUAGE AND CONCEPTS IN VARIED WAYS.

CLARIFICATIONS AND TERMINOLOGY

POINT OF CLARIFICATION IS TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE INSTANCES WHEN WE MAKE
VALUE JUDGEMENT THAT ARE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE PART OF ETHICS. WE CALL THIS
NOT ETHICAL RATHER THAN UNETHICAL.
A. AESTHETICS VALUATION - FROM THE GREEK WORD AISTHESIS MEANING SENSE OR FEELING.
THIS REFERS TO THE JUDGEMENTS OF PERSONAL APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL THAT WE
MAKE ABOUT THE FIVE SENSES NAMELY THE SENSE OF SIGHT, TOUCH, HEAR, SMELL, AND
TASTE.

EXAMPLE: REFERRING TO TASTE AS A PERSONAL JUDGEMENT OF WHAT IS GOOD AND BAD.

ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

B. ETIQUETTE - CONCERNS WITH RIGHT AND WRONG ACTIONS, BUT THOSE WHICH MIGHT BE
CONSIDERED NOT QUITE GRAVE ENOUGH TO BELONG TO A DISCUSSION ON ETHICS.

EXAMPLE: FOR FILIPINOS TO USE PO AND OPO AS A SIGN OF RESPECT.

C. TECHNICAL VALUATION - FROM THE GREEK WORD TECHNE MEANING TECHNIQUE OR

TECHNICAL. THIS IS OFTEN USED TO REFER TO THE RIGHT WAY OF DOING THINGS.

EXAMPLE: LEARNING A SKILL IN MARTIAL ARTS, BAKING, AND BASKETBALL.

ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

NB: “THESE VALUATIONS SERVE AS A ROUGH GUIDE TO WHAT BELONGS TO ETHICS

AND THOSE WHICH ARE NOT ETHICAL. IN GENERAL, ETHICS CONCERNS MAINLY OF
THE RIGHTNESS AND WRONGNESS OF HUMAN ACTION, THUS, MATTERS THAT CONCERN
LIFE AND DEATH (HUMAN LIFE) SUCH AS WAR, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT, ABORTION, AND
MATTERS THAT CONCERN HUMAN WELL-BEING SUCH AS POVERTY, INEQUALITY, AND
SEXUAL IDENTITY ARE OFTEN INCLUDED IN THE DISCUSSIONS OF ETHICS.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

QUESTIONS THAT MATTER!

➢ WHY STUDY SOCIAL SCIENCES SPECIALLY ETHICS IF IT ONLY DEMONSTRATES RELATIVE CONCEPTS
WHICH RESULTS IN THE PRODUCTION OF RELATIVE TRUTHS?

➢ IS IT EVEN SENSIBLE TO PURSUE THE STUDY OF ETHICS?

➢ CAN WE EVER HAVE AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF ETHICS WHICH IS SUBJECTIVE IN NATURE?

ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

CONTRADICTION BETWEEN HUMAN REALITY AND SCIENTIFIC WORLD VIEW

“HOW DO WE FIT OUR CONCEPTION OF HUMAN REALITY (THAT A HUMAN BEING IS A

COMPOSITION OF MIND AND BODY) AS APPARENTLY CONSCIOUS, MINDFUL, FREE, RATIONAL,
SPEAKING, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL AGENTS IN A WORLD THAT SCIENCE TELLS US CONSISTS ENTIRELY
OF MINDLESS, MEANINGLESS, PHYSICAL PARTICLES. WHO ARE WE, AND HOW DO WE FIT INTO THE
REST OF THE WORLD? HOW DOES THE HUMAN REALITY RELATE TO THE REST OF REALITY? ONE
SPECIAL FORM OF THIS QUESTION IS, WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN? THE ANSWERS TO THESE
QUESTIONS HAVE TO BEGIN WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE MIND, BECAUSE MENTAL PHENOMENA FORM
THE BRIDGE BY WHICH WE CONNECT WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

DUALISM VS. MATERIALISM

“THE TRADITIONAL VOCABULARY “MENTAL” AND “PHYSICAL” ASSUMES THE MUTUAL EXCLUSION;
AND THAT ASSUMPTION CREATES INSOLUBLE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE LAUNCHED A THOUSAND BOOKS.
PEOPLE WHO ACCEPT THE REALITY AND IRREDUCIBILITY OF THE MENTAL TEND TO THINK OF
THEMSELVES AS DUALISTS. BUT TO OTHERS, ACCEPTING AN IRREDUCIBLE MENTAL COMPONENT IN
REALITY SEEMS LIKE GIVING UP ON THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD-VIEW, SO THEY DENY THE EXISTENCE OF
ANY SUCH MENTAL REALITY. THEY THINK IT CAN ALL BE REDUCED TO THE MATERIAL OR ELIMINATED
ALTOGETHER. THEY TEND TO THINK OF THEMSELVES AS MATERIALISTS.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

RENÈ DESCARTES’ SUBSTANCE DUALISM

DESCARTES’ MOST FAMOUS DOCTRINE IS DUALISM, THE IDEA THAT THE WORLD DIVIDES
INTO TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF SUBSTANCES OR ENTITIES THAT CAN EXIST ON THEIR OWN.
THESE ARE MENTAL SUBSTANCES AND PHYSICAL SUBSTANCES. DESCARTES’ FORM OF
DUALISM IS SOMETIMES CALLED “SUBSTANCE DUALISM.”

DESCARTES THOUGHT THAT A SUBSTANCE HAS TO HAVE AN ESSENCE OR AN ESSENTIAL TRAIT

THAT MAKES IT THE KIND OF SUBSTANCE THAT IT IS (ALL THIS JARGON ABOUT SUBSTANCE AND
ESSENCE, BY THE WAY, COMES FROM ARISTOTLE). THE ESSENCE OF MIND IS
CONSCIOUSNESS, OR AS HE CALLED IT “THINKING”; AND THE ESSENCE OF THE BODY IS BEING
EXTENDED IN THREE DIMENSIONS IN PHYSICAL SPACE, OR AS HE CALLED IT “EXTENSION.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

RENÈ DESCARTES’ SUBSTANCE DUALISM

DUALISM MIND BODY

Thinking Extension

(having spatial

ESSENCE (consciousness) dimensions)

Known directly Known indirectly

Free Determined
PROPERTIES Indivisible Infinitely divisible

Indestructible Destructible
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

A FUNDAMENTAL FEATURE OF THE NATURAL / PHYSICAL WORLD

1. OBSERVER INDEPENDENT – THINK OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD EXIST REGARDLESS OF

WHAT HUMAN BEINGS THOUGHT OR DID. SOME SUCH THINGS ARE FORCE, MASS,
GRAVITATIONAL ATTRACTION, THE PLANETARY SYSTEM, PHOTOSYNTHESIS, AND HYDROGEN
ATOMS. ALL OF THESE ARE OBSERVER INDEPENDENT IN THE SENSE THAT THEIR EXISTENCE DOES
NOT DEPEND ON HUMAN ATTITUDES.

2. OBSERVER RELATIVE / DEPENDENT – BUT THERE ARE LOTS OF THINGS THAT DEPEND
FOR THEIR EXISTENCE ON US AND OUR ATTITUDES. MONEY, PROPERTY, GOVERNMENT,
FOOTBALL GAMES, AND COCKTAIL PARTIES ARE WHAT THEY ARE, IN LARGE PART, BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT WE THINK THEY ARE. ALL OF THESE ARE OBSERVER RELATIVE OR OBSERVER
DEPENDENT.
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

ORIGINAL / INTRINSIC INTENTIONALITY VS. DERIVED INTENTIONALITY

“FOR EXAMPLE, I HAVE IN MY HEAD INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO GET TO SAN JOSE. I
HAVE A SET OF TRUE BELIEFS ABOUT THE WAY TO SAN JOSE. THIS INFORMATION AND THESE
BELIEFS IN ME ARE EXAMPLES OF ORIGINAL OR INTRINSIC INTENTIONALITY. THE MAP IN FRONT
OF ME ALSO CONTAINS INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO GET TO SAN JOSE, AND IT CONTAINS
SYMBOLS AND EXPRESSIONS THAT REFER TO OR ARE ABOUT OR REPRESENT CITIES, HIGHWAYS,
AND THE LIKE. BUT THE SENSE IN WHICH THE MAP CONTAINS INTENTIONALITY IN THE FORM OF
INFORMATION, REFERENCE, ABOUTNESS, AND REPRESENTATIONS IS DERIVED FROM THE
ORIGINAL INTENTIONALITY OF THE MAP MAKERS AND USERS. INTRINSICALLY THE MAP IS JUST A
SHEET OF CELLULOSE FIBERS WITH INK STAINS ON IT. ANY INTENTIONALITY IT HAS IS IMPOSED
ON IT BY THE ORIGINAL INTENTIONALITY OF HUMANS.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

CAN WE EVER HAVE AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF ETHICS WHICH IS SUBJECTIVE IN NATURE?

TWO VERSIONS OF THE CONCEPTS SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE

1. ONTOLOGICAL SUBJECTIVITY VS. ONTOLOGICAL OBJECTIVITY (ABOUT EXISTENCE)

NB: “ONTOLOGY WHICH MEANS HAVING TO DO WITH EXISTENCE.”

A. ONTOLOGICAL SUBJECTIVITY – THESE ARE ENTITIES WHOSE EXISTENCE IS DEPENDENT ON
BEING EXPERIENCED BY A HUMAN SUBJECT. (EXISTENCE DEPENDS ON SUBJECT).

EXAMPLE: PAINS, DESIRES AND EXPERIENCES.

ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

B. ONTOLOGICAL OBJECTIVITY – THESE ARE ENTITIES WHOSE EXISTENCE IS INDEPENDENT ON

BEING EXPERIENCED BY A HUMAN SUBJECT. (EXISTENCE INDEPENDENT ON SUBJECT).

EXAMPLE: MOUNTAINS, MOLECULES AND TREES.

NB: “THE ONTOLOGICALLY OBJECTIVE WORLD AROUND ME CAUSES IN ME A SET OF

ONTOLOGICALLY SUBJECTIVE EXPERIENCES. THUS, I HAVE A SUBJECTIVE VISUAL FIELD IN MY
HEAD, AND THIS SUBJECTIVE VISUAL FIELD IN MY HEAD GIVES ME INFORMATION ABOUT THE
OBJECTIVE VISUAL FIELD IN THE REAL WORLD.”
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

2. EPISTEMIC SUBJECTIVITY VS. EPISTEMIC OBJECTIVITY (ABOUT CLAIMS)

NB: “EPISTEMIC WHICH MEANS HAVING TO DO WITH KNOWLEDGE.” THIS HAS SOMETHING TO DO
WITH CLAIMS.”
NB: “A CLAIM IS EPISTEMICALLY OBJECTIVE IF YOU CAN SETTLE ITS TRUTH.”

A. EPISTEMIC OBJECTIVITY – THE TRUTH OF A CLAIM CAN BE SETTLED INDEPENDENTLY OF THE

PERSON.
EXAMPLE: JOSE RIZAL WAS BORN ON JUNE 9, 1969 (6/9/1969).
B. EPISTEMIC SUBJECTIVITY – THE TRUTH OF A CLAIM CANNOT BE SETTLED INDEPENDENTLY OF THE
PERSON.
EXAMPLE: JOSE RIZAL IS THE BEST FILIPINO SCULPTOR.
ETHICS: CHAPTER I. AN INQUIRY ON WHAT ETHICS IS.

CAN WE EVER HAVE AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF ETHICS WHICH IS SUBJECTIVE IN

NATURE?