CHAPTER 4, Frameworks

Republic of the Philippines
MARINDUQUE STATE COLLEGE

SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLGY
Tanza, Boac, Marinduque
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

Level III Re-Accredited by the Accrediting Agency for Chartered Colleges, Universities in the
Philippines (AACCUP), Inc.
ETHICS (General Education)

Moral Principles of Frameworks
Learning Handout No. 4.1
A. Learning Objectives
Course Intended Learning Outcome 4: Recognize and analyze the moral principles of
frameworks by understanding the origin, nature, and business fascination of
utilitarianism; differentiating the kinds of rights as legal or moral; explaining Kant’s
concept of good will and categorical imperative; and describing Aristotle’s and St.
Thomas’ concepts of virtue ethics.
Week 6
B. Introduction
The term ‘framework’ can be defined as a basic structure underlying a system or
concept. Contextually in Ethics, it refers to “a set of assumptions, concepts, values, and
practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality” (“Framework,” n.d.). With this
definition, a framework is pretty much like a worldview or a held theory.
Personally, held frameworks and principles in Ethics dictate one’s moral
disposition or the way a person resolves moral dilemmas. Hence, it is important to learn
the basic moral theories which are espoused or held by many people. Some leading
theories in ethics will be specially discussed later. In this lesson, an overview on the
fundamental moral principles, concepts, and theories is provided.
Ethicists generally divide the study of morality into three general subject areas: (1) meta
ethics (2) normative ethics, and (3) applied Ethics. Under these respective areas are
various moral theories frameworks.
1. Meta-Ethics
Meta-Ethics is the branch of ethics that studies the nature of morality, focuses on
the meaning of ethical terms themselves (for instance, ‘what is goodness?’), and on
questions of how ethical knowledge is obtained (for instance, ‘how can I distinguish
what is good from what is bad?’), rather than on the more applied question of ‘what
should I do in a particular situation?’. Meta-ethics is therefore concerned with the
nature of ethical properties, statements, attitudes and judgments. Meta-ethics
examines such themes as what moral questions mean, and on what basis people can
know what is ‘true’ or ‘false’.
2. Normative Ethics
Normative Ethics is the branch of ethics that studies how man ought to act,
morally speaking. As the name suggest, it examines ethical norms, that is, those
guidelines about what
is right, worthwhile,
virtuous, or just. This
branch evaluates


standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions and determines a moral course of
action. Prescriptive in nature, it addresses specific moral question about what we
should do or believe. We do normative ethics if we justify norms like ‘discrimination
is wrong’ or ‘we must act in accordance with our duty’.
Normative Ethical theories are generally categorized into three kinds:

deontological, teleological, and virtue ethics.
2.1 Deontology – is an ethical system that bases morality on independent moral

rules or duties.
The term came from the Greek word deon, which means ‘duty’, implying
the foundational nature of man’s duties or obligations. This system equates behaving
morally with adherence to duties or moral rules, and acting immorally with failure to
obey them. Also called nonconsequentialism, the system’s principles are submitted as
obligatory, regardless of the consequences that actions might produce.
2.2 Teleology – is a moral system that determines the moral values of actions by
their outcomes or results.
From the Greek word ‘telos’, which means ‘end’, teleology takes into
account the end result of the action as the exclusive consideration of its morality.
(Aristotle’s ‘telos’ however has a related but somewhat different meaning).
Teleology deems an action as morally right if its favorable consequences
are greater that it’s adverse outcomes. Its most famous form is consequentialism
which proposes that morality is determined solely by a cost-benefit evaluation of the
action’s consequences.
2.3 Virtue Ethics – as a moral system, places emphasis on developing good
habits of character, like kindness and generosity, and avoiding bad character traits, or
vices, such as greed or hatred.
Virtue-based theories give importance to moral education which molds
individuals to habitually act in a virtuous manner. Focusing on the character of the
agent, virtue ethics describes right actions as those chosen and performed by a
suitably virtuous person.
3. Applied Ethics
Applied Ethics philosophically examines specific, controversial moral issues.
Using philosophical methods, this area of concern in Ethics attempts to determine the
ethically correct of action in specific realms of human action.
Applied Ethics issues nowadays are classified into various subfields.
3.1 Bioethics. This concerns ethical issues pertaining to life, biomedical researches,
medicines, health care, and medical profession. As such, it deals with controversies like those
about surrogate mothering profession, genetic manipulation of fetuses, stem cell research, using
human embryos in research, in-vitro, fertilization, abortion, euthanasia, suicide, patient rights,
and confidentiality of patient’s records, physician’s responsibilities, and mandatory medical
screening.
3.2 Environmental Ethics. It deals with moral issues concerning nature, ecosystem, and
its nonhuman contents. This includes issues such as animal rights, animal experimentation,
endangered species preservation, pollution control, and sustainable development.
3.3 Business Ethics. It examines moral principles concerning business environment
which involves issues about corporate practices, policies, business behaviors, and the conducts
and relationships of individuals in the organizations. It investigates ethical such as those about
the social responsibility of business, employee rights, harassment, labor unions, misleading
advertising, job discrimination, and whistle blowing.
3.4 Sexual Ethics. It studies moral issues about sexuality and human sexual behavior. It
examines topics like homosexuality, lesbianism, polygamy, premarital sex, marital fidelity,
extra-marital sex, non-marital procreation, loveless sexual relations, safe sex, and contraceptive
use.


3.5 Social Ethics. It deals with what is right for a society to do and how it should act as a
whole. Its focus is on what may be deemed as proper behavior for people as a whole. Some of
the issues under this are that racial discrimination, death penalty, nuclear weapon production,
gun use for fun, and welfare rights.
Kinds of Frameworks
A. Consequentialist
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1808-73) are British philosophers
who had impact on British thought. Bentham was the head of a group of reformers called “the
philosophical radicals”, whose members included James Mill and his son, John Stuart Mill.
Bentham and the younger Mill are considered the main proponents of the moral theory called
Utilitarianism.
1. Utilitarianism
Perhaps the most prominent moral philosophy in the last two centuries,
utilitarianism is known as the consequentialist theory, a subclass of teleological moral
theory. A teleological ethical system judges the rightness of an act in term s of an
external goal or purpose. It’s basis in the determination of what one ought (or ought not)
to do rests exclusively on the consequences of the act, not the nature of the act nor the
traditional moral rules.
Consequentialist Ethics proposes that actions, rules, or policies should be ethically
measured and evaluated by their consequences, not by the intentions or motives of the agent. As
opposed to absolutists who hold that some actions are intrinsically wrong and must never be
done no matter what the results are, consequentialist suppose that there is no kind of act which
may not be justifies by its effect. Absolutists believe that in natural law or in natural rights which
render some acts – those which violate those rights or conflict with the law – as immoral, no
matter what their outcomes are. Consequentialist on the other hand believes that there is no class
of action which must be ruled out in advance independent of their consequences.
Utilitarianism is the most influential consequentialist theory. Derived from the Latin
term utilis which means ‘useful’, utilitarianism basically states what is useful is good, and that
the moral value of actions are determined by the utility of its consequences.
Utilitarian ethics argues that the right course of action is one that maximizes overall
happiness.
The principle of utility can be applied to either particular actions or general rules. The
former is usually called ‘act-utilitarianism’ and the latter, ‘rule-utilitarianism’.
1.1 Act Utilitarianism – In act utilitarianism, the principle of utility is applied directly to every
alternative act in a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings
about the best results, or the
least amount of bad
results.


1.2 Rule Utilitarianism – In rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, the principle pf utility is used
to decide the validity of rules of conduct (moral standards or principles). A moral rule such
as promise-keeping is established by evaluating the consequences of a world in which people
broke promises at will and a world in which promises were binding. Moral and immoral are
then as following or breaking those rules.
Example: Slavery in Greece might be right if it led to an overall achievement of
cultivated happiness at the expense of some mistreated individuals.
2. Origins and Nature of the Theory
Jeremy Bentham John Stuart
Mill
Jeremy Bentham founded the doctrine of utilitarianism but John Stuart Mill later
systematized and modified some of Bentham’s utilitarian principles.
2.1 Bentham’s Utilitarianism

Bentham explains that ‘utility’ means that property in any object, whereby it tends
to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness or to prevent the happening
of mischief, pain, evil, or unhappiness. The principle of utility thus states that an action is
right insofar as it tends to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
Utilitarianism determines the moral value of an act by calculating the sum of pleasure it
caused, and the amount of pain generated.. Remember that a moral deed is that which
maximizes benefits and minimizes damages or costs. Therefore, the one moral act to
carry out in any case is that which can be sensibly seen to afford the greatest net benefit,
when the projected costs are deducted from the anticipated benefits.
2.2 Mill’s Utilitarianism.

John Stuart Mill is the most famous proponent of utilitarianism after Bentham. He
made the doctrine the subject of his philosophical treatise (utilitarianism) published in 1863. Like
Bentham he advocates the greatest happiness principle’ which state that it is the greatest
happiness of the greatest number that it is the measure of right and wrong.

B. Duty Framework (Immanuel Kant)
“I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith” –Kant
Trivia: The magnitude of Kant’s intellectual contribution has fascinated

a lot of people. When his body was exhumed for transferring to another
site, his skull was measured and found that his forehead is larger than
that of ordinary German male. Whether the size of his forehead has any
bearing on his genius is a matter of scientific speculation.
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), and the fourth among nine children, he

was raised in a Protestant Environment. When his father dies, he supported his education
by becoming a private tutor. He spent most of his time in his town in Konigsberg,
Prussia. Some people would say that he has such a strict schedule that people will even
adjust their clock according to his daily walks. In one of Kant’s accounts, he has awoken
from his dogmatic slumber after he read the book written by David Hume. During this
time, he was writing what would later become one of his most books “Critique of Pure
Reason” when he was finally published in 1781. However, since it was difficult to
understand, it did not really take off and he made a summarized-much easier to
understand version – the Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics, which was published
in 1783.
1. Kantian Ethics
Kant categorically rejects that ethical judgment are based on feelings. For him,
feelings even serve as obstruction to our discernment of right and wrong. His ethical
theory instead bases moral judgement on reason alone. Reason, for him, is what
deems an action ethical or otherwise.
1.1 Good Will. Kant believes that when we wish to determine the moral status of an
action, we consult. An act either accords with reason or it does not. If it accords with
reason, we must do it, if not, we must avoid it.
Kant believes that one of the functions and capacities of our reason is to
produce a will which is good not as means to some further end, but good in
itself. For him, it is the good will which is the highest good and the condition
of all other goods.
Kant does not agree with many ethicists that happiness is the highest good.
Happiness for him can be corrupting and may be worthless or even positively
evil when not combined with a good will. In the same way, intellectual
eminence, talents, character, self-control, and fortune cannot be intrinsically
good for they can be used to bad ends.
But who is a good person or a person of good will? For Kant, it is the person
who acts from a sense of duty. Kant thinks that acting from a sense of duty
means exhibiting good will even in the face of difficulty.
1.2 Categorical Imperative. We have discussed the ethical relevance of good will and
acting from a sense of duty. But we may ask:
“Can a person know what his duty is in a given situation?”
“Is there a test to find out what one’s duty is in particular set of circumstances?”
Immanuel Kant believes that there is. First, it is one’s duty, as a rational being, to act
on principle or
maxim, as contrasted
to simply acting on
impulse.


What is the difference of “actions on maxim” from

“actions on impulse”?
Action on Impulse
Suppose a man wants to financially help a certain lady who is in need, merely because he likes her
personally, and he might not want to give the same assistance to another woman in an exactly similar
situation because he does not happen to like her.
Action on Maxim
Now, contrast this with another man who gives relief to total strangers who are victims of a calamity.
Because he accepts it as his duty to provide support to those in need, he treats in precisely the same
manner any other person whose situation has the same characteristics. This is acting in maxim. The
agent has a reason for his action, and out of this reason, a maxim like this was formulated.
Maxim, as we have seen, is a general rule or principle which serves as a guide to action.
“Be honest as always”. Don’t always shoot the ball when you get it”, “Don’t wear the wedding
gown before the wedding”, and “When in doubt, render a salute” are examples of maxim.
Evidently, not all maxims are moral ones. In ethics, Kant is concerned with maxims that are
moral, that is those dictated by reason and thus has imperative force.
C. Virtue Ethics
Virtue ethics is a moral philosophy that teaches that an action is right if it is an
action that a virtuous person would perform in the same situation. According to the
theory, a virtuous person is someone who acts virtuously and people act virtuously if they
possess and live the virtues. A virtue is a moral characteristic that an individual needs to
live well. Virtue should be understood as being a habit. It should be something that has
shaped one’s character through constant and consistent virtuous act. For example, if one
can be considered as possessing the virtue of loyalty, then one should be compelled to be
loyal at all types of situation. If one is easily tempted to become unfaithful, then this
character is considered vice.
Virtue Ethics outs emphasis on developing good habits of character and avoiding
bad character traits or vices. It focuses on the character of the agent and describes right
actions as those chosen and performed by a suitably virtuous person.
Virtue Ethicists, such as Aristotle, hold that people live their lives trying to
develop their faculties to the fullest extent. We have many faculties to develop such as
intellectual, physical, social, moral, and so on. Developing one’s moral capacity to the
fullest is pursuing ethical excellence, which is displayed by the virtues (hence “virtues
ethics”).


Basically the virtues are the freely chosen character traits that people praise in
others. People praise them because: (1) they are difficult to develop; (2) they are
corrective of natural deficiencies (for instance, industriousness is corrective of one’s
tendency to be lazy); and (3) they are beneficial both self and society.
Virtue Ethics defines a moral person as someone who develops the virtues and
unfailingly displays them over time. The ancient Greeks list four “cardinal virtues”
namely, wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. The Christian teaching, on the other
hand, recommends faith, hoe, charity, and love. Others suggest virtues which are
associated with ‘humanity’ namely, grace, mercy, forgiveness, honor, restraint,
reasonableness, and solidarity.
1. Aristotle’s Ethics
Aristotle’s ‘Telos’, a ‘telos’ is an end or purpose. Aristotle believes that the essence or
essential nature of beings can discover the ‘essences’ of things and that a being’s essence
is its potential fulfillment or ‘telos’ (as the essence of an acorn is to become as oak tree.)
The essence or ‘telos’ of ‘human being’ is rationally and, thus, a life of contemplation
(a.k.a. Philosophy) is the best kind of life for true human flourishing.
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics can be thus summarized in this manner:
“All humans seek happiness (“well-being”), but in different ways. True
happiness is tied to the purpose or end (telos) of human life. The essence of human
beings (that which separates and distinguishes them as a species) is Reason. Reason
employed in achieving happiness (human ‘telos’) leads to moral virtues [courage,
temperance, justice and prudence] and intellectual virtues (e.g., ‘science’ art, practical
wisdom, theoretical wisdom).”
1.1 Happiness and Virtues. Aristotle believes that the ultimate human goal is self
realization. This entails achieving one’s natural purpose by functioning or living
consistently with human nature. Accomplishing it, in turn, produces happiness
whereas inability to realize it leads to sadness, frustration, and ultimately to poor life.
It therefore behooves us to act in accordance with our nature so as to be content and
complete.
“Living in accordance with reason is viewed as vital in self-realization or
developing one’s potential.”
This self-realization- the awareness of our nature and the development of our
potentials-is the key to human happiness. But what is this happiness in line with
Aristotle’s ethical view?
Ethics, for Aristotle, is the inquiry into the human good. This is to say that the
purpose of studying ethics is to make ourselves good, though Aristotle assumes that we
already want to become good. This human good is eudaimonia or happiness.
2. Thomas Aquinas’ Ethics
Also called the “Angelic Doctor” and the Prince of Scholastics, Thomas Aquinas (1225-
1274) is an Italian Philosopher and theologian who rank among the most important thinkers of
the medieval time period.
In ethics, Aquinas depends so heavily on Aristotle. Like the Greek Philosopher, Aquinas
believes that all actions are directed towards ends and that happiness is the final end. Aquinas
thinks that happiness consists in activities in accordance with virtue. But like Augustine, Aquinas
declares that ultimate happiness is not attainable in this life, for happiness in the present life


remains imperfect. True happiness, then, is to be found only in the souls of the blessed in heaven
or in beatitude with God.
2.1 The Natural Law. By the term ‘law’, he means an ordinance of reason for the
common good, promulgated by someone who has care of the community Aquinas’
laws should also be understood in terms of “rules and measures” for people’s
conduct and as ‘rational patterns or forms”. Obedience to the law is thus viewed also
as participating in or being in conformity with the pattern or form.
Four Primary Types of Law According to Thomas Aquinas
Eternal Law- refers to the rational plan of God by which all creation is ordered. As
God is the supreme ruler of everything, the rational pattern or form of the universe
that exists in his mind is the law that directs everything in the universe to its
appointed end. To this eternal law, everything in the universe is subject.
Natural Law – is that aspect of the eternal law which is accessible to human reason.
Because mankind is part of the eternal order, there is a portion of the eternal law that
relates specifically to human conduct. This is the moral law, the law or order to
which people are subject by their nature ordering them to do good and avoid evil.
Human Law – refers to the positive laws. For natural law to be adhered to, more
exact and forceful provisions of human law are helpful. Because the natural law is
too broad to provide particular guidance, the human law’s precise, positive rules of
behavior are supposed to spell out what the natural law prescribes. Moral virtues are
also reinforced by and cultivated through these human laws. This human law
includes the civil, criminal laws, though only those formulated in the light of
practical reason and moral laws. Human laws that are against natural law are not real
laws, and people are not obliged to obey those unjust laws.
Divine Law – serves to complement the other types of law. It is a law revelation,
disclosed through sacred text or scriptures and the church which is also directed
toward man’s eternal end. Though concerned also with external aspects of conduct,
the divine law is more focused on how man can be inwardly holy and eventually
attain salvation.

CHAPTER 4, Frameworks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 4, Frameworks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Republic of the Philippines

MARINDUQUE STATE COLLEGE

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

ETHICS (General Education)

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

Normative Ethical theories are generally categorized into three kinds:

2.1 Deontology – is an ethical system that bases morality on independent moral

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

2. Origins and Nature of the Theory

Jeremy Bentham John Stuart

2.1 Bentham’s Utilitarianism

2.2 Mill’s Utilitarianism.

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

B. Duty Framework (Immanuel Kant)

“I had to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith” –Kant

Trivia: The magnitude of Kant’s intellectual contribution has fascinated

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), and the fourth among nine children, he

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

What is the difference of “actions on maxim” from

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

Republic of the Philippines

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology (BSIT)

Four Primary Types of Law According to Thomas Aquinas

You might also like