GENERAL EDUCATION CURRICULUM – ETHICS

I. BASIC CONCEPTS

ETHICS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. defined what ethics or morality is

2. identified basic ethical theories
3. recognized the importance of ethics
4. identified and explained ethical discourse appropriate for a moral

phenomena Etymology

The word ethics comes from ethos in Greek which means custom or behavior, and morality comes from
mos in Latin which refers to mores or custom.

Morality can be differentiated from ethics. Morality is the set of norms, rules, standards, principles, or
values of people about what is right or wrong, good or bad. As philosophy branch, ethics studies
morality, critiques and analyzes moral issues arising from social events or phenomena.

Four Branches

1. Descriptive Ethics
It approaches the study of morality by asking, describing, and explaining moral actions, moral
decisions, and moral phenomena as they have occurred through history and today. Cognitive moral
development theory by Lawrence Kohlberg in 1950s is an example of descriptive ethics. It describes
how individuals resolve moral issues and make moral choices across their individual growth and
development.

2. Normative Ethics
It approaches morality through philosophy or religion by providing frameworks and theories, it is also
called prescriptive. Aristotle’s virtue ethics, Mills’ utilitarian ethics, and Kant’s duty ethics as well as
Eastern morality e.g., Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism are examples of normative or
prescriptive ethics.

3. Metaethics
It approaches morality through studying terms, statements, and judgments. It asks: Do moral terms,
statements, and judgments have factual meaning? Are they subjective or objective? Are they true or
false? Is moral knowledge possible? If so, can we represent them exactly through language?

4. Applied Ethics
It approaches ethical questions specific to a professional, disciplinary, or practical field, e.g., bioethics,
animal ethics, environmental ethics, climate ethics, business ethics, computer ethics

Ethical Theories
Ethical theories are a systematic defense to and justification of the moral standards for right actions and
decisions. As giving proofs and reasoning, ethics challenge us to weigh ethical theories against moral
issues to construct a morally sound argument.

Moral phenomena require ethical theories for justification of human actions.

a. Privatization transforms social services into commodities, the majority of population cannot afford to
purchase them. Is this true? Is it morally right or wrong? Why?

b. Philippines has spent billions of pesos for rapid testing kits, which are not effective in testing whether
on has got the virus, and which are unused by the rest of countries except the Philippines. Is this true?
If so, is it morally right or wrong? Why?

c. Anti-terror law can be used to stipple lawful dissent in the country. Is this true? If so, is it morally
right or wrong? Why?

d. Economic structure in the country has kept widening the gap between the rich and the poor. Is this
true? If so, is it morally right or wrong? Why?

e. War on terror has eventually plunged countries in the Middle East into crisis? Is this true? If so, is it
morally right or wrong? Why?

f. Facebook, YouTube, and Google monopolies are crushing competition? Is this true? If so, is it
morally right or wrong? Why?

g. Anti-government corruption is itself anti-government. Is this true? If so, is it morally right or wrong?
Why?

h. Those who have money capital, i.e., rich, can only win as political candidates in the election. Is this
true? If so, is it morally right or wrong? Why?

i. National debt which keeps increasing from one administration to another because of budget deficit
out of corruption has removed funds for basic social subsidies for those living below poverty line. Is
this true? If so, is it morally right or wrong? Why?

j. Global merchants like Nike, Adidas, Gap, etc. are outsourcing factories in developing countries, e.g.,
Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc. who have appalling condition of workers, while those global
merchants are reaping billions of dollars in profits of sale annually. Is this true? If so, is it morally
right or wrong? Why?

Significance of Ethics

Ethics guides oneself to meaningful life and helps determine objectively whether individual moral
behavior is justified.

Ethics involves establishing rules of conduct, principles of behavior, and framework of goals as binding
for individuals within the society particularly the social institutions such as church, economy, politics,
professions, states, and nations.
Ethics emphasizes good habits and character for the wellbeing and flourishing of ourselves and our
society.

Ethics is a reflective attitude towards socio-cultural standards, one that highlights right choice for
human flourishing.
 MORAL AND NON-MORAL STANDARDS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. differentiated moral and non-moral standards

2. identified characteristics of moral standards
3. explained why actions are moral or immoral

What are moral standards, and how do they differ from other rules of lives?

Moral standards refer to socially accepted rules that individuals within a society embrace as morally
right and wrong.

Non-moral standards refer to socially accepted rules that are non-moral, i.e., unrelated to morality, or
good or evil moral behavior, e.g., “three seconds violation” in basketball, “wrong placement of fork and
spoon” in table etiquette, “wrong wearing of neck-tie” in fashion, etc.

Standards in law, economy, and religion can be in themselves non-moral, e.g., “driving without
license,” “rules of supply and demand,” “making sign of the cross to pray,” etc. However, in other
contexts, rules in law, economy, and religion can be moral, e.g., “serving as court witness to a crime,”
“participating in medical mission in poor communities,” and “Love your neighbor as you love
yourselves.”

Characteristics of Moral Standards

a. Moral standards do not impinge human dignity.

Moral standards help humanize people. You may violate certain table etiquette, but such action does not
impinge any human dignity.

b. Moral standards is categorical imperative.

Moral standards imply categorical duty. You serve the poor not because of self-interest or fame but
because you ought to do it as a moral duty.

c. Moral standards are based on adequacy of reasons.

Since moral standards serve as basis for determining good or bad behavior, their validity does not
emanate merely from numbers. You speak for what is right not because many people appreciate it, but
because it is rational thing to do.

d. Moral standards are universal, i.e., applicable among all rational human beings. Moral standards
transcend culture, consistent across societies. An example is the Golden rule, “Don’t do unto others
what you don’t want others do unto you,” or Jesus’ Command “Love your neighbor as you love
yourselves.”
e. Moral standards are impartial.
Moral standards are not favoring for the welfare of one group and despise another out of personal
affiliation or party allegiance.

f. Moral standards are not in themselves emotions.

As adequacy of reasons, moral standards are not subordinate to emotions or mere feelings of fear and
pain of punishment.
 MORAL DILEMMAS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. identified and explained what moral dilemmas are

2. constructed and articulated responses to moral dilemmas

Moral Dilemmas

A moral dilemma is a situation which requires you to choose between two or more actions using moral
standards as basis for judging right and wrong. It may present you something morally right action but
produce bad outcome, and something morally wrong action but produce good or better outcome. In a
sense, no matter what you choose you ultimately compromise some values.

Example

One time after the class you’re dropping by a small urbanized pharmacy to buy only a portion of
the total medicines prescribed by the doctor for your mother. The cost of the portion of the
medicines is P100, the cashier is handing you the medicines and P900 bills. It was perhaps
because of P100 bill the cashier mistakenly identifies as P1,000. If you could not secure the
whole medicines, your mother’s illness gets worse. Will you return the P900 bills to the cashier?
What is the most responsible thing for you to do in this situation?

Three Conditions of Moral Dilemmas

Karen Allen lists down three conditions as situations of moral dilemmas.

1. Moral agent is obliged to make a decision that is best.

2. There must be different course of actions to choose from.

3. No matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are

compromised. Types of Moral Dilemmas

1. a. Epistemic moral dilemmas – the moral agent hardly knows which option is morally right or wrong
b. Ontological moral dilemmas – the moral agent knows the morality of action, but neither the
conflicting options is stronger than the other.

2. a. Self-imposed moral dilemma – conflicting options are made by the moral agent’s wrongdoing, i.e.,
impossibility of fulfilling both obligations

b. World-imposed moral dilemma – certain event in the world places the moral agent in a moral conflict
– e.g., a mother has to choose whether daughter or son to be sent to gas chamber
3. a. Obligation dilemmas – one feasible action is obligatory

b. Prohibition dilemmas – all feasible actions are forbidden

4. a. Single agent dilemma – moral agent is compelled to act on two or more equally the same moral
options, but she cannot choose both, e.g., medical doctor faced option of revealing HIV of her patient in
terms of legal requirement to report the case and the desire to respect confidentiality.

b. Multi-person dilemma – involve several persons expected to come up with consensual decision, eg., a
family may face decision of terminating the life of family member, city government may be torn with
the option of placing the entire city under lockdown, etc.

MORAL REALISM, EMOTIVISM, UNIVERSALISM, RELATIVISM

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. identified and explained moral realism, emotivism, universalism, and moral relativism

Moral Realism

Moral realism holds that moral truths are factual, i.e., happening in actual and real order. What is stated
“Sam is morally good” is taken at face value by moral realists if the statement corresponds to facts. In
every moral judgment we make through statement, there is always an individual or thing that stands to
signify. In philosophy, this is called ontological reality, i.e., there is a substance, existing in itself
represented by concept or idea as expressed in thought, words, or writing.

As abstract, moral facts exist as in the case of mathematical numbers. Moral realists argue thus,

1. Moral sentences are sometimes true.

2. A sentence is true only if the truth-making relation holds between it and the thing that makes it true.
3. Thus, true moral sentences are true only because there holds the truth-making relation between them
and the things that make them true.

Therefore,

4. The things that make some moral sentences true must exist.
Moral Emotivism

Moral emotivism expresses emotion through statement which also elicits similar emotions in others.
Terms as “good,” “right,” “virtuous,” etc. indicate non-cognitive attitudes of approval or preferences,
and terms as “bad,” “wrong,” “vicious,” etc. indicate non-cognitive attitudes of disapproval or dislike.
In a sense, to say of a person as virtuous is analogous to cheer for that person. Terms used to predicate
a subject have both descriptive and emotive meaning.

Moral Universalism
Moral universalism stresses that there is morality that applies to all people across time. Ancient Greek
philosophers Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics are renown adherents to universal morality, i.e., a morality
that regards truth as constant and unchangeable. The 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of
Human Rights exemplifies the global effort to bring universal justice to human race regardless of
culture, race, nationality, status, or gender.

Moral Relativism

Relativism refers to many different ideas from many different groups of peoples. In ethics, relativism is
empirical, metaethical, or normative.

a. Empirical moral relativism – deep and widespread moral disagreements across different societies, and
these disagreements are much significant than whatever agreements there may be.

b. Metaethical moral relativism – truth or falsity of moral judgments, or their justification, is not
absolute or universal, but is relative to the traditions, convictions, practices of a group of persons.

c. Normative moral relativism –actions by those whose actions we disagree requires tolerance in
thoughts and deeds

II. MORAL AGENT

FEELINGS AND MORAL DECISION-MAKING

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. explained feelings and its role to moral decision-making

Feelings as Instinctive Response to Moral Dilemmas

Some ethicists hold that moral judgments at their best should also be emotional.
Emotions can be rational in being based at least sometimes on good judgments about how well
a circumstance or agent accomplishes appropriate objectives. Feelings are also instinctual by providing
motivations to act morally.
Many times, ethical judgments are highly emotional as people emotionally express their strong
approval or disapproval of different acts.

Feelings as Obstacles to Making the Right Decisions

Feelings and emotions, however, can become obstacles or impediments to becoming

ethical. Ethical Subjectivism

It is fundamentally a meta-ethical theory. It is a theory about the nature of moral judgments. It

holds that the truth or falsity of ethical propositions is dependent on the feelings, attitudes, or standards
of a person or group or persons.
 For every controversial ethical topic, we usually hear at least two opposing views concerning
the matter.

- One camp which declares the action as immoral

- Another camp which claims that the action is moral
- There is a third stance – that of the Ethical Subjectivist: People in the first two groups are
expressing their respective opinion, but where morality is concerned, there are no objective
facts and no position is objectively right.

The theory proposes that when we say something is morally good, this just means we approve
of or like that thing. Similarly, when we state that something is morally bad, this means that we
disapprove of or do not like that thing.

Analysis of Ethical Subjectivism

On a positive note, ethical subjectivism allows us to think for ourselves because it implies that
we need not agree with culture or society.
It indicates, unbelievably, that the mere fact that we like something would make it good. It
provides a weak foundation for dealing with topics like drug addiction, bullying, slavery, racism and
discrimination.
According to ethical subjectivism, when we express one’s actions as evil, we merely say we
have negative feelings toward the deeds.
The moral judgments we make do represent the “truth”.
If Ethical Subjectivism is correct, then each of us is infallible in our moral judgments as long as
we are speaking sincerely. But we are not infallible – we may be mistaken, even when we are speaking
sincerely. Therefore, Ethical Subjectivism cannot be correct.
When A says “X is morally acceptable” and B says “X is morally unacceptable,” they are
disagreeing. But if Ethical Subjectivism is correct, there would be no disagreement between A and B.
Therefore, Ethical Subjectivism cannot be correct.
It could have dangerous implications in moral education. Deficient in providing us any guide on
how to develop sensible and proper feelings, it, in effect, tells us to simply follow our personal feelings
and emotions.

Emotivism
It was developed chiefly by the American philosopher Charles L. Stevenson. It has been one of
the most influential theories of Ethics in the 20th century.
It is actually the most popular form of non-cognitivism, the meta-ethical theory that claims that
ethical sentences do not convey authentic propositions.
According to Emotivism, moral judgments are not statements of fact but are mere expressions
of the emotions of the speaker, especially since they are usually feelings-based.
Some emotivists base their stance on logical positivism, which claims that any legitimate truth
must be empirically verifiable. Since moral judgments cannot be tested by sense experience, they
cannot be authentic truth claims but can only express feelings.
According to Emotivism, utterances in ethics are not fact-stating sentences. They are not used to
convey information; instead, they have two entirely different purposes:
First, moral sentences are used as a means of influencing others’ behavior.

- To say “X is immoral,” it is equivalent to saying “Do not do X!”

- To say “X is moral” is to say “Do X!”
- Thus, the utterance is more like a command.
Second, moral sentences are used to express (not report) the speaker’s
attitude. - “X is moral” merely means “Hooray for X!”
 - “X is immoral” just means “Boo on X!”
- Thus, the utterance is more like an exclamation.
Since ethical judgements are essentially commands and exclamations, they are not true or
false; so there cannot be moral truths and moral knowledge.

Evaluation of Emotivism

It is barely sensible to base a moral theory on logical positivism. Logical positivism is self
refuting as the view is not itself verifiable by sense experience and thus would not be a genuine truth
claim on its own grounds.
In denying moral truths and moral knowledge, Emotivism seems to dilute what morality is
instead of elucidating it. It is also unclear how the ethical “good” can be reasonably reducible to mere
exclamation.
Emotivism suggests that in ethical disputes, we cannot appeal to reason but only to emotion. It
is thus against our basic knowledge that it is favorable if opposing groups would instead judiciously
deliberate about their ethical differences and resort to reasons to resolve them.
Emotivism also fails to distinguish moral judgments from mere expressions of personal
preference. For an utterance to become a genuine moral or value judgment, it must be supported by
pertinent reasons.
Having logical positivist background, Emotivism discards moral truths. Maintaining that moral
claims are not testable by empirical observation and experimentation, it reduced morality to mere
matters of feelings. It however fails to notice that humans have not only feelings but also reason, and
reason plays a vital role in Ethics.

Feelings Can Help in Making the Right Decisions

Admittedly, there are situations in which our feelings and likings are relevant to the rightness of
our decisions and actions.
Ethics-without-feeling also appears to go against Christian philosophy’s emphasis in love, for
love is basically a strong liking, desire, or emotion.
Emotions are a crucial art of what gives life meaning, and ought to play a guiding role in
morality. Nonetheless, the feelings or emotions involved in moral thinking should be anchored on
careful consideration of a full range of right goals, including altruistic ones.
CULTURE AND MORAL BEHAVIOR

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. described the characteristics of culture

2. exemplified culture using pakikipagkapwa

How has culture been influencing morality?

Moral standards, dilemmas, actions, and behavior are shaped and influenced by culture. As complex
phenomena, culture such as politics, economy, and religion are conditioning our moral perceptions and
judgments, thus provide us the theoretical basis for what is morally right and wrong.

Characteristics of Culture

a. Culture is a human made.

It is a social, historical, political and religious construct.
b. Culture is site specific.
It is specificity at a particular space, marked by differences from other culture.

c. Culture reflects and embodies the logic and the power relations to a particular social order.
It is a product of a particular social order.

d. Culture is performative.
It is neither static nor fixed, it transforms itself over time.

Pakikipagkapwa and Filipino Culture: An Example

To understand values is to understand culture. Take for example the Filipino pakikipagkapwa. Kapwa
means the Other or fellow-being. Pakikipag refers to action performed with someone or a joint action.
The affix pa connotes either a command or request, and paki signifies a favor asked by a person to the
Other. Pakiki indicates insistence or an act that is continuous.

Kapwa is a shortened version of kapuwa, where the affix ka means “shared” while puwa is the root
word of puwang, which means separateness, gap, something missing. It is the prefix ka that bridges or
connects the gap, filling up the missing.

So, kapwa changes the condition from separation to oneness, or solidarity. It reflects a relationship that
bridges a gap between two beings. Kapwa means the Other fellow-being who is similar to me, and at
the same time different from me, or best captured in Filipino phrase “hindi iba sa akin” (not different
from me).

Our pakikipagkapwa extends to nature and ancestral spirits, whom we believe share and live in the
same space. Thus, we customarily say “tabi” in Bisaya, “tabi-tabi po” in Tagalog (excuse me/us) when
trekking in an unfamiliar place. We acknowledge the presence of Other beings who are invisible. So,
we
consider nature as well as spirit dwellers as kapwa in terms of oneness with them, and not different
from us in essential aspects like entitlement of respect, recognition of their rights, etc.

Filipino pakikipagkapwa has to a certain extent shaped and influenced Filipino moral standards,
dilemmas, actions, and behavior. Culture of pakikipagkapwa affects the way Filipinos look at others,
and how Filipinos decide for things in the realm of politics, economy, religion, household, community,
and other institutions.

Workplaces in the Philippines such as factories, government offices, and commercial establishments
have put strong regard on pakikipagkapwa, placing the values as integrated standard of moral action and
behavior which everyone ought to observe upon.

Philippine laws and social agreements have been constructed on the ground that everyone is kapwa
whose wellbeing ought to be upheld. Education puts premium of pakikipagkapwa, employing it among
others as a moral code for molding the human development of learners.

Notably, Filipino culture influences the way Filipinos look at themselves and the actions they take as
moral agents. Indeed, by understanding the differences of cultural values, we can better appreciate the
differences of culture.
 III. MORAL ACT

SITUATED FREEDOM AS FOUNDATION OF MORAL ACT

Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. explained what situated freedom is in relation to morality

Moral act is determined by situated freedom.

Situated freedom is a human power, a human right to act, speak, or think without hindrance. Some
examples are freedom of the press, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of expression,
freedom to assembly, freedom of religion, freedom from slavery, freedom to suffrage, and freedom to
live.

But freedom is always restrained. Whether in biology and society, people’s actions are always
determined by situation. Thoughts, physical health, and accomplishment are not absolute consequence
of one’s freedom.

When we talk about situated freedom in politics, we must take the question whether we are humanizing
or dehumanizing individuals or groups, i.e., promoting or impinging their basic dignity as human
persons.

If I stand up for my right to speak to destroy the character of others, then I am not only dehumanizing
others but also dehumanizing myself in the process. If my actions are inhuman on others, then I am not
free.
Only human beings can be moral or ethical because only human beings are free, i.e., imbued with the
power or right to humanize the world, whether in the economy, the politics, state, household, or any
institution.

Situated freedom means assuming responsibility. Although we’re far from biologically perfect, we can
use our human faculties such as language, cooperation, and so on to live harmoniously with ourselves,
others and our ecology.

Natural and political factors always suppress responsible freedom. Man wishes to live immortal, but
nature sets limits to life. Certain leader is demanding unquestioning obedience upon citizens even
against their right to privacy.

That is why situated freedom is foundation of moral act because responsibility is a process of
humanizing oneself, others, and environment.

As moral choice, humanization presupposes that everyone is treating others and environment in dignity
whether one resides in different class, race, gender, or culture. Humanization is not determined by
political legitimacy nor social approval. An action in accordance to the law of the state may be
legitimate e.g., abortion or death penalty, but it doesn’t necessarily mean a humanization. Or an action
in accordance to culture, e.g., 10% commission in government project or palakasan in job hiring may
be widely accepted, but it is dehumanizing.
 MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR MORALITY: REASON AND

IMPARTIALITY Intended Outcomes

At the end of the lesson, the students should have:

1. defined reason and impartiality

2. explained the 7 step Moral Reasoning Model
3. applied the 7 step Moral Reasoning Model on certain situations

Presentation

Morality is the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason – that is, to do what there are the best reasons for
doing – while giving equal weight to the interest of each individual affected by one’s decision (Rachel,
2018). There are two minimum requirements of morality, namely, reason and impartiality.

Reason refers to the basis or motive of an action, decision, or conviction. It is a human quality, a human
power for logical, rational, and analytic thought.

Reason differs from mere feelings and thoughts which just pop up in our mind. Reason is a conscious
activity of the reasoner particularly by his justification of the meanings, actions, and decisions.

Impartiality refers to a principle of justice that considers decisions based on objective criteria, rather
than on biases or prejudices. By objective criteria, it presupposes that decision presupposes consultation
about the matter at hand beyond the confines of our usual assumptions and perceptions.
7-Step Moral Reasoning Model
by Scott B. Raw, Ph.D.

Scott B. Raw presents a model for making ethical decisions under reason and impartiality.

1. Gather the facts – refers to what you have at hand and your succeeding actions. This may involve
profiling the circumstances and persons involved in your decisions.

2. Determine the ethical issues – refers to what issues that may cause harm to an individual. For
example, if you decide to pursue your goal, the question you have to ask is whether in making that
decision you are harming the rights of others?

3. Identify the Principles that have a Bearing on the Case – refers to ethical discourses, e.g., applied
ethics, normative ethics, or metaethics or their sub-discourses. Principle can be in a form of raising the
question what’s really the best thing here.

4. List the Alternatives – refers to alternative courses of action in resolving a moral dilemma. In this
level, you could list down a lot of alternative actions and choose which of those is the best.

5. Compare the Alternatives with the Principles – refers to weighing the alternatives against the
principles we hold.

6. Weigh the Consequences – refers to consideration of possible consequences (positive & negative) of
your actions

7. Make a Decision – refers to the decision seen to have the least number of negative consequence
 Application of 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model

The story is imaginary for the purpose of the lesson.

A drug user Maria went to PDEA 7 to report that she would buy shabu from certain Juana in V. Rama
Ave., Barangay Guadalupe, Cebu City at 5.00pm. Maria told Corporal Sergeant Felipe Cruz, head of
PDEA 7 that she knew very well the drug pusher and that she could help the authorities in catching the
suspect. Maria explained that Juana is planning to leave the place that evening, and that it might be the
opportunity to catch the suspect.

Corporal Sergeant Cruz along with seven of his men accompanied Maria to trap the drug pusher.
Minutes before the transaction, PDEA authorities were preparing themselves around the area of V.
Rama Ave for the buy bust operation. With Corporal Sergeant Cruz, Maria without hesitation instantly
pointed finger at the woman standing by the sidewalk that she’s the drug pusher. Maria claimed the
shabu is inside the sling bag of the woman. Surprise, the woman screamed as she protested against the
accusation of Maria. There was no sale of illegal drugs taking place between Maria and the accused
drug dealer, and people around became witnesses that Maria only did finger pointing at the suspect.

Meanwhile, Maria is placed under the watch list of PDEA 7. Corporal Sergeant Cruz promised to Maria
that he would waive her status from the watch list if she could identify a drug pusher in the city leading
for arrest. However, Corporal Sergeant Cruz knew of the basic procedure that he had to determine first
the veracity of the claim of Maria so as to avoid particularly the instance of mistaken identity of drug
suspect.
Corporal Sergeant Cruz asked the identified suspect if he could check her sling bag to determine if
Maria’s allegation is true. But the woman objected to Corporal Sergeant Cruz, saying she is not drug
seller, she didn’t even know of Maria, and so she won’t open her bag unless there’s a search warrant.

Now the question would be ….

If you were Corporal Sergeant Cruz, what would you do?

1. Gather the facts – This may involve profiling the circumstances and persons involved in your
decisions.

Maria is a drug addict, placed under drug watch list. She accused the woman of being drug retailer
without evidence of selling.

2. Determine the ethical issues – Notice that it’s illegal to coerce to yield belonging without warrant of
arrest under the law.

3. Identify the Principles that have a Bearing on the Case – Principle can be in a form of raising the
question what’s really the best thing here. Notice that legality of decision must be considered here.
Coercion is human right violation in this circumstance.

4. List the Alternatives – In this level, you could list down a lot of alternative actions and choose which
of those is the best.
a. Coerce but face legal penalty
b. Request to yield the object and respect her consent

5. Compare the Alternatives with the Principles – Letter b alternative is preferred. 6. Weigh the

Consequences – Letter a alternative is obvious. Letter b alternative promotes human right. 7. Make a
Decision – Action based on the law will result to negative consequences.

IV. MORAL FRAMEWORK: WHY DOING GOOD

VIRTUE ETHICS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of each lesson, the students should have:

1. explained what Aristotle’s virtue ethics is

What is virtue ethics?

Socrates founded the virtue ethics tradition by posing the question: What is good life? How is man
going to live it? Socrates’ student Plato developed this field of study, as did Plato’s student Aristotle.
Aristotle was born in 384 BC in Stageira, Greek, studied Plato’s philosophy for over twenty years.
Aristotle founded his own school, the Lyceum, after the god Apollo Lyceus. Aristotle died in 322 BC.

Summum Bonum

What is good life? How is man going to live it? To answer the question, Aristotle postulated that the
highest good or summum bonum exists, it is the highest because it is chosen for its own sake, and it is
for its sake that everything else is chosen. Aristotle explained it in this way: I choose good x for the
sake of good y, and good y for the sake of good z, where good z is the highest good in the series,
followed by y and then x.

Aristotle discovered that the highest good is happiness or “eudaimonia.” Everything we do is ultimately
for the sake of happiness. Happiness as the highest good is something final or “teleion,” i.e., it is not
chosen for the sake of anything else. Teleion also means complete, i.e., lacking in nothing.

As well constituents to eudaimonia, honor and pleasure are chosen for the sake of eudaimonia.

Aristotle assumed that summum bonum or eudaimonia is something achievable by the average person,
by anyone as everyone is rational. It is something uniquely and characteristically human, it is what
makes man truly human.

Murder, corruption, vote-buying are harming the rights of others, so any vices of man are not making
man truly human. What is proper to the nature of man is to choose good which are in accordance to his
uniqueness being rational.

It is natural to be angry, but anger must be subordinated to our rational capacity for moderation. It is
tempting to receive any forms of bribery, but such must be placed under our rational power for justice.
It is normal to be afraid to threats if you stood up for your right, but such must be subservient to our
rational power for courage. So, moderation, justice, and courage are moral good as they are unique and
proper to man, whereas anger, bribery, and fear are vices if they rule over our lives.
Aristotle argued that summum bonum or eudaimonia must be an activity, not a mere feeling. It is
something you do. It is like courage in the person which becomes important only because of the
person’s courageous action – because feeling of courage without courageous action would be useless.

Aristotle said that summum bonum or eudaimonia is not something to be maximized because it already
is maximal. It is something self-sufficient or autarkês, which means lacking in nothing that is good –
that there is nothing to be increased upon.

As self-sufficient, eudaimonia means riches in resources and relationship with others, such as “parents,
children, wife, and in general for his friends and fellow citizens.”

As the summum bonum, Aristotle’s understanding of happiness will not be just any activity in
accordance with reason, i.e., what is unique of being human, but the best sort.

Summum bonum is not just to act in accordance with reason but to do it well, in “excellence” or aretê.

If the function of a doctor as a doctor is healing people, then the aretê of a doctor as a doctor is healing
people well. Likewise, if the function of a human as a human is to act in accordance with reason, then
the aretê of a human as a human is to do this well.
THE NATURAL LAW

Intended Outcomes

At the end of each lesson, the students should have:

1. explained what Natural Law of Thomas Aquinas is

What is natural law?

Natural law ethics has come from Thomas Aquinas by integrating philosophy and religion.

Aquinas whose thoughts would dominate medieval Christianity was born on January 28, 1225 in Italy.
Thomas resolved to enter the Dominican Order even at the opposition of his parents who wanted the
young man to enter the Benedictine Order’s Abbey of Monte Casino. He wrote the famous the Summa
Theologica.

What is good life? How is man going to live it? To answer this question, Thomas begins from the
standpoint of faith, one that presupposes the existence of a God who is the author (source) and the goal
(end) of all reality. This Creator according to Thomas, however, relates in freedom with the human
person and so enables him/her in freedom to recognize through reason, the very principle of the
foundations of all things.

The human being is said to be gifted with “the ability to know the highest good” that engages him/her in
freedom in “choosing to act on the good that he/she ought to do.” This is expressed interiorly, that is in
the very heart, of every human person as the dictate of “doing good and avoiding evil.”

According to Thomas, God reveals his Goodwill as the Eternal Law reflected in the order of reality. The
reality of life as growth, nutrition and reproduction is founded on the will that is eternal. Consciousness
and instincts that allow animals and plants to persist is ruled by the Eternal Law.
Human freedom for Thomas is an imprint of the divine will in the very being of the human person. This
sharing of human reason in the eternal will or divine law is called the Natural Law. When the human
freedom is exercised in accordance to Eternal law, the law that rules the world since the beginning of
creation, then human is exercising the Natural Law.

In a sense, Natural Law is observed when humans are following the will of God, which can be found in
the Sacred Scripture. The human person’s participation, through his ability to discern what is good from
what is not, is the very presence of the dictate of the law within the person, and is also the imprint on
the person of the Creator (Divine will). Meaning, there is Creator’s presence in every person.

For those who have no faith in God or etsi Deus non daretur which literally means “even if there is no
God,” Natural Law is still applicable to them for as long as they are individuals living in goodwill.

Regardless of belief, human person’s exercise of the Natural Law is aided by individual conscience.
Conscience absolutely binds us in doing the good and avoiding evil. However, conscience requires
formation and education as it can be mistaken because of the influence of others. There are forms of
conscience that may lead us to wrongdoing, these are callous and scrupulous conscience.

Callous and scrupulous are both malformed in being too laxed or too strict. Callousness results in
persistence in doing evil that the self is no longer concerned whether what one does is good or bad.
Scrupulousness fails to trust one’s ability to do good, overly concerns itself with avoiding what is bad to
the point of seeing wrong when there is really none. All these can be rectified by formation and
education. In this regard, formation and education is really crucial for moral living.

Natural law is man’s participation in the execution of the good and avoidance of evil through the use of
his/her reason and will. Alasdaire Macintyre has raised three questions to highlight the relevance of
Thomas’ Natural Law: Who am I? Who I want to be? How can I get there?

Who am I? Every man is an image of God. Hence, knowing the self is very crucial toward building up
the identity of the human person as an image of God.

Who do I want to be? Self-knowledge is important towards self-determination, towards a particular goal
in life.

How can I get there? This question implies self-governance. Self-knowledge and self-determination are
hereby bridged by self-governance for a particular goal in life.

Natural Law always implies that what man does must always be directed towards God. In a sense, all of
one’s actions must be all manifestations of the love of God. This ethics is given full meaning and
perfection in a relationship with God. In this sense, how you relate with God through love is shown in
how you relate to others. The highest perfection of man according to Thomas is in wanting to be in
union with God.

DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of each lesson, the students should have:

1. explained what deontological ethics is

“If early morning tomorrow you wake up so sure that there is no God, what would you do?”

The German thinker Immanuel Kant proposed a viable answer to this question. His philosophy views
man as autonomous and not subject to external conditions. If left to himself to decide, Kant argued that
it is possible for human person to be ethical without dependence to religion.

German thinker Immanuel Kant born in 1724 at Prussia is one of the most influential philosophers in
Western philosophy. Known as rationalist-empiricist, Kant devised what is called transcendental and
empirical arguments in order to resolve conflict between Descartes’ rationalism and Hume’s
empiricism.

Deontology comes from Greek deon which means duty. Kant argued that every time we confront moral
situations there are formally operative a priori principles. A priori principles are found in the realm of
the mind. These are according to Kant reason, goodwill, and duty. Reason is foundation, goodwill is
source, and duty is motivation of ethical living. So even if there is no God, one can still be morally
upright in terms of duty or obligation.

Duty is the motivation for reason and goodwill of the human person. If one asks why one had to do
one’s duty, the answer can only be because of one’s duty. Reason tells the human person to do the duty
that is doable for the goodwill since it is his/her duty.

Kant calls duty as the obligation that follows what reason deems as the action which is most worthy of
our humanity. In a sense, doing one’s duty is what makes us truly human.

Obligation is really a must, which means a “categorical imperative.” In this sense, my obligation cannot
be passed on to others. If confronted by a particular situation the human person in his reason and
goodwill is obliged to do his duty as the agent of action.

Unlike Aristotle, Kant does not define happiness as the motivation for his ethics of duty. What is ethical
is indifferent to happiness according to Kant, and is purely motivated by duty itself. If one does the
obligation to reach for happiness, that will be self-serving according to Kant, and self-interest here
moves away from the purity of duty.

Kant says, “He who has lived justly by doing his obligation dutifully is the most fitting for happiness.”
In a sense, happiness is simply a gift of being ethical person, who is always exercising his duty.
Everyone’s exercise of duty can be an expression of hope that, indeed, he or she is worthy of happiness.

CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICS

Intended Outcomes

At the end of each lesson, the students should have:

1. explained what consequentialist ethics is

How we make moral decisions?

Human decisions always have consequences. They affect other people in ways beyond one’s
imagination. They affect relationships. They bring forth new ideas, objects and relationships. Particular
decisions have particular consequences.

So in making decisions, one either looks at one’s motives and to the consequences. Oftentimes
decisions are judged as good if they are brought about by good and just motives and result in good
consequences. Decisions are considered bad if are brought by opposite.

How does one judge the morality of a decision or an act? Does one examine the motivation behind the
decision and see whether the act is mostly motivated by goodness or does one look at the results of the
act? If based on consequences, what categories can we use to judge whether the act did produce good
consequences? How can we say that an action did produce good consequences? Does the end justify the
means? Does the goodness of the consequences have more value than the means? Are the motives
irrelevant so long as the action or decision produces favorable consequences?

Utilitarianism or Consequentialist Ethics is a moral theory that tries to answer these questions. Among
the famous proponents in this thinking is John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). He is considered to be
influential. His utilitarianism is a development and clarification of earlier moral theory of Jeremy
Bentham (1748- 1832). Bentham’s moral doctrine is Greatest happiness of the greatest number is the
measure of right and wrong. Happiness is understood as the predominance of pleasure over pain.

Below is Bentham’s Hedonistic Calculus that determines the morality of one’s actions.

1. Intensity. How strong is the pleasure?

2. Duration. How long does the pleasure last?
3. Certainty or Uncertainty. How likely or unlikely the pleasure will occur?
4. Propinquity or remoteness. How soon does the pleasure occur?
5. Fecundity. What is the probability that the action is followed by sensations similar with pleasure?
6. Purity. What is the probability that the action is not followed by sensations different than
pleasure? 7. Extent. How many people are affected?

If Bentham’s version of utilitarianism focuses on the quantity of happiness, John Stuart Mill’s ethics
makes a sharp distinction between lower and higher forms of pleasure. John Stuart Mill says that even if
more people benefit from an action’s consequences, but the kind of pleasure they experience is
considered lower or baser than the consequence of another action that pleases a lot less people, but
please them in a more human way, then the latter course of action is deemed more right. Pleasures of a
higher quality are those that employ our unique human faculties such as intellect.

However, it should be noted that John Stuart Mill was not saying that people who have experienced
both the pleasures of sensation and pleasures of the intellect consistently prefer the latter on every
occasion. He only said that these people would not choose a manner of existence that includes a greater
amount of lower pleasures than higher pleasures. In other words, a true wise man would not exchange
intellectual greatness with lower pleasures such as physical sensations.

Take the example below.

Playing on-line games all day for a week Studying three hours a day for a week
 a. immediately satisfies one’s search for
fun and excitement
b. Allows one to hangout with friends
c. Lets one enjoy oneself while escaping
the everyday pressures of daily tasks like
household chores
d. Essentially satisfies one and one’s
gaming friends immediately
a. tedious, yet allows one to develop his/her
intellect and virtue of perseverance in
learning important lessons for school
b. The discipline of focusing on relevant
tasks related to one’s education can go a
long way in one’s future endeavors
c. Relatively solitary
d. Has the potential to bring pleasure to
one’s family by showing one’s gratitude
for their gift of education

If one observes, studying while seemingly “painful”, bears more potential to bring happiness in the long
run compared to playing games online.

Bentham and Mill might conclude that studying is always better than playing. However, one may also
argue that skills in playing computer games may develop friendship, critical thinking, etc.

Unlike in Bentham’s utilitarian ethics, Mill’s utilitarian ethics asks us before making a choice: A) Is
there a way to strike a balance between the two activities such that the important of experiencing the
higher pleasure is not completely compromised by choosing the other option? B) If one were really just
restricted to choose one activity, one must ask oneself which of the two options one would be truly
happy in the context of being a human person.

One of Mill’s famous quotes: “It is better to be a human being satisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be
Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool or the pig is of a different opinion, it is
because they only know their own side of the question.”

Happiness according to the Greatest Happiness Principle must be in direct proportion to the form of the
being which desires it. So a pig prefers pleasures befitting of its nature. And a human person prefers
pleasures befitting to its nature.

In sum, the Greatest Happiness Principle as the ultimate end of action sponsors the view that morality is
about fostering an existence that is exempt from pain as much as possible and one that is capable of
enjoying pleasures befitting a human person in terms of both quantity and quality which benefits not
just oneself but others as well.

Mill said that the life of happiness defined in his theory is not a life a rupture but an existence made up
of few, transitory pains. It is important to have a balance between tranquility and excitement. Those
who cannot find balance in such a state are those who care for no one but themselves. Another reason
why some experience difficulties in being happy is lack of mental cultivation.

V. CONCLUSION: ETHICS AND GLOBALIZATION

GLOBALIZATION AND PLURALISM: NEW CHALLENGES IN

ETHICS Intended Outcomes

At the end of each lesson, the students should have:

1. defined what globalization is
2. identified its reasons
3. specified its historical background
4. identified moral challenges of globalization
5. stated significance of global ethics
6. identified global problems
7. identified positive consequences and negative impact of globalization

Globalization Defined
Globalization means “the erosion of national boundaries and the reduced significance of national
governments.” It is “moving from a world with borders to a world without.” Nations states will remain
in existence but they have to work together with other centers of power such as 1) transnational
corporations, 2) intergovernment organizations like the UN and 3) non-governmental organizations
(NGO) such as environment movements.

Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies and governments
of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information
technology. This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic
development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies around the world.

Jan Scholte, an expert in globalization, gave 5 different interpretations of globalization, namely:

1. Internationalization – refers to ‘cross-border relations between countries. These relations include

trade, finance, communication which create international interdependence among nations and people 2.
Liberalization – focuses on “open, borderless world economy.” Trade and foreign exchange as well as
travel barriers are abolished or reduced, making it possible to participate in the world as a whole. 3.
Universalization – refers to the “various ways in which a synthesis of cultures has taken place, etc. such
as having a common calendar, shared common technology.
4. Modernization or Westernization – refers to the ways that ‘social structures of modernity’ –
capitalism, science, movies, music have spread throughout the world.
5. Deterritorialization – means that in a highly globalized world “social space” is no longer wholly
mapped in terms of territorial places… and borders. Corporations and non-government organizations
transcend local geographic constraints.
In other words, globalization is the worldwide movement toward economic, financial, trade and
communications, interconnection, interdependence, interaction and integration. It is the integration of
national economies through trade, investment, capital flow, labor migration and technology, removal of
barriers between national economies to encourage the flow of goods, services, capital and labor.

Reasons for Globalization

There are several key factors which have influenced the process of globalization:

1. Improvements in transportation – larger cargo ships mean that the cost of transporting goods between
countries has decreased. Economies of scale mean the cost per item can reduce when operating on a
larger scale. Transport improvements also mean that goods and people can travel more quickly. 2.
Freedom of trade – Organizations like the World Trade Organization promote free trade between
countries, which help to remove barriers between countries.
3. Improvements of communications – The internet and mobile technology have allowed greater
communication between people in different countries.
4. Labor availability and skills – Countries such as India have lower labor costs (about a third of that of
the UK) and also high skills levels. Labor intensive industries such as clothing can take advantage of
cheaper labor costs and reduced legal restrictions in LEDCs (Less Economically Developed Country).
Historical background of Globalization

The progress of industrial revolution in the 20th century was accompanied by a replacement of the police
state by a welfare state. The state came to be an active actor in the economic life of the society. In the
socialist states, state ownership of means of production and distribution became the rule.
State-controlled command economies were operationalized and regarded as the best means for rapid
socio-economic development. In several other countries, nationalization of key industries and
enterprises was undertaken with a view to provide goods and services to the people. State began
performing several socio-economic functions.

Several other new states, adopted a mixed economic model. Ownership and control over key industries
was entrusted to the public sector. It was deemed essential for securing a better mobilization of
resources and for providing better services to the people. State regulation of economy and industry was
practiced and the public sector was patronized by the state. Private sector was given a lesser role in the
economic system.

However, the experience with the working of command economy and mixed economy models was
found to be inadequate slow and unproductive. By 1980s economies of socialist countries began
collapsing.

In 1990s, the world witnessed the collapse of socialist economies, in particular the Soviet economy and
political system. In 1991, the USSR suffered a disintegration. The weaknesses of all socialist economies
became fully clear and all socialist countries began witnessing a process of overthrow of socialist
systems.

Liberalization of politics and economy came to be recognized as the necessity of the day. All countries
of the world began realizing the merits of the market economy, free trade, privatization, liberalization,
delicensing and deregulation of trade, industry and business.

In 1991, the several states decided to go in for liberalization of economy. A new economic policy was
formulated and implemented with an emphasis upon new economic reforms. There were governed by
the principles of liberalization, privatization, market economy, free trade, deregulation and delicensing.
These reforms paved the way for initiating the process of liberalization and globalization of several
states’ economy. Similar changes were adopted by other states including the Philippines.

At the international level, all the states agreed to freely develop financial, business, trade and industrial
relations among other people. Adoption of new trade and tariff agreement leading to the establishment
of World Trade Organization was made. Globalization became the order of the day.

Moral Challenges of Globalization

Along with the globalization comes ethical or moral issues. If the values of people, particularly moral
values, are influenced by culture, then globalization where people are exposed to new ways of doing
things further enhances moral development, particularly global moral consciousness. The challenge lies
in the willingness of people used to thinking and assessing things within their smaller context to adjust
to a wider world view; particularly to develop a global consciousness. For instance, the Filipino “kami”
or “tayo” mentality which implies groupings within the confines of family, barangay, municipality will
become a global “kami” or “tayo”.

Global ethics implies growth, from local or national to global moral consciousness, “a perspective that
takes all human beings and their habitats as its subject,” with the purpose to lay bare “the ethical
propositions that underpin injustice and inequality in a globalized world and to devise ideal distributions
of resources and responsibilities that would our world fairer.” The greatest good of the greatest number
is no longer the greatest good of the greatest number within their localities but the greatest good of the
greatest number of the citizens of the world.

Global Ethics
Globalization includes the observance of global ethics. Global ethics is concerned with the critical
ethical inquiry into the nature and justification of values and norms that are global in kind and into the
various issues that arise such as world poverty and international aid, environmental problems, peace
and security, intervention, human rights, gender equality, child labour, torture, scarce resources,
trafficking, migration, climate change, global trade, medical tourism…

There are global problems or issues that require corresponding ethical considerations.

1. Global Poverty
A quotation traced by St. Thomas to its author, St. Ambrose states: “It is the hungry man’s bread that
you withhold” or hoard. Fr. Gerry Orbos, SVD said: “If only we learned to share, no one will have so
little, and no one will have too much”. Of course, the basis of moral obligation is the principle of love.
Some countries cannot help being poor, due lack of resources, or technical knowhow to develop and
manage their resources. Wealthy nations are lucky they both have in place, resources and skills of
management, compounded by a culture of honesty and discipline. Poor nations are unlucky they are
governed by dictators who are also corrupt. Because from the very start, they are already on the
disadvantage or losing end, the Vatican adopted the policy of preferential option for the poor.

There is a moral obligation of wealthy nations to help the global poor. But it is not as simple as giving
dole outs or donations. For instance, if the wealthy farmers of USA have bumper crop, their moral
obligation to help the global poor is not as simple as merely delivering their excess production to the
latter. The economists have to consider how to maintain prices of the products that will make the
farmers survive. Those who have none or less in products are best helped by assisting them in
production.

2. Migration
People living in poor places, or being ruled by oppressive, dictatorial or tyrannic regimes long to
migrate to place where they believe life is better. The moral or ethical issue is whether or not the
receiving countries, in a Christian spirit, will simply open their doors without considering the negative
impact of the migrants on their own citizens. There is a limit to the absorptive capacity of the receiving
countries; they may even end up regretting why they open their doors in the first place, especially when
some of the migrants to enter to enforce their mission to inflict harm.

3. Environmental Ethics
Environmental ethics states that there is a moral duty of moral agents “to protect or at least refrain from
damaging” the environment. The basis of the duty lies in the environment’s “intrinsic value”, its
goodness in itself. Its use and development should be sustainable, that is, its use and development to
“meet the needs of the present” should not compromise its ability to meets the needs of future
generations. “Whatever the future holds, many thinkers now believe that solving the problems of
climate change is an essential ingredient in any credible form of sustainable development and the
alternative to decisive action may result in the diminution not only of nature and natural systems, but
also of human dignity itself”.

4. Pluralism vs. Fundamentalism

As a political philosophy, pluralism is the recognition and affirmation of diversity within a political
body, which permits the peaceful coexistence of different interests, convictions and lifestyles.
Pluralism as to content refers to diversity, to differences in values and beliefs, and to notions of
“otherness.” Pluralism about morality “may be understood as a form of relativism which holds that
there is no single objective or universal standard.” The challenge is to find common grounds and build
up from there. The question to ask in all meetings is, what is morally best for all parties and not what is
legal or lawful.
Despite pluralism as an offshoot of globalization, there are sectors who refuse to get out from they are
used to be. Their movement is called fundamentalism. This refer to any sect or movement within a
religion that emphasizes a rigid adherence to what it conceives of as the fundamental principles of its
faith, usually resulting in a denouncement of alternative practices and interpretations. Whoever is not
with them is “against” them, and therefore an enemy who should be “piously” killed, that is killed in the
name of God.

Positive Consequences of Globalization

There is substantial evidence, from countries of different sizes and different regions, that as countries
“globalize” their citizens benefit, in the form:

1. Access to wider variety of goods and services

2. Lower prices
3. More and better-paying jobs
4. Improve health, and
5. Higher overall living standards
6. Globalization is merging historic distinct and separate national markets into one huge global
marketplace.

Negative Impacts of Globalization

Critics of globalization have listed down some of the negative impact that include groups such as
environmentalists, anti-poverty campaigners and trade unionists.

Some of the negative impacts are:

1. Globalization operates mostly in the interests of the richest countries, which continue to dominate
world trade at the expense of developing countries. The role of Less Economically Developed Countries
(LEDCs) in the world market is mostly to provide the North and West with cheap labor and raw
materials. 2. There are no guarantees that the wealth from inward investment will benefit the local
community. Often, profits are sent back to the More Economically Developed Countries (MEDC)
where the Transnational Corporation (TNC) is based. Transnational companies, with their massive
economies of scale, may drive local companies out of business. If it becomes cheaper to operate on
another country, the TNC might close down the factory and make local people redundant.
3. An absence of strictly enforced international laws means that TNCs may operate in LEDCs in a way
that would not allowed in an MEDC. They may pollute the environment, run risks with safety or impose
poor working conditions and low wages on local workers.
4. Globalization is viewed by many as threat to the world’s cultural diversity. It is feared it might drown
out local economies, traditions and languages and simply re-cast the whole world in the mold of the
capitalist North and West. An example of this that a Hollywood film is far more likely to be successful
worldwide than one made in India or China, which also have thriving film industries.
5. Industries may begin to thrive in LEDCs at the expense of jobs in manufacturing in the UK and other
MEDCs, especially in textiles.
Disclaimer: These notes are a compilation in compliance to the contents of the prescribed syllabus; it has indicated
references/sources, thus, bears no intent to claim them as mine.
References/Sources

Bowin, J. (2020). Aristotle's Virtue Ethics. A Companion to World Literature, 1-11.

Ethics: Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society by Jens Micah De Guzman et al. Feelings and
Moral Decision-Making, pages 50 –60.

“FAQs on Search Warrants.” Retrieved from https://ndvlaw.com/faqs-on-search-warrants/

“Globalization and Pluralism: New Challenges in Ethics.” Retrieved from

shorturl.at/kzOT5 https://philonotes.com/index.php/culture-and-moral-behavior/

“Irregularity in entrapment operation in drug cases.” Retrieved from

https://www.respicio.ph/features/tag/buy-bust

Rachels, J. (2012). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. New York: McGraw Hill.

Rachels, James. “Subjectivism in Ethics.” The Elements of Moral Philosophy, Seventh Edition.
McGraw Hill, 2012, 32-44.

“Reason and impartiality as requirement for morality.” Course Hero. Available online:
https://www.coursehero.com/file/p7ilntj/REASON-AND-IMPARTIALITY-AS-MINIMUM
REQUIREMENT-FOR-MORALITY-CONTENT-I1-Reason/

SC Buy bust procedures must be strictly followed. operation

https://www.boholchronicle.com.ph/2019/08/19/sc-buy-bust-procedures-must-be-strictly-followed/

Kristine Meneses, “Pakikipagkapwa: A Filipino Value in Attempt to Counter Biodiversity and Cultural
Diversity Loss,” Solidarity: The Journal of Catholic Social Thought and Secular Ethics Vol 2 Issue 1,
1-13.

Pasco, Suarez, and Rodriguez. (2018). Ethics. C & E Publishing.

Shorturl.at/jnOQ7