1

NORTHEASTERN CEBU COLLEGES, INC.

Senior High School Department
P.G. Almendras St., Danao City, Cebu
Tel #: 233 – 9660/ 233 – 9637

QUARTER 3

Module 3
2
BUSINESS ETHICS AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

UNIT II

FOUNDATIONS OF THE PRINCIPLES OF BUSINESS ETHICS

LESSON 5: Classical Ethical Philosophies: An

Introduction

NAME: ______________________________________________________________
GRADE & SECTION: ___________________________________________________
DATE: ______________________________________________________________

PREPARED BY: RESHEAL MEDIO

Subject Teacher

UNIT II
_____________________________________________________________________________________

1
Foundations of the Principles of Business Ethics

University Social Responsibility

In 2006, the administration of De La Salle University (DLSU) in Manila
renamed DLSU’s business school as the Ramon V. del Rosario Graduate School of
Business (RVR-GBSB). Del Rosario was an outstanding alumnus, entrepreneur,
business leader, and former ambassador to Canada, Germany, and Japan. He was
also vice – chairman of Caritas Manila, the social action of the Roman Catholic
Archdiocese of Manila. He remarked during the naming ceremony:” …Our
mission is not to produce MBAs (Masters in Business Administration) it is to
produce the managers and business leaders with the passion and commitment to
help millions of Filipinos out of Poverty into lives of dignity and well – being.”

INTRODUCTION
………………………………………………………………………………………………………

The unit’s opening story makes us realize that each of us has a social
responsibility toward our neighbor and society as a whole. In the book The End of
Poverty, author Jeffrey Sachs says: “This book is about ending poverty in our time.
It is not a forecast. I am not predicting what will happen, only explaining what can
happen. Currently, more than eight million people around the world die each year
because they are too poor to stay alive… Our generation can choose to end the
extreme poverty by the year 2005. You will see that all parts of the world have the
chance to join an age of unprecedented prosperity building on global science,
technology, and markets. But you will see that certain parts of the world are caught
in a downward spiral impoverishment, hunger, and, disease. It is no good to lecture
the dying that they should have done better with their lot in life. Rather, it is our
task to help them onto the ladder of development, at least to gain a foothold on the
bottom rung, from which they can then proceed to climb on their own.” Mr.
Ramon del Rosario Jr. has chosen to make it his business to take poverty
eradication or reduction seriously. Likewise, it is expected of you to seriously take
your social duties toward the society by learning about how to act well and do
good from the early classical philosophers.

Lesson 5: Classical Ethical Philosophies: An Introduction

Lesson Objectives:

2
 At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to:
1. Define philosophy;
2. Distinguish between ethics and philosophy; and
3. Identify the various branches of philosophy.

I. Pre – Test

1. What is Philosophy?

2. What is ethics?

3. How do you distinguish between ethics and philosophy?

4. Identify the various branches of philosophy.

5. Under which branch of philosophy would business ethics fall?

II. Discussion

Ethics and Philosophy

The term ethics has several meanings. One of the meanings given to it by the
dictionary is: “the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group.” We
3
sometimes use the term personal ethics, for example, when referring to the rules by
which an individual lives his or her personal life. We use the term accounting
ethics when referring to the codes that guides the professional conduct of an
accountants. A second – and for us more important – meaning of ethics according
to the dictionary is this: “the study of morality.” Just as chemists use the term
chemistry to refer to the study of the properties of chemical substances, ethicists
use the term ethics to refer primarily to the study of morality. Although ethics deals
with morality, it is not quite the same as morality. Ethics is a kind of investigation,
which includes both the activity of investigating as well as the results of that
investigation, whereas morality is the subject matter that ethics investigates.
Philosophy, on the other hand, comes etymologically from two Greek words
philia, which means love, and sophia, which means wisdom. It is the “study of the
fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence” (New Oxford American
Dictionary, 2005). It helps us better understand who we are, why we are here, and
where we are going.

We can speak in general of three branches of philosophy:

1. Metaphysics – which answers the question “What is the nature of reality?”
2. Epistemology – which answers the question “What is the nature of knowledge?”
3. Axiology – which answers the question “What is the nature of values?”

Metaphysics is concerned with reality and existence. It is the philosophical

of being. It can be subdivided into two categories: (1) ontology, which deals with
the nature of existence; and (2) cosmology, which inspects the origin and
organization of the universe.

Epistemology raises questions about the nature of knowledge. Logic is a key

dimension to epistemology. We can distinguish between: (1) deductive logic (from
moving general to specific), (2) inductive logic (that is, form specific facts to
generalization).

Axiology explores the nature of values. This can be subdivided into: (1)
ethics, which studies human conduct and examines moral values, and (2)
aesthetics, which values beauty, nature, and aesthetic experience (often associated
with music, art, literature, dance, theater and other fine arts). Ethics involves a
discipline that examines good or bad practices within the context of a moral duty.
It is the discipline that examines your moral standards or the moral standards of a
society. It asks how these standards apply to your life and whether these standards
are reasonable or unreasonable – that is, whether they are supported by good
reasons or poor ones. So personal ethics starts when you take the moral standards
you have absorbed from family, church, and friends and ask yourself: What do
these standards imply for the situations in which I find myself? Do these standards
really make sense? What are the reasons for or against these standards? Why
should I continue to believe in them? What can be said in their favor and what can
be said against them? Are they really reasonable for me to hold? Are their
implications in this or that particular situation reasonable?

Strands of Philosophy

4
 1. Idealism. This is considered the oldest Philosophy of Western culture. It
refers to the world of mind and ideas, where reason is primary. Leading
proponents of idealism are:
a) Socrates (Greek Philosopher)
b) Plato (Greek Philosopher, “father of idealism”)
c) Augustine (Theologian of the 4th and 5th centuries)
d) Rene Descartes
e) Immanuel Kant
f) Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
2. Realism. This can be considered the antithesis of idealism, whereby “the
Universe exists whether mind perceives it or not.” Leading proponents of
Realism are:
a) Aristotle (Greek Philosopher, “father of Realism”)
b) Francis Bacon
c) John Locke
d) Comenius, Rousseau, and Pestalozzi
3. Neo – theism. This would date to time of Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274),
and is also known as theistic realism, whereby “God exists and can be
known through faith and reason.”
4. Contemporary philosophies
a) Pragmatism – also known as experimentalism (experience of things
that work). Leading proponents were: (1)Auguste Comte; (2) Charles
Darwin; and (3) the Americans: Charles Peirce, William James, and
John Dewey.
b) Existentialism – appeared as a revolt against the mathematical,
scientific philosophies that preceded it. Leading proponents were: (1)
Soren Kierkegaard; (2) Martin Buber; (3) Edmund Husserl; (4) Martin
Heidegger; and (5) Jean – Paul Satre.
c) Analytic Philosophy – it sought out to clarify and define
philosophies. This bean in post-World War I era (the Vienna Circle)
and studied the alienation between philosophy and sciences. It
established the concept of logical positivism that is there are logical
and empirical types of scientific expression. Analytic philosophy has
recently focused on political philosophy, ethics, and philosophy of the
human sciences.

III. Discussion Questions

1. Write your answer to any of the following questions:
 Have your ever known someone who was simply a good
person? What sets him or her apart from the others?

5
  Have you ever known someone to change his or her character
over time? How so?

 Have your own ethical standards changed at different times of

your life? What happened?

 What molded your moral behavior and /or moral attitudes the
most?

IV. Application
Access the link http://www.angelfire.com/az/experiment/quiz.html, to be
able to answer the test question below:

1. Philosophy is
A. Love of Knowledge
B. Abstract thinking, beyond practical concerns
C. The skill of assessing concepts or presupposition
D. Pre – Socratic in nature

2. Which of the following statements is true?

A. Personally, currently do not have a philosophy
B. Real Philosophy is only in an academic environment

6
 C. A “worldview’ may be define as philosophical belief system
D. Aphorisms in themselves are philosophically untenable

3. Metaphysics can be defined as:

A. That which is logical
B. Study and discourse
C. Analysis and Synthesis
D. Theories of that which is “beyond the physical”

4. Aesthetics has to with;

A. Morals
B. Ethics
C. The categorical imperative
D. None of the above are correct

5. Logic is:
A. Arbitrary, therefore optional in informal conversation
B. A “useless passion”
C. As logic does
D. The study of correct reasoning and correct inferences

6. The division of Philosophy dealing with HOW and WHAT we know is the
science of:
A. Hermeneutics
B. Self – stultification
C. Epistemology
D. Ontology

7. Ethics can be defined as:

A. The study of ideal conduct
B. A Legal fiction
C. The thought processes characteristics of an individual or group
D. A matter of personal preference
8. Ontology deals with:
A. Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis
B. The life cycle of a single organism
C. Attempts to coordinate the real in light of the ideal
D. The study of being

9. Socrates said that the unexamined life is:

A. Normal
B. A mystery
C. Not worth living
D. Full of sound and fury

10. Philosophy is:

A. At the root of political thought
B. Expressible in various art form
C. Hypothetical interpretation of the inexactly known
D. All of the above
7
Lesson 6: Major Ethical Philosophers

Lesson Objectives:

At the end of this lesson, the students should be able to:

1. Identify the classical philosophies and philosophers;
2. Describe those philosophies’ implications for business principles
and practices;
3. Compare and contrast classical philosophies as they relate to the
business setting; and
4. Give examples of how belief systems affect business practice..

I. Pre – Test

8
 1. Who was Aristotle? What contribution did he make in philosophy, and
specifically in ethical theory?

2. Who was Immanuel Kant? What was his chief contribution to

philosophy?

3. Who was Thomas Aquinas?

II. Discussion

The Classical Philosophers and Their Philosophies

Plato

At one time in the history of Western philosophy, theories of higher reality

were commonplace. The most influential of these was offered by the ancient Greek
Philosopher Plat (428 – 348 BC), student of the equally great philosopher Socrates.
By almost any standard, Plato ranks among the greatest philosophers of the world,
and many scholars view him as the most important philosopher in Western
Civilization. We find in Plato a drive for absolute truth that goes beyond the
merely popular opinions of the multitudes. We also find in Plato a conviction that
the physical world around us is merely a pale copy of the true reality of things that
exist on a higher objective plane (Fieser, 2003).

Having been inspired by the field of mathematics, Plato held the moral
values are objective in the sense that they exist in a spirit – like realm beyond
subjective human conventions. He held that they are absolute, or eternal, in that
they never change, and also that they are universal insofar as they apply to all
rational creatures around the world and throughout time. When we look at numbers
9
and mathematical relations, such as 1 + 1 = 2, they seem to be timeless concept
that never change, and apply everywhere in the universe. Humans do not invent
numbers and humans cannot alter them. Plato explain the eternal; character of
mathematics by stating that they are abstract entities that exist in a spirit-like real.
He noted that moral values are also absolute truths and thus are also abstract, spirit
– like entities. In this sense, for Plato, moral values are spiritual objects. Plato
largely shares the teaching of his master, Socrates, to make all virtue intellectual, a
doctrine expressed in the formula, virtue is knowledge; which is tantamount to this
other, vice is ignorance, or an erroneous view. Whence the conclusion is
inevitable: No evil deed is wilfully done; and therefore, No man is to blame for
being wicked (Coppens, 1895)

Aristotle

Aristotle was born in 384/3 BC at Stageira in Thrace, and was the son of
Nocomachus, a physician of the Macedonian king, Amyntas II. When he was about
seventeen years old Aristotle went to Athens for purposed of study and became a
member of the Academy in 386/7 BC, where for over twenty years he was in
constant dialogue with Plato until the latter’s death in 348/7 BC. He thus entered
the Academy at the time when Plato’s later dialectic was being developed and the
religious tendency was gaining ground in the great philosopher’s mind.
The ethics of Aristotle are teleological (from the Greek telos, which means
“end”): he is concerned with action, not as being right in itself irrespective of any
other consideration, but with action as conducive to man’s good. What conduces to
the attainment of his good or end will be a “right” action on man’s part; the action
that is opposed to the attainment of his true good will be a “wrong” action. “Every
art and ever inquiry, every action and choice seems to aim at some good; whence,
the good has rightly been defined as that at which all things aim.’ Aristotle sets
himself to discover what is good is and what the science corresponding to it is.
(Copleston, 1993).
Aristotle argued that virtues are good habits that we acquire, which regulate
our emotions. For example, in response to a natural feeling of fear, one should
develop the virtue of courage, which allows a person to be firm when facing
danger or fear. Analyzing 11 specific virtues (namely: courage, temperance,
liberality, magnificence, honor, good temper, friendliness, truthfulness, wit,
friendship and justice), Aristotle argued that most virtues fall at a mean between
more extreme character traits. With courage, for example, if one does not have
courage, he/she will develop the disposition of rashness, which is also a vice.
According to Aristotle, it is not an easy task to find the perfect mean between
extreme, character traits. In fact, everyone needs assistance from reason to do this
(Fieser, 2003).

Immanuel Kant

Kant was born at Konigsberg on April 22, 1724, and a son of a saddler. Both
as a child at home and at the Collegium Friedricianum, where he studied from
1732 to 1740, he was brought up in the spirit of the pietist movement. He
continued to appreciate the good qualities of sincere pietsts throughout his life, but
it is evident that he reacted rather sharply against the religious observances to
which he had to conform at the college. In March 1770, he was appointed

10
“ordinary” professor in logic and metaphysics at Konigberg. During this period, he
moved from rejecting the Leibniz – Wolffian system of philosophy to beginning to
work out his own philosophical system. It was 1781 that his famous Critique of
Pure Reason appeared; during the intervening 11 years, Kant was thinking out his
philosophy. Once the first edition of Critique of Pure Reason had appeared in
1781, Kant’s other famous writings followed in quick succession. Among others
the Critique of Practical Reason came out in 1788, and the Critique of Judgment in
1790 (Copleston, 1960).
Kantian ethics emphasizes a single principle of duty that encompasses our
particular duties. It is a single, self – evident principle of reason that he calls the
“categorical imperative.” A categorical imperative, he argued, is fundamentally
different from hypothetical imperatives that hinge on some personal desire that we
have, for example, “If you want to get a good job, then you ought to go to college.”
By contrast, a categorical imperative simply mandates an action, irrespective of
one’s personal desires, such as “You ought to X.” Kant gives at least four versions
of the categorical imperative, but one is especially direct: Treat people as an end,
and never as a means of an end. That is, we should always treat people with
dignity, and never use them as mere instruments. For Kant, we treat people as an
end whenever our actions toward someone reflect the inherent value of that person.
Donating to charity, for example, is morally correct since this acknowledges the
inherent value of the recipient. By contrast, we treat someone as a means to an end
whenever we treat that person as a tool to achieve something else. It is wrong, for
example, to steal a neighbor’s car since that would be treating him/her as a means
to one’s own happiness. The categorical imperative also regulates the morality of
actions that affect us individually. Suicide, for example, would be wrong since I
would be treating my life as a means to the alleviation of my misery. Kant believes
that the morality of all actions can be determined by appealing to this single
principle of duty (Fieser, 2003).

Utilitarianism as an Example of a Consequentialist Theory

Consequentialist theories became popular in the 18 th century by philosophers

who wanted a quick way to morally assess an action by appealing to experience,
rather than by appealing to gut intuitions or long lists of questionable duties.
Jeremy Bentham presented one of the earliest full developed systems of
utilitarianism. Two features of his theory are noteworthy. First, Bentham proposed
that we tally the consequences of each action we perform and thereby determine on
a case to case basis whether an action is morally right or wrong. This aspect of
Bentham’s theory is known as act – utilitarianism. Second, Bentham also proposed
that we tally the pleasure and pain which result from our actions. For Bentham,
pleasure and pain are the only consequences that matter in determining whether
our conduct is moral. This aspect of Bentham’s theory is known as hedonistic
utilitarianism. Critics point out limitations in both of these aspects.
First, according to act-utilitarianism, it would be morally wrong to waste
time on leisure activities such as watching television, since our time could be spent
in ways that produced a greater social benefit, such as charity work. But
prohibiting leisure activities does not seem reasonable. More significantly,
according to act – utilitarianism, specific acts of torture or slavery would be
morally permissible if the social benefit of these actions outweighed the disbenefit.
A revised version of utilitarianism called rule – utilitarianism addresses these
11
problems. According to rule – utilitarianism, a behavioral code or rule is morally
right of the consequences of adopting that rule are more favorable than unfavorable
to everyone. Unlike act – utilitarianism, which weighs the consequences of each
particular action, rule – utilitarianism offers a litmus test only for the morality of
moral rules, such as “stealing is wrong.” Adopting a rule against theft clearly has
more favorable consequences than unfavorable consequences for everyone. The
same is true for moral rules against lying or murdering. Rule – utilitarianism, then,
offers a three – tiered method for judging conduct. A particular action, such as
stealing my neighbor’s car, is judged wrong since it violates a moral rule against
theft. In turn, the rule against theft is morally binding because adopting this rule
produces favorable consequences for everyone. John Stuart Mill’s version of
utilitarianism is rule – oriented. Second, according to hedonistic utilitarianism,
pleasurable consequences are the only factors that matter, morally speaking. This,
though, seems too restrictive since it ignores others morally significant
consequences that are not necessarily pleasing or painful. For example, act which
foster loyalty and friendship are valued, yet they are not always pleasing. In
response to this problem, G.E Moore proposed ideal utilitarianism, which involves
tallying any consequence that we intuitively recognize as good or bad (and not
simply as pleasurable or painful). Also, R.M. Hare proposed preference
utilitarianism, which involves tallying any consequence that fulfills our preferences
(Fieser, 2003).

Thomas Aquinas
Auinas (1225 – 1274), an Italian philosopher, theologian, and priest, is
sometimes called the Prince of Scholastics. He wrote Summa Theologiae and
Summa Contra Gentiles, among many other works, and developed as systematic
Christian Theology in response to the problem of the dichotomy of faith and reason
during the medieval period. He was invited by Pope Gregory X to attend a General
Council in Rome in 1274 but died on the way to the Vatican. He died at young age
of 49 years old. 49 years later, he was canonize, and later proclaimed the Angelic
Doctor of the Church (Roa, 2011).

The moral philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas involves a merger of at least

two apparently disparate traditions: Aristotelian eudaimonism and Christian
theology. On the one hand Aquinas follows Aristotle in thinking that an act is good
or bad depending on whether it contributes to or deters us from our proper human
end – the telos or final goal at which all human actions aim. That telos is
eudaimonia, or happiness, where “happiness” is undersdtood in terms of
completion, perfection, or well – being. Achieving happiness, however, requires a
range of intellectual and moral virtues that enable us to understand the nature of
happiness and motivate us to seek it in a reliable and consistent way. On the other
hand, St. Thomas Aquinas moral theory is seen to move on a different plane from
that of Aristotle. Aristotle may have said that the good of man consists in the
consideration of the speculative sciences, but he was speaking of imperfect
happiness, such as is attainable in this life. According to Aquinas, perfect
happiness, the ultimate end, is not to be found in any created thing, but only God,
who is Himself the supreme and infinite Good. God is the universal good in the
concrete, and though He is the end of all things, of both rational and irrational
creatures, it is only rational creatures who can attain this final good by way of
knowledge and love: it is only rational creatures who can attain the vision of God
12
in which alone perfect happiness lies. Aquinas was in some respect a better
Aristotlelian than Aristode, that only was he an excellent interpreter of Aristotle’s
text, but that he has been able to extend and deepen both Aristotle’s metaphysical
inquiries and his moral enquiries (Copleston, 1993; Macintyre, 1984).

Different Philosophies’ Implications for Business Principles and Practices

What can business leaders learn from ancient Greek philosophers?
To help achieve "the good life" companies can learn from the techniques used by
Greek philosophers. Jules Evans explores seven that could help employees live
their lives better.
I've met and interviewed hundreds of people who have used ancient Greek
and Roman philosophies to help them live their lives better, including soldiers,
astronauts, politicians and business leaders. They all used philosophy to help them
achieve "eudaimonia", by which the Greeks meant "flourishing" or "the good life".
Here are seven techniques, from seven philosophers, which businesses can use to
become more eudaimonic.

Socrates: dare to disagree

Socrates, one of the first philosophers, insisted on our right to think for ourselves.
Too often, he warned, humans sleepwalk through life, simply going along with the
crowd.

This is dangerous in questions of morality, and particularly in corporate

governance. When corruption is uncovered, too often people say "everyone else
was doing it". But our characters are our responsibility. Socrates was prepared to
die rather than go against his conscience. Does your organisation encourage
independent thinkers, and people who follow their conscience? Does it allow
people to give critical feedback to managers? Does it create opportunities for good
people to blow the whistle on bad behaviour?

Aristotle: let people seek fulfillment

Aristotle was a great biologist as well as a great philosopher. He based his
ethics on a psychological theory of human nature, insisting that we are naturally
virtuous, rational, social and happiness-seeking. Governments and organisations
need to build the best systems to let humans fulfill their natural drives.

Aristotle's philosophy was an influence on Edward Deci and Richard

Ryan's Self-Determination Theory, which suggests that employees will work
harder for you, and perform better, if you give them tasks they find meaningful and
morally worthwhile.
Humans want to believe in something and to serve it. Appeal to your employees'
best nature and they will answer that call.

Your employees will also be more motivated if you give them the
opportunity to feed their natural curiosity through learning opportunities. That
could be vocational training, but it could also simply be learning about the world,
ideas, culture. Does your company have an evening or lunch-time lecture series,
such as Google Talks? Could it give credits for evening adult learning classes, as
companies such as Cadbury and Ford once did?

13
Plutarch: be a good role model
Plutarch, the ancient Greek historian and educator, understood that humans
are incredibly social creatures, who constantly observe the people around them and
imitate them.

Unfortunately, people often grow up surrounded by bad role models.

However, we can steer people, by providing them with better patterns to imitate.
That's what Plutarch tried to do with his famous work, Parallel Lives, which
offered biographical sketches of some of the great Greek and Roman heroes –
Cicero, Caesar, Alexander the Great, Pericles – to give young people something to
emulate.

In organizational terms, that means what you say to your employees is less
important than what you do. They will watch how you behave, how you treat
others, how you cope with pressure and whether you follow through on your
promises. And they will imitate you. If you talk about ethics and then cut corners at
the first opportunity, they will follow your lead.

Set a good example and they will follow it. Plutarch would also warn that
your best young employees will use you as a bar to aim for and exceed. That's
natural. Let them compete with you and encourage them to go further.

Epictetus: build a resilient mind-set

Epictetus grew up a slave in Rome, and then became a Stoic philosopher.
Both of these positions were incredibly precarious – slaves could be abused or
killed by their owners, while Stoic philosophers were constantly falling foul of the
imperial authorities (Epictetus himself was eventually exiled). Epictetus coped
with this insecurity by constantly reminding himself what he could control and
what he couldn't. We can control our thoughts, beliefs and attitudes, but everything
else is to some extent out of our control – other people's perceptions and behavior,
the economy, the weather, the future and the past. If you focus on what is beyond
your control, and obsess over it, you will end up feeling helpless. Focus on what
you can control, and you will feel a measure of autonomy even in chaotic
situations.

This insight is now part of the US Army's $125m resilience training course, which
teaches soldiers the Stoic lesson that, even in adverse situations, we always have
some choice how we react. We can learn this resilient thinking, and it will make
our organization and employees more capable of reacting to crises. The
environment may be worsening, the economy may be double-dipping. Focus on
doing what you can, on the practical steps you can take to improve the situation.

Rufus: keep track of your ethical progress

Musonius Rufus was known as the Socrates of Rome. He was another Stoic,
who taught that philosophy cannot just be theoretical. If you want to be an ethical
individual or an ethical company, you can't just study ethics, you have to practice
it, every day, to get into good habits. The ancient Greek word for ethics is actually
the same word for habit.

You also need to keep track of your progress, to see how you're doing. You can't
just rely on your intuitions, because they're often wrong. So the ancient Greeks
learned to keep accounts of themselves. They would track their daily behavior in
14
journals, keeping account of how many times they lost their temper, for example,
or got too drunk. Then they could see if they were really improving their behavior,
or just going round in circles.

In organizational terms, keeping track of ourselves means trying to take an

evidence-based assessment of our performance. We might say we're a green
company, but how do we know if we're making progress? We might say we're a
eudaimonic organization, but how do we know? We can keep track of this, for
example by asking our employees (anonymously) how worthwhile they feel their
job is. Then see if, in a year, we have managed to enhance their sense of purpose.

Epicurus: the art of happiness

Epicurus was a fourth century Greek philosopher who taught, rather
scandalously, that the aim of life was simply to be as happy as possible here on
Earth, before we die and dissolve back into the atomic universe. He warned that
humans are very bad at being happy, and very good at inventing reasons to be
miserable. Philosophy should teach us how to be happy, he suggested. For
example, it could teach us how to bring our attention to the present moment, to
savour it. It could also teach us to limit our desires to what is easy to get, not
inflating our needs with endless artificially stimulated desires.

Today, some companies are embracing Epicurus' philosophy, and trying to

teach their employees the art of happiness. Tony Hsieh, the CEO of American shoe
company Zappos, is so committed to the company's courses in happiness that he
sold the company to Amazon on the agreement it would be able to continue with
its unique happy culture.

I'm not personally an Epicurean, and think companies should be careful

about forcing all their employees to follow one philosophy of the good life. As
we've seen, there are many different approaches to achieving eudaimonia. Perhaps
companies could create an ethical culture that embraces all these different ways of
living.

15
III. Discussion Questions
A. Access this link:
https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780199765225/student/chapter4/
quizzes/mcquiz/ to be able to answer the test questions below:

1. In moral life, feelings are _______.

A. essential and inevitable
B. essential to impartiality
C. an unerring guide
D. reason based

2. A moral theory explains

A. why an action is right or wrong
B. why moral event caused another
C. where moral agent got her values
D. why people do what they do

3. Moral theories that say that the rightness of actions depends solely on their
consequences are ______.
A. a. deontological
B. virtue oriented
C. consequentialist
D. egoistic
4. An important moral criterion of adequacy is known as _____.
A. simplicity
B. consistency with our considered moral judgments
C. fruitfulness
D. fallibility
5. Critics of the divine command theory have argued that the theory implies that
God’s commands are _____.
A. well supported
B. unclear
C. unknowable
D. arbitrary
6. According to Kant, nothing can be called “good” without qualification except
_____.
A. right action
B. good consequences

16
 C. happiness
D. a good will

7. Kant says that when trying to decide whether an action is morally permissible,
we must ask if we can consistently will that the maxim of our action should
become _____.
A. a rule for maximizing happiness
B. a contingent law
C. a universal law
D. a rule of thumb

8. To Kant, making a lying promise would be wrong because _____.

A. lying to people can cause them harm
B. lying to people harms society
C. you could not consistently will that everyone should make lying promises
D. most people condemn the practice

9. According to Mill, to determine whether one pleasure is more valuable than

another, we must _____.
A. determine which one is objectively most pleasurable
B. determine which pleasure most experienced people prefer
C. consult philosophers of the past
D. consult science

10. Mill says that the ultimate end of utilitarianism is an existence as free of pain as
possible and as rich as possible in _____.
A. lower pleasures
B. spiritual attainment
C. social achievement
D. enjoyments

17
 B. True or False

1. According to ethical egoism, you should do whatever you desire to do or

whatever gives you the most immediate pleasure.
A. True
B. False
2. Kant declares that we should never in any circumstances treat people as a
means.
A. True
B. False
3. Kant believes that we should not treat persons merely as a means except when
society’s welfare is at stake.
A. True
B. False
4. Kant argues that the moral law is conditional.
A. True
B. False
5. Mill thinks that some kinds of pleasures are more valuable than others.
A. True
B. False
6. Mill believes that the moral worth of an action depends on one’s motives.
A. True
B. False
7. Mill asserts that happiness is the sole end of human action.
A. True
B. False
8. For Mill, a beast’s pleasures can satisfy a human being’s conception of
happiness.
A. True
B. False
9. Aristotle thinks that the highest good is an instrumental good (good for the
sake of something else).
A. True
B. False
10. Aristotle says that virtue is a mean lying between two vices.
A. True
B. False

18
IV. Application
Matching Type
A.
_____1. Alexander the Great
_____2. Basis of the Philosophy
_____3. Epicurus
_____4. Descartes
_____5. Dualism
______6. Consequentialism
______7. Virtues
______8. Psychological realism
______9. Logical Positivists
______10. Ethical Relativists
______11. Thales
______12. Parmenides
______13. St. Augustine
______14. St. Thomas Aquinas
______15. Rationalists
B.
a. Argue that ethical
Statements are meaningless
b. Believe that values are
related to the environment
in which they are formed
c. Famous leader whom
Aristotle tutored
d. holds that we ought to do
Whatever maximizes good
consequences
e. One of the greatest
Presocratic philosophers
who held that time and
change are illusionary
f. Philosopher who believed
that gods had no interest in
humans
g. Philosopher who used the
Argument “I think,
Therefore I am.”
h. Positive character traits
i. Rejects the idea that our
Minds or mental states
Are fundamental than our
Bodies of physical states
j. Sought to unite Christian
Theology with Aristotelian
Philosophy
k. Sought to unite Christian
Theology with Platonic
Philosophy
l. States that human actions
are governed by self –
interest.
m. that happiness was
achieved by accepting
whatever happened
whether good or bad.
n. The Greek usually thought
Of as the first western
Philosopher
o. those who believe that basic
Knowledge arises from
19
reason

20