This document is a strictly confidential communication to and solely for the use of the

recipient and may not be reproduced or circulated without prior written consent from
the authors. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the
information in this documentation in any way.

MODULE 2: Basic and Key Concepts in Ethics

Module 2 will introduce you to the basic terms used in Ethics and to the main components to
be considered when dealing with ethical issues and when making moral decisions. In this
module we will:
(1) examine the subject matter of Ethics;
(2) determine what ethics is, and what ethics is not;
(3) distinguish actions, on whether they are “human acts” or “acts of man”
(4) show examples of moral dilemmas; and
(5) analyse the different determinants of morality.

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of Module 2, you should be able to:

1. explain the similarities and differences of “ethics/ethical” and “morality/morals;”
2. articulate the importance of Ethics to one’s life;
3. judge whether the dilemma faced by people in given situations are moral dilemmas or
not;
4. point out which among the determinants of morality is/are involved in a certain dilemma;
and
1. demonstrate understanding of the fundamental concepts in ethics and morality such as
“knowledge,” “voluntariness,” and “impartiality” by applying them in solving certain
moral dilemmas.
DISCUSSION
 2. Basic and Key Concepts in Ethics

2.1. What is Ethics

Ethics is derived from the Greek word “ethos,” which means a characteristic way of acting
which also refers to the principles or standards of human conduct. Ethics is also called moral
philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and Recommending concepts of right and
wrong behavior; thus, ethics is sometimes referred to as the study of morality. It is said to be a
science insofar as it is a body of systematized knowledge arranged with its accompanying
explanation. In terms of content, it is not to be classified as a course in science. Ethics as a
practical science means that it consists of principles and laws that are applied in daily living. In
this sense, ethics is not a course taken for the sake of contemplation; rather, it is a study taken
for application in a person’s everyday course of action. Ethics then is an applied knowledge.

As a philosophical science, ethics is not a technical course or a laboratory study. Devoid

of human experience, it presents and deliberates its subject matter “in the light of its deepest
principles by means of human reason alone.” There are various ways of defining and discussing
Ethics: 1) Ethics is a subject matter with content. It is a discipline with a body of knowledge; 2)
Ethics is a process of decision-making because it is a thinking skill leading to actions that we
perform coupled with accountability; 3) Ethics refers to well based standards of right and wrong
that prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society,
fairness, or specific virtues. It refers to standards that impose the reasonable obligations to
refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include
those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. Ethical standards include values
relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to
privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by
consistent and well-founded reasons; 4) Ethics refers to the study and development of one's
ethical standards. Since feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical, it is
necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-
founded. It is a continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct and
striving to ensure that we live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based; and, 5)
Ethics involves the study and application of “right” conduct. When people ask themselves,
“What ought I to do?” they are concerned of their actions that might be wrong or are having
difficulty working through the moral or values dimensions and from these, they are asking an
ethical question.

What Ethics is Not

Before we understand the moral from the non-moral standards, it is important to look
into some misinterpretations and misconceptions of what Ethics is all about. Such
misinterpretations and misconceptions can obliterate the real essence of Ethics as an important
branch of Philosophy. Raymond Baumhart, a sociologist, asked some people, "What does ethics
mean to you?" Among their replies were the following: "Ethics has to do with what my feelings
tell me is right or wrong;" "Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs." "Being ethical is doing
what the law requires;" "Ethics consists of the standards of behavior our society accepts;" and, "I
don't know what the word means." These replies might be typical of our own. The meaning of
ethics is hard to pin down, and the views that some people have about ethics are shaky and
dangerous.

Ethics and Feelings Ethics is not the same with psychology but is a companion to it.
Ethics is not merely attributed to observations and scientific
interpretations of behaviors like what psychology does. The ethicists dig
Like Baumhart's first
deeper on the reason why an action is such without necessarily
respondent, many people
quantifying and measuring human behaviors. However, psychology
tend to equate ethics with
admits that it developed and progressed in the course of time due to
their feelings. But being the contribution of philosophy, a companion to its scientific
ethical is clearly not a matter of following one's feelings. A person following his or her feelings
may recoil from doing what is right. In fact, feelings frequently deviate from what is ethical.
Several students fall into the trap of engaging in pre-marital sex because they allow their
feelings or emotions to dominate their rationality.

Ethics is not the same with religion but Ethics and Religion

speaks about it. While religion seeks the

meaning of human existence through spiritual Most religions, of course, advocate high
nourishment with Creed, Code and Ceremonies,
ethics dwell on the reason or existence of religion.
This explains why we have philosophy of religion.
However, since religion uses reason to explain
faith like theology, then we do philosophizing
ethical standards. Yet if ethics were confined to religion, then ethics would apply only to
religious people. But ethics applies as much to the behavior of the atheist as to that of the saint.
Religion can set high ethical standards and can provide intense motivations for ethical behavior.
Ethics, however, cannot be confined to religion nor is it the same as religion.

Ethics and Law

Ethics is not the same with studying

Being ethical is also not the same as following the law but is closely related to it. While
law. The law often incorporates ethical standards to law is concerned about the effects of action
through punishment and reward, ethics
which most citizens subscribe. But laws, like
dwell on a deeper meaning of action by
feelings, can deviate from what is ethical. What is
finding the main reason of the act. This
legal is not necessarily ethical; but what is ethical is
explains the old adage, “not all legal is
necessarily worth legalizing. For instance; gambling,
ethical.” However, if ethics reflect laws
divorce, abortion, and the like can be legalized in founded on reason as their bases, then we
some nations, but they do not necessarily mean
that they are ethical.

Ethics and what Society accepts:

Ethics is not the same with culture but is closely

Being ethical is not the same as
connected to it. Ethics is not only about etiquette or
doing "whatever society accepts."
manners like the GMRC (Good Manners and Right Conduct)
In any society, most people accept
we used to learn. Learning variety of cultural norms is not a
standards that are, in fact, ethical.
guarantee of ethical evaluation. This explains why ethics is not
But standards of behavior in
only researches in cultural anthropology or sociology that
studies behaviors of a social group, an organization or a society can deviate from what is
community. However, in studying society and culture, we have ethical. An entire society can
social philosophy to explain the reasons of organizations to become ethically corrupt. Nazi
exist. We can say then that culture and society are associated Germany before, particularly
during the time of the holocaust, is a good example of this. If being ethical were doing
"whatever society accepts," then to find out what is ethical, one would have to find out what
society accepts. To decide what I should think about abortion, for example, I would have to take
a survey of American society and then conform my beliefs to whatever society accepts. But no
one ever tries to decide an ethical issue by doing a survey.

Finally, the lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics
with whatever society accepts. Some people accept abortion but many others do not. If being
ethical were doing whatever society accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues
which does not, in fact, exist.

Ethics is not the same with morality but is closely linked to it. While moral standard or
norm of action is fixed and already set, ethics dwells on the use of reason. It is because we
cannot limit philosophy from mere norms of conduct. However, ethics is identical to moral
science or moral philosophy based from the Latin term mos (nominative) or moris (genitive)
which also means custom, or “traditional line of conduct.” It is from this root word that the word
moral or morality is derived. The term morality is synonymous with the word ethics in
etymological meaning; however, ethics deals more on the principles and laws on the morality of
human acts by providing the person knowledge that s/he may know, what to do and how to do
it. In other words, ethics provides the guides to the performance of an act.

2.2. Importance of ethics

For some people, the importance of ethics only comes as a result of encountering
unethical conduct. But if Ethics is inculcated into one’s system, it is being carried into one’s
bloodstream and to the day-to-day activity of the individual. Ethics is an important requirement
for human existence. It is our means of deciding a proper course of action. Without it, our
actions would be aimless and not properly rooted. When a rational ethical standard is taken, we
are able to correctly organize our goals and actions to accomplish our most important values.
Any blunder in our ethical values will reduce our ability to be successful in our endeavors.

Ethics is important because of the following reasons: 1) It serves as a guide towards our
goals, rather than just allowing our lives to be controlled by self-serving motives, accidental
occurrences, customs, feelings, or our impulses; 2) It helps us deepen our reflection on the
ultimate questions of life and help us think better about the concerns of morality; 3) It offers us
a wider perspective on how to live our life to the fullest, taking into consideration that we do not
have the luxury of eternal time in this world; 4) It reminds us of our duties, responsibilities, and
accountabilities to ourselves, to our fellowmen, to our society, to our nation, and to the world in
general; 5) It encourages us to examine our life and honestly evaluate how we are responding to
the challenges and demands of this contemporary time; 6) It increases our capacity to perceive
and be sensitive to relevant moral issues that deserve consideration in making our choices that
will have significant impact on ourselves and on others; 7) It polishes, strengthens and brings
out to the fore our value priorities in life which will make us better and happy individuals; and, 8)
It helps us realize and become what we ought to be in this challenging, yet beautiful, world.

2.3. Recognizing Terms in Ethics

There are ethical terms to be distinguished in relation to human acts: It is important to

consider Moral, Amoral, and Immoral actions.

Moral actions or events are those which require the goodness of the object chosen, the
intention or the end in view, and of the circumstances together. Moral actions are
deemed to be good as one performs the moral rules or codes of the society.

Immoral actions or events are those actions or areas of interest where moral categories
do apply and are considered to be evil, sinful, or wrong according to the code of ethics.
For examples: consciously telling a lie; graft and corruption; cheating during
examinations, gluttony, taking a sip of water fully aware that there is hemlock in it
(suicide), and many more.

Amoral actions or events are those actions or areas of interest exhibiting indifference. At
times, these are manifested in the absence of knowledge, freedom and voluntariness on
the part of the acting agent. For examples: a young child who speaks bad words, an Aeta
who just came from the mountain obstructs a city traffic, a person innocently taking a sip
of water but the water contains a hemlock, or a man accidentally entering the ladies
comfort room.
2.4. Moral versus Non-Moral Dilemmas

A moral dilemma is a situation in ethics where the human person is to choose between
two possible alternatives and the options become limited. In decision-making, even when you
do not want to choose to act in a situation, that is still considered a choice. It is impossible then
that there is no possible option. Thus, whatever is the decision a person makes, it is expected for
that person to stand and be responsible with the decision s/he takes whatever the
consequences could be. To decide is to be responsible.

Moral dilemma happens when we cannot make a distinction between what is a good act
from an evil act. When we encounter question of ethics like, is it moral to attend my class even if
I am sick? Is it necessary to avoid killing someone when my life is in danger? Is waking up early
necessary when am always late in going to school? Is it important to maintain my diet even if my
doctor advised me not to? To avoid moral dilemma, it is important to distinguish the good act
from a bad act.

A morally good act requires the goodness of the object chosen, of the intention, and of
the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself
like for instance in the case of praying and fasting in order to be seen by men. The chosen
object can by itself vitiate or destroy an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts, such as
bribery, robbery, fornication, and the like, which are always wrong to choose, because choosing
them entails an evil act.

It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the
intention that inspires them or the circumstances which supply their context. There are acts
which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely
illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy, murder, adultery, and the like. One may not
do evil so that good may result from it. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, an evil action cannot
be justified by reference to a good intention. A good intention does not make the action or
behavior that is intrinsically disordered, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus,
the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the
country.
2.5. Distinction of Action:

Human acts are the fundamental foundation of morality. These acts which are under the
control of the will and therefore done knowingly and willingly; not acts which happen by
accident, as falling, or by nature, as growing, but acts performed by choice, that is, after
deliberation and decision. They are imputable to their human author to the extent that he has
knowledge of his own activity and its import, and to the extent that he has freedom of election.
The moral or ethical character of the human act lies in this, that it is freely placed with
knowledge of its objective conformity or nonconformity with the law of rational nature.

As elaborated by ethicists, human acts are characterized by the following: 1) Acts which
are free and voluntary; 2) Acts done with knowledge and consent; 3) Acts which are proper to
man as man; because of all animals, he alone has knowledge and freedom of the will; 4) Acts
which are under man’s control, and for which he is responsible for its consequences; and, 5) Acts
which man is the master and has the power of doing or not doing as he pleases. On the other
hand, human acts should be differentiated from ordinary ‘acts of man’. Acts of man are bodily
actions performed without deliberation and in the absence of the will. For instances, the blinking
of our eyelids, our breathing patterns, sneezing, and the like are considered as acts of man. In
many ways, we are accountable to our actions but somehow our responsibility is lessened unlike
human acts that absolutely require moral obligation and responsibility.

Human Act requires moral responsibility that is derived from a person. If responsibility is
a coined term of “response” and “ability” then the ability to response is important in ethics
because “no one can give what s/he does not have.” It is expected for young people studying
ethics to respond to the problems of society today based on their capacities. As such, we can
apply the old saying, “if there’s a will, there’s a way.” For example, the right to vote in local and
national election, participate in any assembly, joining school organizations, becoming choir
members of the Church, joining professional associations, and other organizing activities, are
simple ways that young people can do to become responsible individuals. If a person achieves
an ethical attitude, it presupposes that s/he takes moral responsibility to society. A personal
conviction of what is “right and wrong” becomes a social duty and such duty must be put into
action. This makes ethics an axiology, or what philosophy calls praxis, the emphasis on the
practical application of ethical ideas.

There are two significant considerations of ethics; the Ethics of Being and the Ethics of
Doing. In the Ethics of Being, the emphasis is on the “character development” which involves the
integrations of virtues, values and personhood; it is looking into the foundation of actions who is
the “good person” while the Ethics of Doing focuses not only the goodness of the person but on
the ability of the person to put into action his/her ethical conviction (Fr. Ramon Coronel & Fr.
Paul Van Parijs, CICM, Bioethics, 1996). It is not enough simply to be contented in believing to be
a good person while forgetting to do good actions; on the other hand, it also not good just to
think that you are doing good while you forget that you are first and foremost a good person.
There is the need to harmonize the two considerations of ethics; hence, you do a good act
because you believe and think that you are a good person capable of doing good. Both
considerations are inseparably related to be better person – intellectually mature,
psychologically stable, socially involved, spiritually nourished and economically well-off; and, to
do good acts.

Our ethical responsibility is reflected in the following scheme:

Foundation of
Morality
Ethics: Human acts: Bases of
Ethics
human responsibility: Free,
Theory and
voluntary, and deliberate
Principles as
guidelines of
human actions

The fundamental bases of morality start with the use of reason, exercise of human
freedom, willful, voluntariness, and deliberate act. Ethical principles and theories are guidelines
for human actions for which we can only talk about moral responsibility. It is because we cannot
be totally responsible to our actions that we are not aware of. We can only be responsible to our
actions that we are aware of, freely acting on them, and voluntarily responding to the
circumstance we are engaged in. With our moral conviction arises our moral responsibility.

2.6. Three-fold Elements of Human Acts

There are three essential elements to consider any action to be a human act. Without
one of these elements, the action cannot be considered as a human act. These are knowledge,
freedom of the will, and voluntariness.

Knowledge is awareness or being conscious of one’s actions including its possible

consequences. The act of knowing is always consciousness of something which is inevitably
linked to the subject, who is the knower. For example, an insane person and a three-year old
child are not liable for their actions since they are not capable of acting with proper knowledge.
Their actions can never be considered as immoral. College students and professionals are
expected to be possessors of knowledge; thus, they cannot claim excuses for their immoral
actions. They are liable for the consequences of their actions. According to Aristotle, knowledge
is the first element of ethical practice. This knowledge provides a framework for deliberating
about the most appropriate technique(s) by which the good can be attained. But, it should be
noted that; although, knowledge is a requirement for considering an act to be a human act,
being knowledgeable or being aware of what is ethical or moral is not a guarantee that the
person is already considered as an ethical or moral person. It is not enough for an individual to
know what is good. What really count are his good acts.

Freedom of the Will. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, this is the power which human
beings have in determining their actions according to the judgment of their reasons. This always
involves a choice or an option of whether to do or not to do a certain action. Without this
freedom of choice, then responsibility and/or liability on the part of the individual would be
meaningless. Insane people who have no control of their minds and children who have no idea
of what they are doing or are not free to do or not to do, are not responsible for their actions.
Matured people, college students and professionals are expected to be free from doing or not
doing; thus, they are responsible or liable for their actions.

Voluntariness. This is an act of consenting or accepting a certain action whether it is

done whole-heartedly, half-heartedly, or non-heartedly. According to Aristotle, the moral
evaluation of an action presupposes the attribution of responsibility to a human agent; thus,
responsible action must be undertaken voluntarily (Nicomachean Ethics III). Agapay presented
four modes of voluntariness. These are perfect, imperfect, conditional, and simple voluntariness.

Perfect Voluntariness is actualized by a person who is fully aware and who fully intends
an act. The person, under perfect voluntariness, is fully convinced of his action including its
consequences. A politician who, in his right mind, engages in graft and corruption is considered
to be acting with perfect voluntariness. Imperfect Voluntariness is seen in a person who acts
without the full awareness of his action or without fully intending the act. A drunken person who,
acting irrationally, jumps from a ten-storey building is said to be exhibiting an imperfect
voluntariness. Conditional Voluntariness is manifested by a person who is forced by his
circumstances beyond his control to perform an action which he would not do under normal
condition. A freshman college student who is forced by his parents to enroll in a course which is
against his will is showing a conditional voluntariness. Simple Voluntariness is exhibited by a
person doing an act willfully regardless of whether he likes to do it or not. It can either be
positive or negative. It is a positive simple voluntariness when the act requires the performance
of an act. For examples: Studying one’s lesson; participating in class discussions; engaging in
sports, and so on. It is a negative simple voluntariness when the act does not require the
performance of an act. For examples: Remaining silent or choosing to be alone; deciding not to
go to a drinking spree; avoiding to take illegal drugs; and so on.

2.7. Determinants of Morality

Freedom makes man a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, man is, so to speak, the
master of his acts. Human acts, that is, acts that are freely chosen in consequence of a judgment
of conscience, can be morally evaluated. They are either good or evil. The morality of human
acts depends on the object chosen; the end in view or the intention; and the circumstances of
the action. These are the factors to consider in making ethical judgement in determining the
morality of human acts.

Object Chosen: This is a good toward which the will deliberately directs itself. The
chosen object resides out the acting subject. The object chosen morally specifies the act of the
will, insofar as reason recognizes and judges it to be or not to be in conformity with the true
good. Examples of Good Chosen Objects: nutritious foods; hard-earned money or wealth;
educational books and films; and the like. Examples of Bad Chosen Objects: Forbidden drugs;
Pornographic materials; Leakages for examinations; and others.

The Intention: This is a movement of the will toward the end. It is concerned with the
goal of the activity. The end is the first goal of the intention and indicates the purpose pursued
in the action. It aims at the good anticipated from the action undertaken. Intention is not limited
to directing individual actions but can guide several actions toward one and the same purpose;
it can orient one's whole life toward its ultimate end. For example, a service done with the end
of helping one's neighbor can at the same time be inspired by the love of the Divine Being as
the ultimate end of all our actions. One and the same action can also be inspired by several
intentions, such as performing a service in order to obtain a favor or to boast about it. The
intention resides in the acting subject as contrast to the object chosen. Because it lies at the
voluntary source of an action and determines it by its end, intention is an element essential to
the moral evaluation of an action.

The Circumstances: These, including the consequences, are secondary elements of a

moral act. They contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human
acts. For instances: the number of people killed; the amount of money being stolen; the number
of trees cut by loggers; the regularity of the graft and corruption done by politicians; the
number of times a lie is spoken; or, the number of times a student cheated. They can also
diminish or increase the agent's responsibility. For examples: acting out of ignorance or fear of
death; acts done because of habit; choosing between two or more evils in a certain situation;
being forced to do something against one’s will; and so on. It should be noted that
circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make
neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil.
 In Summary: A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of
the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself
(such as praying and fasting "in order to be seen by men"). The object of the choice can by itself
vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always
wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil. It is
therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that
inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.)
which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of
circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as
blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from
it.

The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the three "sources" of the
morality of human acts. The object chosen morally specifies the act of willing accordingly as
reason recognizes and judges it good or evil. "An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a
good intention" (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). A morally good act therefore requires
the goodness of its object, of its end, and of its circumstances together. There are concrete acts
which are always wrong to choose, because their choice entails a disorder of the will, i.e., a moral
evil. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.