Focus Questions:

What are moral standards? How do they differ from other rules of life? What is a moral dilemma? What are three levels
of moral dilemma?

Why is freedom crucial in our ability to make moral decisions? What is the advantage of owning moral standards
(morality and

ethics) over merely abiding by moral standards?

How does culture define moral behavior? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Filipino character?

Are there universal values?

INTRODUCTION

Everywhere you go are rules at home, at school, in church, in the barangay. Do these rules make our life more difficult
and so should be eliminated or do these rules make our life more peaceful and orderly? Imagine your life, your home,
your school, your Church and community without rules. In this Lesson, we'll study about the importance of rules.

ABSTRACTION

Rules are important to social beings. Just imagine the chaos that results from the absence of rules. What happens when
students and professors alike come to school in any attire they want? Imagine what happens when in the classroom
everyone wants to talk at the same time. Let's go out of the classroom for more examples. What if there were no traffic
rules? Rules can be expanded to include the Philippine Constitution and other laws. What if there were no Constitution
and other laws of the rules

Rules are meant to set order. Rules (the Philippine Constitution and other laws included) are meant for man. The
greatest Teacher, Jesus Christ, preached emphatically, "The Sabbath is made for man and not man for the Sabbath". The
law of the Sabbath, i.e. to keep it holy and observe rest, is meant to make man whole by resting and by giving him time
to thank and spend time in prayer and worship for his own good. For the sake of order in society, everyone is subject to
rules. In a democratic country like the Philippines, we often hear the statement "No one is above the law," including the
highest official of the country. We are all subject to rules or else court chaos.

Rules are not meant to restrict your freedom. They are meant to help you grow in freedom, to grow in your ability to
choose and do what is good for you and for others. If there are rules or laws that restrict your ability or strength to do
good, they are suffocating laws and they are not good laws. They ought to be abolished. Any rule or law that prevents
human persons from doing and being good ought to be repealed. They have no reasons to exist. In fact, if you are a rule
or a law-abiding citizen, you don't even feel the restricting presence of a rule or law because you do what the law or
what the rule states everybody should do. Looking from a higher point of view, this is the state when one acts not
because rules demand it but because one sees he has to act that way. It is like saying one no longer needs the rule or
law because one has become mature and wise enough to discern what ought to be done. This is an ideal state which the
ancient Chinese sages (Confucius, Lao Tzu) referred to as state of no-more rules, no-more laws, because people discern
what is right or good and do what is right or good without thinking or a rule or law; people are no longer in need of a
government because they can govern themselves. It is a state where one owns the moral standard not just abide by the
moral standard.

Rules are not meant to restrict your freedom. They are meant to help you grow in freedom, to grow in your ability to
choose and do what is good for you and for others.

Any rule or law that prevents human persons from doing and being good ough to be repealed. They have no reason to
exist.

ABSTRACTION

Ethymology and Meaning of Ethics

The term "ethics" comes from the Greek word "ethos" meaning "custom" used in the works of Aristotle, while the term
"moral" is the Latin equivalent. Based on the Greek and Latin etymology of the word "ethics", ethics deals with morality.
When the Roman orator Cicero exclaimed, "O tempora o mores" (Cicero, 1856) (Oh, what time and what morals), he
may have been trying to express dismay of the morality of his time.
Ethics or moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy which deals with moral standards, inquires about the rightness or
wrongness of human behavior or the goodness or badness of personality, trait or character. It deals with ideas, with
topics such as moral standards or norms of morality, conscience, moral values and virtues. Ethics is a study of the
morality of human acts and moral agents, what makes an act obligatory and what makes a person accountable.

"Moral" is the adjective describing a human act as either ethically right or wrong, or qualifying a person, personality,
character, as either ethically good or bad.

Moral Standards or Moral Frameworks and Non-Moral Standards

Since ethics is a study of moral standards, then the first question for the course is, what are moral standards. The
following are supposed to be examples of moral standards: "Stealing is wrong." "Killing is wrong." "Telling lies is wrong."
"Adultery is wrong." "Environment preservation is the right thing to do". "Freedom with responsibility is the right way."
"Giving what is due to others is justice". Hence, moral standards are norms or prescriptions that serve as the frameworks
for determining what ought to be done or what is right or wrong action, what is good or bad character. In the Activity
phase of this Lesson the following can be classified as moral standards:

 Do not lie.
 Don't steal.
 Don't cheat others.
 Don't kill.

Moral standards are either consequences standards (like Stuart Mill's utilitarianism) or non-consequence standards (like
Aristole's virtue, St. Thomas' natural law, or Immanuel Kant' good will or sense of duty). The consequence standards
depend on results, outcome. An act that results in the general welfare, in the greatest good of the greatest number, is
moral. To take part in a project that results in the improvement of the majority of people is, therefore, moral. The non-
consequence standards are based on the natural law. Natural law is the law of God revealed through human reason. It is
the "law of God written in the hearts of men." To preserve human life is in accordance with the natural law, therefore it
is moral. Likewise, the non-consequence standard may also be based on good will or intention, and on a sense of duty.
Respect for humanity, treatment of the other as a human person, an act that is moral, springs from a sense of duty, a
sense of duty that you wish will apply to all human persons.

On the other hand, non-moral standards are social rules, demands of etiquette and good manners. They are guides of
action which should be followed as expected by society. Sometimes they may not be followed or some people may not
follow them. From time to time, changes are made regarding good manners or etiquette. In sociology, non-moral
standards or rules are called folkways. In short, non-moral actions are those where moral

categories cannot be applied. Examples of non-moral standards are rules of good manners and right conduct, etiquette,
rules of behavior set by parents, teachers, and standards of grammar or language, standards of art, standards of sports
set by other authorities. Examples are "do not eat with your mouth open;" "observe rules of grammar," and "do not
wear socks that don't match." In the Activity phase of this Lesson, the following are non-moral standards:

 No talking while your mouth is full.

 Wear black or white for mourning: never red.
 The males should be the one to propose marriage not
 Observe correct grammar when writing and speaking English.
 Submit school requirements on time.
 If you are a male, stay by the danger side (roadside) when walking with a female.
 Go with the fashion or you are not "in."
 When you speak pronounce words correctly.
 Focus the microscope properly.
 Maintain a good body figure.

non-moral standards are social rules, demands of etiquette and good manners. They are guides of action which should
be followed as expected by society.

An indicator whether or not a standard is moral or non-moral lies is it compliance as distinguished from its non-
compliance. Non-compliance with moral standards causes a sense of guilt, while non-compliance with a non-moral
standard may only cause shame or embarrassment.

Classification of the Theories of Moral Standards

Garner and Rosen (1967) classified the various moral standards formulated by moral philosophers as follows: 1)
Consequence (teleological, from tele which means end, result, or consequence) standard states that an act is right or
wrong depending on the consequences of the act, that is, the good that is produced in the world. Will it do you good if
you go to school? If the answer is right, because you learn how to read and write, then going to school is right. The
consequence standard can also be a basis for determining whether or not a rule is a right rule. So the consequence
standard states that the rightness or wrongness of a rule depends on the consequences or the good that is produced in
following the rule. For instance, if everyone follows the rule of a game, everyone will enjoy playing the game. This good
consequence proves the rule must be a correct rule. 2) Not-only-consequence standard (deontological), holds that the
rightness or wrongness of an action or rule depends on sense of duty. natural law, virtue and the demand of the
situation or circumstances. The rightness or wrongness of an action does not only depend or rely on the consequence of
that action or following that rule.

Natural law and virtue ethics are deontological moral standards because their basis for determining what is right or
wrong does not depend on consequences but on the natural law and virtue. Situation ethics, too, is deontological
because the rightness or wrongness of an act depends on situation and circumstances requiring or demanding exception
to rule.

Rosen and Garner are inclined to consider deontology, be it rule or act deontology, as the better moral standard because
it synthesizes of includes all the other theory of norms. Under this theory, the rightness of wrongness of an action
depends on (or is a function of) all the following: a) consequences of an action or rule, what promotes one's greatest
good, or the greatest good of the greatest number, b) consideration other than consequences, like the obligatoriness or
the act based on natural law. or its being one's duty, or its promoting an ideal virtue. Deontology also considers the
object, purpose, and circumstances or situation of the moral Consequence teleological from tele which means end result
or consequence) standard states that an act is right or wrong depending on the issue or dilemma. All these moral
standards or ethical frameworks will be dealt with n detail in Chapter IV of this book. more in d

consequences of the act, that is, the good that is produced in the world. Not-only- consequence standard (deontological)
holds that the rightness or wrongness of an action or rule depends on sense of duty natural lew, virtue and the demand
of the situation or circumstances

What Makes Standards Moral?

The question means what obliges us to follow a moral standard? For theists, believers in God's existence, moral
standards are commandments of God revealed to man through prophets. According to the Old Testament, the Ten
Commandments were revealed by God to Moses. One who believes in God vows to Him and obliges himselfherself to
follow His Ten Commandments. For theists, God is the ultimate source of what is moral revealed to human persons.

How about non-theists? For non-theists, God is not the source of morality. Moral standards are based on the wisdom of
sages like Confucius or philosophers like Immanuel Kant.

In China, B.C., Confucius taught the moral standard, "Do unto others what you like others to do unto you" and
persuaded people to follow this rule because it is the right way, the gentleman's way. Later, Immanuel Kant, the German
philosopher, formulated a criterion for determining what makes a moral standard moral. It is stated as follows: "Act only
according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." (1993) In other
words, if a maxim or standard cannot pass this test, it cannot be a moral standard. For instance, does the maxim
"Stealing is wrong" pass this test? Can one will that this maxim be a universal maxim? The answer is in the affirmative.
The opposite of the maxim would not be acceptable. Moral standards are standards that we want to be followed by all,
otherwise, one would be wishing one's own ill fortune. Can you wish "do not kill" to be a universal maxim? The answer
has to be yes because if you say "no" then you are not objecting to someone killing you. Thus, the universal necessity of
the maxim, what makes it a categorical imperative is what makes it obligatory. "Stealing is wrong" means "one ought not
steal" and "Do not kill" means "one ought not kill." It is one's obligation not to steal or kill. Ultimately, the obligation
arises from the need of self-preservation.

The Origin of Moral Standards: Theist and Non-Theist

Related to the question on what makes moral standards moral is how do moral standards arise or come into existence?
A lot of new attempts to explain the origins of morality or moral standards have been made.

The theistic line of thought states moral standards are of divine origin. while 20th century thinkers claim state that they
simply evolved. The issue is: Are moral standards derived from God, communicated to man through signs or revelation,
or did they arise in the course of man's evolution? With the Divine source concept, moral standards are derived from
natural law, man's "participation" in the Divine law. The moral principle, "Do good and avoid evil" is an expression of
natural law. Man's obliging himself to respect the life, liberty, and property of his fellowman arises from the God-given
sacredness, spirituality, and dignity of his fellow man it arises from his faith, hope, and love of God and man. With the
evolutionary concept, the basics of moral standards – do good, avoid evil have been observed among primates and must
have evolved as the process of evolution followed its course.

For theists, God is the ultimate source of what is moral revealed to human persons

For non-theists, God is not the source of morality Moral standards are based on the wisdom of sages like Confucius or
philosophers like Immanuel Kant
Are these theist and non-theist (evolutionary) origin of moralstandards reconcilable?

The evolutionist claims that altruism, a sense of morality, can be observed from man's fellow primates- the apes and
monkeys and, therefore, it can be said that the altruism of human persons evolved from the primates. However, the
evolutionist cannot satisfactorily argue, with factual evidence, that the rudiments of moral standards can be observed
from the primates. Neither can it be scientifically established that the theist view, that man's obliging himself to avoid
evil, refrain from inflicting harm on his fellowman, is a moral principle implanted by God in the hearts of men. But the
concept of creation and evolution are not necessarily contradictory. The revelation of the norms of Divine origin could
not have been instant, like a happening "in one fell swoop." It could have happened gradually as man evolved to differ
from the other primates. As the evolutionists claim creation may be conceived as a process of evolution. Hence, the
biblical story of creation could have happened in billions of years instead of six days.

Meaning of Moral Dilemma

A moral dilemma is a problem in the decision-making between two possible options, neither of which is absolutely
acceptable from an ethical perspective. It is also referred to as ethical dilemma. The Oxford Dictionary defines ethical
dilemma as a "decision-making problem between two possible moral imperatives, neither of which is unambiguously
acceptable or preferable. It is sometimes called an ethical paradox in moral philosophy."(Oxford Dictionary)

Based on these definitions, moral dilemmas have the following in common: 1) "the agent is required to do each of two
(or more) actions which are morally unacceptable; 2) the agent can do each of the actions; 3) but the agent cannot do
both (or all) of the actions. The agent thus seems condemned to moral failure; no matter what she does, she will do
something wrong (or fail to do something that she ought to do).

This means that moral dilemmas are situations where two or more moral values or duties make demands on the
decision-maker, who can only honor one of them, and thus will violate at least one important moral concern, no matter
what he or she decides to do. Moral dilemmas present situations where there is tension between moral values and
duties that are more or less on equal footing. The decision-maker has to choose between a wrong and another wrong.
The decision-maker is a deadlock.

In the case of The Pregnant Lady and the Dynamite, there were Maval demas atuations where between moral dudes
that are more or less on equal footing The decision a wrong and another wrong The decision two options- use the
dynamite and kill the pregnant woman but save the other 5 or don't use the dynamite and all the 5 will get drowned
except the pregnant woman whose head is out. To have a genuine dilemma, one of the conflicting solutions should not
override the other. For instance, "... the requirement to protect others from serious harm overrides the requirement to
repay one's debts by returning a borrowed item when its owner so demands." Hence,... "in addition to the features
mentioned above, in order to have a genuine moral dilemma it must also be true that neither of the conflicting
requirements is overridden" (McConnell, T. 2019). This means that none of the conflicting requirements is solved by the
other. The persons involved in the dilemma are in a deadlock. They find themselves in a "damn-if-you-do and damn-if-
you-don't" situation.

Another example of a moral dilemma is the story from the Bible about King Herod. On his birthday, his stepdaughter,
Salome danced so well in front of him and the guests at his party that he promised to give her anything she wanted.
Salome consulted her mother about what she should wish for, and decided to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a
platter. The king now had a choice between honoring the promise to his stepdaughter, or honoring the life of John the
Baptist. And Herod chose to have John the Baptist be headed. The king had inadvertently designed a moral trap for
himself, a dilemma where whatever he decided to do would be morally wrong.

Meaning of a False Dilemma

On the other hand, a false dilemma is a situation where the decision- maker has a moral duty to do one thing, but is
tempted or under pressure to do something else. A false dilemma is a choice between a right and a wrong. For example,
a lawyer or an accountant can face an opportunity to prioritize self-interest over the client's interest.

A false dilemma I s a situation where the decision- maker has a moral duty to do one thing. but is tempted or under
pressure to do something else.

What to Do When Faced with a Moral Dilemma

Ultimately, dilemmas are conflicts in the application of moral standards. The question is which moral standards must be
followed? In a state of emergency, necessity demands no moral law. You have to decide based on your best judgment or
choose based on the principle of lesser evil or greater good or urgency. There are 24 moral dilemmas listed by Pixi's
blog. Refer to 25 Moral Dilemmas, Pixi's Blog.

A. Individual
This refers to personal dilemmas. It is an individual's damn-if-you-do-and-damn-if-you-don't situation. The case of Heinz
as given in the Activity phase of the lesson is one of the best known individual dilemma's of Kohlberg's (1958). Kohlberg's
dilemma questions were as follows: "Should Heinz have stolen the drug." (Mackinnon, B., etal 2015) If he did not steal
the drug that would mean his wife's death. He was torn between stealing the drug and saving his wife. The dilemma is
faced by an individual who is torn between 2 obligations- to save the wife or obey the law. So this an example of an
individual dilemma.

Personal is an individual's damn-if-you- do-and-damn- -you-don't situation

B. Organizational

An organizational dilemma is a puzzle posed by the dual necessities of a social organization and members' self-interest.
It may exist between personal interests and organizational welfare or between group interests and organizational well-
being... (Wagner, J. 2019)

The example of the Catholic school in the Activity phase of the lesson shows the dilemma between the goal of the school
to give quality education for the poor and so must charge the lowest tuition fee possible and yet to keep quality faculty
the school must raise their salary and consequently, must raise tuition. Organizational dilemmas may likewise occur in
business, medical, and public sector.

The following hypothetical case highlights the story of Mr. Brown, a 74-year old man who is seriously ill of metastatic
lung cancer. Mr. Brown completed a full course of radiation therapy as well as chemotherapy for treatment of his
cancer, and he is now hospitalized with severe shortness of breath and pneumonia. His physician has managed the
symptoms associated with the lung disease, including chest pain, fever, infection, and respiratory distress, but believes
that there are no other options available to aggressively treat the underlying cancer.... Both Mr. Brown and his wife
clearly state that they 'want everything done."...

The dilemma here lies in the conflicting concerns: a) the financial problems of Mr. Brown and his wife, b) the hospital
concem of focusing its attention on this hopeless patient when there are other cases which have still possible remedies,
c) the other hospital patient's concern, particularly their need of the medicine used by Mr. Brown, c) the concern of the
medical staff, et al. Organizational dilemmas arise due to different opposing concerns between various groupings in an
organization.

C. Structural

Organizational dilemmas arise due to different opposing concerns between various groupings in an organization. The
case of the principal whether to be participatory or non- participatory in school affairs but due to her not so favorable
experience of attempting to be participatory ended up to one-woman rule is an example of a structural dilemma.

Below are more examples of structural dilemma.

Differentiation Versus Integration in Structural Dilemma

Different divisions have their own different culture and so coordination between divisions or bringing them
together for becomes more difficult.

With decentralization, local governments have become more empowered to direct their affairs just as schools
have become empowered to address their problems or are given opportunity to localize the given curriculum.

In effect, local governments and schools have likewise become more differentiated and so it becomes more
difficult to integrate them for a unified structure. Local governance and schools curricula have become more complex.
There is need for more costly coordination strategies.

Any attempt to introduce reform in society or government creates structural dilemma. For instance, promoting
or introducing universal health care, which is tantamount to socialized health care, gives rise to a structural dilemma,
that is, a conflict of perspective of sectors, groups and institutions that may be affected by the decision. Why would
those who contribute less to the social fund enjoy the same benefits as those who contributed big amounts of
premium? In a study on the prices of medicines in the Philippines, it was established that "patients are buying medicines
from the private sector at many times their international reference price" (Ateneo de Manila University 2019). If the
government intervenes by introducing price control, the drug stores may lose so much that they may close shop. If the
government does not do anything at all, the patients will continue to suffer because they may not be able to afford the
high prices of medicines.

Gap Versus Overlap

There may be gaps and overlaps in roles and responsibilities. If key responsibilities are not clearly assigned, there
may be gaps or overlaps in important tasks. If there are gaps, organizations end up with no one doing the responsibility.
If there are overlaps, things become unclear and may lead to more confusion and even conflict and worse wasted effort
and perhaps even resources because of the unintended overlap.

Here is an example. A patient in a teaching hospital called her husband to report how disturbed she is and how
sleepless she was during the night. At night, she couldn't sleep because hospital staff kept waking her up, often to repeat
what someone else had already done. This is an overlap of nurse duty. Conversely, when she wanted something, her call
button rarely produced any response. This is a gap. There is a gap as to who according to rule is supposed to respond to
the buzzer.

To illustrate further the consequence of gap and overlap, here is a story to show what happens when there is a
gap or overlap. A boy wanted his pants shorter. So he went to his mother to ask him to shorten it. His mother was busy
computing grades and told her son to ask his sister to do it. His sister was busy reviewing for the final exams and asked
her brother to ask their elder brother to do it. But his older brother was also busy with his school project and so could
not also attend to it. The boy highly frustrated went to sleep. His pants were

Ethics Applies Only to Human Persons

The song. My Way/Born This Way, implies choice or freedom "I did it my way". Unlike the lower forms of animals,
human persons have a choice or freedom, hence morality applies only to human persons. Ethics, therefore, applies only
to human persons. We cannot say a cat is "unethical" when it eats the food at table intended for you or when a dog
urinates on your favorite bag lying on the floor.

Dilemmas presuppose freedom. Freedom-loving societies have customary ways of training the young to exercise
their freedom. Parents regularly give their children opportunities to choose. "Guys, what do you want for breakfast -
ham and egg or pancake?" Later in life, they come face to face with hard choices. Then dilemmas come along. There is
such a thing as a dilemma because there is such a thing as freedom. If there is no ability or power of choice, then any
incident simply happens without any interference. There would also be no obligation to do any act in expectation of the
responsibility following the act.

Freedom and Moral Choice

Without freedom it is impossible to make a moral choice." If we are to have free will we must have the ability to
make a decision that is unhindered. Kant believed that we must have free will if we are to be held morally responsible
for our actions. If God did not give us free will then our decisions cannot be considered immoral or moral as we would
have had to act in the way we did. Thus we cannot be held responsible; a good moral action cannot be praised as you
had no other option, whilst an immoral action cannot be punished as once again there was no free choice. In other
words, making moral choice is a necessary consequence for being free, a consequence of being a human person.

Because a human person has freedom, beshe has a choice and so in responsible for the consequences of his/her
choice. The lower forms of animals have no choice since they are bound by instinct and so cannot be held responsible
for their behavior

to be Ethical: Own Net Merely Abide by Meral Standards Having free will or freedom to choose among
alteratives, which implies prior analysis and study, is coming to terms with what you finally affirm or deny. When you
arrive at a personal conviction and self- affirmation, you begin to own the moral standard. The moral standand begins to
be integrated, internalized. You follow the norm not became it is imposed by others, not because others say so or
authoritatively impose it on you. On the other hand, merely abiding by moral standards means applying them as basis to
resolve a moral problem without necessarily having interalized them. Merely abiding by them means once the enforcer
is not around, the moral standard is not followed.

Or if you do not own or internalize the standard, you will tend to use it for convenience, to evade responsibility,
to put the blame on the standard itself when things do not end well. You simply become legalistic, and adopt the
maxims, "follow the rule or law, even if the sky falls down", "the law says so"; the law is hard, but it is the law (dura lex
sed lex). You follow the lew because others, authorities, regulators say so; not because you say so. Owning moral
standards means internalizing them, making them part of your conviction. Internalized or embodied moral standards are
being followed with or without anyone telling you.

or without anyone telling you.

You internalize a rule after using reason to understand. When you are persuaded of its wisdom, it becomes your
basis of resolving an ethical problem. You decide to do something not because the law says so but because you yourself
say so.

This may be termed as the embodiment of the moral standard in you. The moral standard becomes one with the
moral agent. As the moral agent, this moral standard becomes your natural and immediate basis in your ethical decision
making.
 The presupposition is that you have come to own the moral standard after having been convinced of its wisdom,
having chosen it among other principles or standards. Any dilemma regarding the standard has been resolved. Under
the Chinese Taoist concept of harmony, this is where the thought, the word, and the action become one. This author
once visited a Taoist temple and had a chance to ask what a Taoist live by as a principle of life. He replied, "what I think
must be the same as what I say, and what I say must be the same as what I do." The result is oneness of thought, word
and action, and its effect is an integrated personality, personality made whole.

Making your mind, word, and action, a unity is not easy. You have in mind the maxim, "honesty is the best
policy." As a teacher you always tell that to students. But deep in your heart you know it has been difficult to be honest
all the time. There was the joke, of which no one knew the source, regarding the motto of the Philippine Military
Academy (PMA) "Integrity, Courage, Loyalty." This is a signage at the gate of PMA in Baguio City. At that time, some
military officials, alumni of PMA, were being investigated for corruption, the word "Integrity" disappeared.

The Human Person and Culture As a moral agent you are born into a culture, a factual reality you have not
chosen. You are not born nothing. It may be said that the Aristotelico-Thomistic tradition is one dominant, if not the
most dominant culture. This Aristotelico-Thomistic culture is a Greco-Roman culture, which has influenced and shaped
the moral life of those who have been exposed to it. Those who were born into this culture, educated under this culture,
are persuaded that there is God, that a divine order and law keep and govern the world, which includes you. But what
happens when there are different cultures with their own different views of man's direction and destiny? For instance,
the Greek culture introduced the idea of perfection. In terms of numbers, a perfect thing is 100%; in terms of figures, it
is a whole circle. A perfect thing has no privation, no lack, no absence of being. What if a new culture redefines
perfection as any created and present model, which may be recreated, remolded like clay? Any change in the model
may be perceived as the creation of a new model of perfection, not the actualization of what was lacking. Every created
model is a perfection in its own right.

Enculturation, Inculturation and Acculturation

Cultures change or evolve. There are various ways by which cultures change-by enculturation, inculturation and
by acculturation. Enculturation, an anthropological term, was coined by J.M. Herskovits

Margaret Mead has, however, was the one who defined the term as "the process of learning a culture in all its
uniqueness and particularity". ...Enculturation is a process of learning from infancy till death, the components of life in
one's culture. The contents of this learning include both the material and non-material culture. The latter refers to
values while the former refers to tools such as a hoe or mask. In the said process of learning. a person grows into a
culture, acquires competence in that culture and that culture takes root in that person and becomes the cognitive map,
the term of reference for acting.

For instance, African girls (South of the Sahara) grow up learning that as a woman she has less rights and
privileges as the African man. For instance, a man can marry more than one woman while she cannot. While the African
wife cannot share her love with other men, the man can share his with other women in the system. It turns women into
an appendage, a property of the man- one of the man's laborers. Umoren,

property of the husband and his family is levirate marriage. Levirate marriage is the marriage between the
widow and the brother of her deceased husband. Therefore at the husband's death the woman is generally expected to
stay on (as property of the family) without any choice in the matter. She raises children to immortalise the deceased
husband's name. Umoren, UE. 1992

This is enculturation in concrete terms. The African girl grows up and becomes a woman through the said
process of enculturation. This enculturation process has both cognitive and emotional elements. The girl child who later
becomes a woman learns and internalizes the idea that she, because she is a woman, has less privileges than the African
man. This learning takes place through example, direct teaching and in patterns of behavior. What is learned becomes
her Cognitive map

the intimate transformation of authentic cultural values through their integration in Christianity and the
insertion of Christianity in the various human cultures." This means that inculturation is characterized by a dual
movement, Le a dialogic movement towards cultures via the incarnation of the Gospel and the transmission of its values,
and a movement towards the Church that involves the incorporation of values that come from the cultures the latter
encounters. Therefore, a fruitful cross-fertilisation can follow (Umoren, U.E., 1992)

In other words, inculturation raises two related problems, that of the evangelisation of cultures (rooting the
Gospel in cultures) and that of the cultural understanding of the Gospel. It was this movement that led Pope John Paul II
to say in 1982, "The synthesis between culture and faith is not only a requirement of culture, but also of faith.... Faith
that does not become culture is not fully accepted, nor entirely reflected upon, or faithfully experienced"
 This means that inculturation is not an action but a process that unfolds over time, one that is active and based
on mutual recognition and dialogue, a critical mind and insight, faithfulness and conversion, transformation and growth,
renewal and innovation.