INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY

Philosophy- theoretical basis of a particular field of knowledge.

- By Pythagoras, Greek word “Philo”: Love - “ Sophia” : Wisdom
Wisest man: Socrates – teacher of Plato and Plato teacher of Aristotle
Aristotle- First Philosophy in Metaphysics
Philosophy- Universal question
Science- Particular question
3 ATTEMPTS TO DEFINE PHILOSOPHY
1. Scholastic – St. Thomas Aquinas
2. Translation – merely approximately something
3. Karl Jaspers- based on experience or phenomenological
Perennial question- no specific answer, the attempt to answer.
Bertrand Russel- wiser people full of doubt, knows nothing knows themselves

METAPHYSICS- “ META”- beyond “PHYSICS”- beings

- What is Real? What is the essence of things?
- Being, human freewill, existence, God

EPISTEMOLOGY- study of knowledge

Rationalism- knowledge is innate. Innate principles or ideas
Empiricism- all knowledge is derived from sense of experience, mother of scientific data

RATIONALISTS:
Rene Descartes - “ Father of Modern Philosophy”
Philosophy- “ Meditations on first Philosophy “
- COGITO ERGO SUM- I think therefore, I am.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz- The Monadology
Baruch Spinoza- The Ethics
Plato- First Rationalist
- TWO WORLDS: Form- Perfect Reality- souls of human being- (sea of forgetfulness)
Matter- where we exist
EMPIRICISTS
John Locke - human mind is like tabula rasa, blank slate
George Berkeley
David Hume
- LEARNING- recollection
Immanuel Kant- resolve between rationalists and empiricists
- Stalemate- book ( THE CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON )
- No such thing as pure innate knowledge/ideas
- No pure sensory experience
Knowledge – synthetic a priori knowledge
- By product of a priori and a posteriori
A priori principles- framework of the mind ( concept of space and time )
A posteriori- influx of your experience as registered by your senses
Phenomenon- totality of all synthetic a priori knowledge
Noumenon/noumena- world in itself- something that we cannot know

LOGIC- the science and art of correct thinking

- Greek word, “ LOGOS”- word
Science- principles and rules that leads you to identify fallacies and valid reasoning
Art- the application of reasoning in debates, analyzing text and articles
Aristotle- St. Thomas Aquinas- Natural Law
Plato- St. Augustine of Hippo- Logos is God
Philosophy- mother of all sciences, only study that investigates into the question of being
Metaphysics- language is logic
Logic- foundation of all sciences
Principle of contradiction- thing can be and cannot be at the same time
Martin Heidegger- “ LETTERS ON HUMANISM’’
ETHICS- How must a life be lived?
- Greek word, “ETHIKOS” – Habits, Moral Philosophy
- Tendency of becoming a virtue and vice, that becomes our character
Questions of morality- “ WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG? “
David Hume- “ Habits is stronger than reason “
Natural Law Theory - St. Thomas Aquinas- evil
Utilitarianism- Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill
- The Greater Good for the Greater number of People
Cultural Relativism- arise from cultures
Plato- founded the academy of Athens, The allegory of the cave
Oracle of Delphi
Glaucon- The ring of gyges
Protagoras- ( relativism)- man is the measure of all things
ETHICS AND MORALITY
Morality- pertains to an individual’s guidelines regarding right and wrong.
- Assessment of actions as good or bad, whether or not one is virtuous or vicious.
- Morality is too personal
- Sets of standards
Virtuous- virtue
Vicious- vice
Ethics- discipline that examines the moral standards of an individual or society. Exploration of
morality, justification of moral principles. Standard for living life with meaning and purpose.
- Rightness and wrongness, underlying principles
- Delves into the validity, rationality and justification of the moral principles embraced by
individuals or communities
Sense of Duty- humans have two way relationships
Sources- Religion, culture, upbringing, government or states- legislations
The voice of the people is the voice of God.- legislature, and law

NATURE OF MORAL STATEMENTS

Metaethics- explores topics beyond normative or applied ethics.
- Greek word, “META”- beyond
- Analytic ethics, looks into the nature, meaning, scope, and foundations of moral values
and discourses.
- It does not prescribes, makes evaluation about them, analyticethics
Unethical- undergo moral process, immoral
Not Ethical- not considered part of ethics, nothing to do with right and wrong
Descriptive Ethics- seeks to ascertain the current state of affairs, aiming to describe or explain
the world as it is rather than prescribing how it ought to be.
Normative Ethics- tackles the question of what actions should be considered right or wrong
- Prescribes the ethical standards we should uphold on how we conduct ourselves in the
world or relate with other people, the environment and the world.
- Ethics, by nature is normative.
- Prescribes concrete actions to perform in given circumstances
Aesthetics- investigating the concept of beauty.
- Greek word, “ AESTHESIS”- sense or feeling.
- Subjective assessments of approval or disapproval we form with our perception of sight,
sound, smell, and taste.
- Technique, “techne’’
Moral Statements is Normative statements. Since it conveys value judgments.
- Statement about moral asssertions or claims that can undergo the process of ethical
evaluation using the different theories of ethics, such as consequentialism, utilitarianism,
deontology, and virtue ethics.
Three aspects of an action: consequences, the rule that it follows or violates, and the
character of the person performing it.

Normative Moral statement Basis of Assessment

It is wrong to steal other peoples, belonging. Ethical standards
it is unacceptable to perform euthanasia. Virtual Ethics, Deontology, Consequentialism
It is unjustifiable to do an abortion. Utilitarianism
Normative Non-moral Statement Basis of Assessment
Today is good weather to go swimming. Aesthetic Standard
Low kick is the most incredible martial art. Technical/technique standard
It is illegal to disobey traffic signs. Legal standard
A sentence should express a complete Grammatical standard
thought.
Factual Statement Basis of Assessment
Covid 19 vaccination is effective. Scientific research
There is dengue outbreak. Observation
Pesticides are effective in combating pests. Scientific Experiment

FOUR CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL STANDARD

- Moral standards pertain to issues that we believe can significantly impact the well-being
of individuals.
- Ethical standards possess universal applicability.
- Moral standards are commonly regarded as having a paramount significance, meaning
they hold greater weight than other values.
- Ethical standards are not established solely through the dictates of authorative entities,
nor are they determined purely by consensus or tradition.

MORAL DILEMMA- two or more moral values or duties, hard to choose

Non-moral Dilemma- has nothing to do with ethics
Real Dilemmas- the decision-maker has to choose between two wrong options of moral values
or moral duties.
- wrong because it will end up violating one of the moral concern.
Fake Dilemmas- has to choose between right and wrong, but he or she chooses the wrong
option out of pressure or temptation.
- Prioritizes self-interest over the interest of others.
- Should be called right-versus-wrong issue called moral temptations
Dilemmas- Greek words, “ DI”- two, ‘’LEMMA’’- fundamental proposition, basic assumption
taken for granted.
- Lemma against another lemma
- Options, moral duties or duties in conflict.
Sinnott Armstrong- ethical dilemmas as ‘’unresolvable conflicts between strong moral
requirements’’.
MacIntyre (2006)- significant moral requirements .
Moral agents- has to assess the options available even though they are equally undesirable or
unsa.tisfactory.
Two Systems in Decision- Making Process
First approach- distinction between ethics and morals
Second approach- process of learning.
Keith Stanovich and Richard West- describe the decision-making process. There are two
systems in mind.
System one- corresponds to morality, based on moral intuitions and feelings, quick thinking and
perhaps out of what the heart dictates.
System two- corresponds to ethics, based on ethical analysis, slow decision makes one
passive.
Self-Inflicted Dilemmas- personal mistakes, double booking- make incompatible promises to
two individuals
Moral Temptations- distinction between true and false dilemmas is described as the distinction
between dilemmas and temptations.
False dilemma or conflict of interest- choosing between two undesirable options

THE FOUR ETHICAL DILEMMA PARADIGMS

Rushworth M. Kidder (1995)- HOW GOOD PEOPLE MAKE TOUGH CHOICES
- Identify four ethical dilemmas paradigms at the heart of many ethical conflicts.
- Paradigms clarify that there are clashes of core values

1. TRUTH VS. LOYALTY- contrast between sticking to what is true, and keeping
allegiance with someone like friends, etc.
2. INDIVIDUAL VS. COMMUNITY- contrast between the interest of one person or a small
group and the interest of the larger group.
3. SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM- now vs. needs, immediate needs of the present and
the mediated needs of the future.
4. JUSTICE VS. VIRTUE- following the books and somehow bending the rules. Justice vs.
compassion, and empathy

MORAL PERSONHOOD- moral persons, rights and duties

Moal agents- only human beings can be moral agents
Moral Person- minimum requirement is to bear rights. Basis for both legal and moral rights.
- Rights, are inherent entitlements or privileges that pertain to the interests one is
permitted to pursue.
Rights and duties
Duties- are the actions that we are obligated to fulfill or perform.
Rights- are commands, laws and imperatives similar to the duties articulated in the Torah,
Bible, and Qur an.

First Classification of Rights: RIGHTS IMPOSE DUTIES

- Or Duties implies rights. One’s possession of a right imposes an obligation on another
person.
Second Classification: ACQUISITION OF RIGHTS
- Three ways to acquire rights.
1. Individuals or institutions obtain contractual rights when entering an agreement or
contract.
- Contractual rights- can be categorized as formal when explicitly stated in a written
document or informal when they only imply rather than expressly defined.
2. Legal rights. LAW OF THE COUNTRY OR HOMELAND, ‘’Lex Patria’’
 - Legal principles, statues, or regulations that govern a specific nation or jurisdiction.
3. Moral rights- acquiring this is contingent upon possessing the fundamental qualities of
moral personhood are sentience and rationality.
- Sentience- ability to experience pleasure or pain.
- Rationality- ability to understand and make free choices.
- Human rights- moral rights of every individual.
- It holds a higher position than legal and contractual rights.
- All legals should be moral, not all legal are moral
Moral agents and Patients
Moral Agents- posses both the defining features of moral personhood: sentience and
rationality. They can perform actions that are morally evaluable.
Moral Patients- persons with mental disability.
- Recipients and are target of morality.
- Includes non-human beings; applied ethics, bioethics, environmental ethics
 MODULE 5: MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY

Moral Accountability
- By product of moral personhood’s defining feature, the faculty of reason
- Equates to the term responsibility only when it means duty or obligation towards other
people.
Accountability
- Arises from our rationality, which encompasses our intelligence and freedom. It entails
taking responsibility for our actions. Our reason helps us discern right from wrong
actions, while our free will empowers us to select our actions.
Two dimensions of moral accountability- falls under the moral agent, the source of morally
evaluable actions.
1. Moral agents’ deservingness of praise
2. Deservingness of blame

Responsibility
- Could refer to entities, humans, and non-humans alike.
Agent
- A human person who is the cause of something or an event
Cause
- Inanimate object or non-human factor is involved
Prospective Responsibility
- Responsibility directed toward what will or may happen.
Retrospective Responsibility
- Directed toward what already happened.
Legal Accountability
- Relies on legal measures such as laws or statutes
- May not always align with moral accountability, as laws can be morally flawed, do not
embody ethical principles.
- Sanctions typically involve external physical punishments, such as imprisonment or the
deprivation of freedom.
Moral Accountability
- Basis its evaluation using moral or ethical principles.
- Moral sanctions encompass internal mental suffering like guilt, remorse, and low self-
esteem.
Conditions for Moral Accountability: Incriminating and Excusing Conditions
Incriminating Conditions
- Establish moral accountability for the action in question
Three Incriminating Conditions
1. Agency condition- stipulates that a person is only accountable for actins in which they
are the cause.
2. Knowledge condition- pertains to the state in which an individual possesses
knowledge or the capacity to understand their actions ethical nature whether morally
right or wrong.
3. Intentionality condition- situation where an individual consciously intends or freely
chooses to engage in particular action.
Excusing Conditions
- Absolve one from moral accountability.
- Absence of the three incriminating conditions mentioned.
- These conditions are non-agency, ignorance, and involuntariness.
Blameless Ignorance- situations where the individua cannot be held accountable for their lack
of knowledge. It serves as an exemption or justification.
Blameful or blameworthy Ignorance- when an individual could have known better but failed to
do so. It stems from negligence in fulfilling one’s duty to acquire relevant knowledge. It does not
serve as an excuse.

The Degree Conditions

Mitigating Factors
- Tend to lessen the degree of moral accountability
Aggravating Factors
- Tend to increase it.
DEGREE OF KNOWLEDGE
- Greater knowledge corresponds to increasing moral accountability, while lesser
knowledge corresponds to decreasing moral accountability.
DEGREE OF PRESSURE
- Difficulty in life that compels one to engage in wrongdoing.
DEGREE OF INTENSITY
- The greater the intensity of harm inflicted, the higher the moral accountability, the lesser
the lower.
EXTENT OF INVOLVEMENT
- Participation in a collective act of moral wrongdoing.

MODULE 6: THE ISSUE OF RELATIVISM

Ethical Relativism
- Claims that the validity of moral principles is contingent upon the specific person or
society in question.
- Proclaims the non- existence of valid moral principles.
- Redentor A. de la Rosa’s book Introduction to Moral Philosophy: An Anthropology-based
Ethics
Ethical Skepticism
- Denies the existence of valid moral principles and altogether asserts our inability to know
them.
Ethical Objectivism
- Maintains the presence of universal moral principles that apply to all individuals.
Two Versions of Ethical Relativism
Ethical Conventionalism
- Equates to the moral standards of the society or culture
- Moral standards hinge on the society or culture. It acknowledges the social dimension of
morality.
- Rejects the notion of universal moral principles but asserts the validity of ethical
principles based on their acceptance within a particular culture.
 - Frees itself from the assault from moral or ethical skepticism and inclines itself to support
ethical objectivism
Ethical Subjectivism
- Speaks of the individuals commitment to what is right and wrong.
- Posits a basis for moral judgment dependent on the person’s standards without any
objective standard external to the individual.
- It falls prey to the ethical skepticism.

Three Arguments For and Against Ethical Relativism

1. The Diversity Argument- asserts that factual evidence or empirical observation
demonstrates the variation of moral beliefs and rules across different cultures.
2. The Dependency Argument- rooted in the perspective that moral beliefs possess truth
or validity only specific groups.
3. The Toleration Argument- suggests that relativism may provide a suitable approach to
morality.
Three Famous Counterarguments
1. Illogical flow of reasoning- the truth of the premise does not imply the conclusion is
true and correct.
2. Accepting the theory of Ethical relativism- entails negative implications.
3. Existence of Universal moral standards- despite cultural variations in beliefs and
practices.

MODULE 7: KOHLBERG’S THEORY OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987)- focuses his theory on the person’s moral development. He
develop the stages of moral thinking that go beyond the formulation of moral autonomy of Jean
Piaget. Piaget has two stage theory, while Kohlberg has six stages in three different levels.

THE SIX STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Level I. PRECONVENTIONAL MORALITY
- Children around four to ten do not see themselves yet as members of society. Morality is
something external to them.
Stage One: Obedience and Punishment Orientation
- Children believe that powerful authorities are fixing any rules, and the latter handed them
down. “ Do what you are told”
Stage Two: Individualism and Exchange
- Children have a realistic attitude, recognizing that different individuals have different
viewpoints. Manifest of being amoral or appear to be not concerned about morality.
Level II. CONVENTIONAL MORALITY
- Children generally can think and speak of themselves as community members. In stage
three, their moral opinions would be shared by the moral community. And in stage four,
children think of themselves as full-pledged members of society.
Stage Three: Good Interpersonal Relationships
- Children are entering their teens. Perception of morality is becoming more expansive
because they begin to expect people to live up to society’s expectations.
Stage Four: Maintaining the Social Order
- Reasoning of children are broadly concerned with society as a whole, just as their
physical and social environment gets large. Obedience to the law, respect for authority.
Level III. POSTCONVENTIONAL MORALITY
 - The pinnacle of moral reasoning occurs. “ reciprocity involves the balancing of the rights
and responsibilities of all concerned parties and arises from an attitude of mutual respect
and commitment to universal principles.
Stage Five: Social Contracts and Individual Rights
- Respondents start asking what makes a society good. They understand that rules can
be changed or ignored in some situations.
Stage Six: Universal Principles
- Kohlberg distinguishes stage six and stage five. Respondents base their judgments on
fundamental and universal principles such as justice, reciprocity, and respect.
Veil of Ignorance- of rawls in reaching a desired decision in an impartial manner that each
character would act without any role.

MODULE 8: ETHICAL SUBJECTIVISM AND EMOTIVISM