THE MORAL AGENT

What does "culture" mean? There are several definitions of "culture". The father of
sociology, Emile Durkheim asserted that culture has the power over individuals to create
beliefs, such as belief in God. Durkheim added that with more people holding the same
beliefs, social order is also strengthened (Little and McGivern, 2016). Meanwhile, the father
of cultural anthropology, Edward Tylor stated that in general, culture is the way of life of a
group of people that "includes their knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, customs, and any
other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society" (Tylor, 1974, 1981).

What is Culture?

Culture is a complex phenomenon. It contains nearly all aspects of shared human

experiences. How does culture affect human behavior? Since human beings are naturally
social creatures, we as people, are also naturally drawn to participate in culture. People
want to belong, to be accepted by peers. We also need protection from danger. Being part
of a social group not only feeds our need to be accepted, it also increases the human being's
chances to survive. Thus, because of the safety in numbers that being part of a group
provides, human beings learned to modify behaviors to match that which their cultural
group deem acceptable.

However, not all is well with culture's power and control over people. Plato worried about
the idols and ideologies of his day, and especially about the power of the public to corrupt a
young person's mind.

In a memorable passage in The Republic, Plato warned:

"Whenever the populace crowds together at any public gathering, in the Assembly, the law-
courts, the theater, or the camp, and sits there clamoring its approval and disapproval, both
alike excessive, of whatever is being said or done; booing and clapping till the rocks ring and
the whole palace redoubles the noise of their applause and outcries. In such a scene, what
do you suppose will be a young man's state of mind? What sort of private instruction will
have given him the strength to hold out against the force of such a torrent, or will save him
from being swept away down the stream, until he accepts all their notions of right and
wrong, does as they do, and comes to be just such a man as they are. And I have said
nothing of the most powerful engines of persuasion which the masters in this school of
wisdom bring to bear when words have no effect. As you know, they punish the recalcitrant
with disenfranchisement, fines, and death."

(Plato's Republic, trans. by F. M.Cornford, 1966)

This power and control on people also did not sit well with German philosopher and father
of Communism Karl Marx. According to Marx, culture served to justify inequality because
the ruling class determines what is right and wrong while the rest merely follow.
Elements of Culture

The five basic elements of culture are: symbols, language, beliefs, values, and norms.

Symbols

Symbols can be anything that a group of people find meaningful. For example, in religious
groups, the cross is a symbol for Christianity while the crescent is for Islam.

Language

Language is a complex symbol system that enabled human beings to communicate either
verbally or through writing. Ilocano, Bisaya, Tagalog, and several other native languages
were already spoken in pre-colonial Philippines Their ancient script or writing called
baybayin had characters, and each character represented a complete syllable (Lewis, 2015).

Beliefs

Beliefs are assumptions or convictions held to be true by an individual or a group of people.

These assumptions/convictions could be about events, people, or things. For example,
ancient civilizations attributed events to spirits and gods. This is what we now call as
"superstitious beliefs. However, when people started to think critically and scientific
research flourished, events are now explained differently. This also shows that beliefs
change through time.

Values

Values are culturally acceptable standards of behavior. It is what a person considers

important or beneficial in life. For example, in pre-colonial Philippines there were evidences
that women were equally valued and held central roles in society just as did the men (Perez,
2013). This was in stark contrast to the Spanish colonizers however, who valued women
mainly as domestic caretakers.

Norm

Norm is an informal guideline by a particular group of people or social unit about what is
considered normal or correct/incorrect social behavior. For instance, the Filipino norm in
relating to other people is to get along well with others, even with complete strangers. This
Filipino trait is called pakikisama.

How does culture define Moral Behavior?

One of the revered founders of Western philosophy Plato in his famous philosophical work,
The Republic cited three critical elements that jointly influence the human person's moral
development. These elements are native traits (or what we might call genetic
characteristics); early childhood experience; and one's cultural surroundings (Pekarsky,
1998).
Plato implied that if a person's cultural surroundings reward conformity to agreeable norms
it would lead the person to behave much better and quell undesirable conduct. He also
expressed that the power of culture over an individual is more potent in children because
they do not have any pre-existing values. The child's cultural surroundings create these
values and dispositions. Thus, Plato insisted that a child's cultural surrounding should
"express the image of a noble character"; that role models should display the conduct of a
proper human being because the behavior of the adults serves as the child's moral
foundation as he or she grows and develops (Cornford, 1966; Pekarsky, 1998).

Why can't all cultural practices be always correct?

The world is wide and huge. Part of what makes the world interesting is that it is home to
different groups of people who have developed their own unique outlook on how to survive
and thrive. These differences led people to view life differently and live completely different
lifestyles. German-American anthropologist Franz Boaz first articulated this in 1887,
"...civilization is not something absolute, but... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions
are true only so far as our civilization goes." However, the first to use the term "cultural
relativism" was philosopher and social theorist Alain Locke in 1924. Cultural relativism
explains why one behavior or practice is completely acceptable by a particular group of
people, while it is taboo in another. It refers to the idea that values, knowledge, and
behavior of people must be understood within its own cultural context, and not by the
standards of other cultures. Hence, all moral and ethical standards (or the judgment of what
is right or wrong) is valid and there is not "one" standard that is "better" among all others.

Philosopher and university professor Dr. James Rachels (1941-2003), in his book The
Elements of Moral Philosophy, laid out five claims of cultural relativists as to why right or
wrong is only a matter of cultural standards. These claims are:

1. Different societies have different moral codes.

2. The moral code of a society determines what is right or wrong. There is no objective
standard considered better than others.

3. There are no universal moral truths.

4. The moral code of a particular society has no special status. It is but one among many.

5. It is arrogant for one culture to judge another culture. There should be tolerance among
cultures.

The Advantages and Dangers of Cultural Relativism

Rachels identified two positive lessons we can learn from cultural relativism.

1. It warns us from assuming that our preferences are the absolute rational standard.

2. It teaches us to keep an open mind and to be more amenable in discovering the truth.
Many of our practices are relevant only to our particular community. This implies our moral
views are a reflection of our society's prejudices. Cultural relativism makes us understand
that what we think as truth may actually be just the result of cultural conditioning.

On the other hand, the dangers of cultural relativism are:

1. We cannot call out societal practices that promote harm.

If cultural relativism is true, then we should not condemn what Hitler and the Nazis did
against the Jews, Apartheid in South Africa, or any form of maltreatment, damage, injury, or
destruction that one community inflicts upon anyone or anything.

2. We cannot justifiably criticize our own culture's harmful practices.

This implies that to decide whether your action is right or wrong all you need to do is check
whether your action is in accordance with the standards of YOUR society. If your actions are
in line with your culture, then you have done nothing wrong even though your actions were
harmful. After all, if it is true that you cannot criticize other cultures, then all the more can
you not criticize your own culture since people in your group accept it as a way of life. For
example, if cultural relativism is to be followed then 2016 Metro Manila Film Fest officials
did not have the right to take back the Fernando Poe Jr. Memorial Award granted to the film
'Oro' where a dog was really slaughtered in the movie because dogs as "pulutan" is part of
an issue.

3. The idea of social progress becomes doubtful.

Progress means replacing something old with something better. However, if cultural
relativism is to be followed, by what standards do we say that a society has become better?
The idea of social reform is now eradicated because we are prohibited from judging one
society as better over others. For example, Spanish colonial era was in effect a different
society than modern Philippines. Hence, we cannot say that Filipinos have made social
progress from being slaves to conquistadores into a freedom-loving society because slavery
during the Spanish colonial era was the norm; and it was a different time compared to
modern Philippines.

Peace Education

Peace as defined in relation to culture according to UNESCO is a set of beliefs, values,

attitudes, traditions and modes of behavior and ways of life based on:

1. Respect for life

2. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms

3. Rejection of all forms of violence

4. Adherence to the principles of justice, democracy, tolerance, solidarity, cooperation,
diversity, dialogue and understanding in all levels of society

The three phases to accomplish peace:

1. Cognitive phase which is understanding and being aware to the happenings in the society.

2. Affective phase which is being concerned and responsible learning to value peace since
rational beings are species of social interaction.

3. Active phase which is taking practical action in which a course that will lead us to what is
good for the benefit of the majority.

To quote a peace education literature in line with the Global Campaign for Peace Education,
"peace education seeks the abolition of war as an institution. Considering the death
destruction and suffering that result from war, the abolition of war gains practical relevance"
(Navarro-Castro & Nario- Galace, 2010).

Two types of peace:

1. Negative peace-Absence of direct/physical violence (both macro and micro) Direct

Violence-War, Torture, child and woman abuse

2. Positive peace-Presence of conditions of well-being and just relationships:

a. Economic, political, and ecological

b. Structural Violence - Poverty, hunger

c. Socio-cultural Violence - Racism, sexism, religious intolerance

d. Ecological Violence - Pollution, overconsumption

Six Dimensions and Operative Values

by: Archbishop Antonio Ledesma

1. Personal & Family (Spiritual) Values formation starts in the family. These are taught to
children by the parents. Family is the basic unit of the Society. Every individual learns to
understand the concept of peaceful and non-violent by the Ideal Character traits shown by
the parents.

2. Human Rights & Democracy (Justice) indicates that political respect is the key towards
human viability and sustainability in achieving peace and mitigating conflict in the complex
and dynamic society
3. Poverty Eradication (Compassion) - Poverty might be inevitable, however with the help of
lowering the poverty borderline, peace can somehow be attainable. This could be subjective
in sense that not all of us share the same perspective. But in order to achieve attainable
peace, Poverty Eradication might be the key for consideration.

4. Intercultural Understanding & Solidarity (Dialogue) What is right for yo might be wrong
for me, what is wrong for me might be right for you" Dialogue is the of the important factors
towards attainable peace. It serves as the foundation for consideration towards respect.
Moreover, the way we expres ourselves and the way we communicate is also as important
as Dialogue.

5. Disarmament & Cessation of Hostilities (Active/non-violence). In promoti the culture of

peace, we must share the same idea of cease fire towards active non-violence. The absence
of war is the absence of conflict, the absence of conflict, is the presence towards a culture of
peace.

6. Environmental Protection (Stewardship) The concepts of stewardship must be universal

to all regardless of the status, influence, and power. This connotes taking care of the
environment and nature, economics, health to mitigate conflict and eventually a culture of
peace may follow.

Peace education is broadly defined as education that seeks the transformation of people's
mindsets, attitudes and behaviors toward peace, justice and environmental care. In a
peacebuilding framework developed for the Philippines, peace-constituency building is
indicated as an important element. The latter includes education aimed at promoting a
peace culture and agenda. Philippines' E.O. 570 (Sept. 2006)。 "Institutionalizing Peace
Education in Basic Education and Teacher Education"

Peace education is important. It is an ethical imperative since it upholds core ethical

principles such as value of life, love and human dignity. It is a practical alternative. We need
to build a critical mass of people who will reject war (and the death and destruction in
breeds) and will claim their right to true human dignity.

Adapted from 1st gen CHED GEC Training in Ethics, 2016

ᴜɴɪᴠᴇʀsᴀʟ ᴠᴀʟᴜᴇs
Why there are Universal Values

The dangers that cultural relativism present led thinkers such as ethics expert Dr.James
Rachels to reject cultural relativism because it is implausible. The empirical basis of cultural
relativism is that cultures are dramatically different in its views of what is right or wrong.
However, when it comes to important moral issues, three are three are three values that are
universal (Rachels, 2004).
The three universal values shared by all cultures are:

1. Caring for the young

2. Murder is wrong

3. Tell the truth

The theoretical point here is that "there are some moral rules that all societies will have in
common, because those rules are necessary for society to survive" (Rachels, 2004). Imagine
if human beings do not care for their young. Homo sapiens will eventually be an extinct
species. In the same manner, we will eventually be wiped out too if people were free to kill
other people. Moreover, what kind of society will it be if the presumption of everyone's
statement is that it is a lie? What reason do you have to pay attention to anyone? If lying is
our way of life, how can you believe what your teacher is teaching? What is the use of
having a teacher in the first place? What is the use of talking to each other at all?

Qualities of the Filipino Moral Identity

The Filipino culture is a mix of both Eastern and Western cultures. The beliefs and traditions
of pre-colonial Philippines was mainly indigenous Malay heritage (Baringer, 2006). Then the
Spanish colonized the islands and the Hispanic culture influenced the natives. In turn, the
Americans shaped the modern Filipino culture and this is primarily manifested by the wide
use of the English language in the Philippines today. It was from these influences that
formed the Filipino character. The brief occupation of the British (1762-1764) and the
Japanese (1942-1945) however had no cultural influence in the Philippines at all.

Psychologist, educator, and former Chairperson of the Commission on Higher Education Dr.
Patricia B. Licuanan wrote that the strengths and weaknesses of the Filipino character are
rooted in factors such as:

1. The home environment

2. The social environment

3. Culture and language

4. History

5. The educational system

6. Religion

7. The economic environment

8. The political environment

9. Mass media, and

10. Leadership and role models

Licuanan said that in the home environment, Filipino children are taught to value family and
give it primary importance. The Filipino social environment is characterized by depending on
one another to survive. This dependence on relationships and the struggle for survival make
Filipinos group oriented (1994).

Meanwhile, Filipino culture and language depict openness to foreign elements with no basic
consciousness of our cultural core (Licuanan, 1994). The Filipino colonial mentality such as
the importance of the English language in our educational system, the wider following of
Hollywood movies, foreign soap operas/TV shows, and foreign songs/singers over Filipino
movies, shows, and music is a manifestation of our attachment to foreign elements.

Licaunan added that our colonial history is regarded as the culprit behind our colonial
mentality. Unfortunately, most Filipino elite are of no help in setting an example of
overcoming colonial mentality because they are even more westernized in their
ways.Present day media on the other hand reinforced these colonial influences (1994).

The Philippine educational system is also instrumental in molding the strengths and
weaknesses of the Filipino character. Schools are highly authoritarian. Early on, children
learn that well-behaved and obedient students are praised and rewarded. This teaches
passivity and conformity. The Filipino is also religious. Religion taught us optimism and
resilience. However, it also instilled in us a fatalistic attitude. Since religious communities are
also highly authoritarian, this further reinforced our being passive and a conformist
(Licuanan, 1994).

Several Filipino traits are rooted in our economic environment. The hard life drove Filipinos
to work hard and take risks, such as leaving our families to work abroad. This further
developed our ability to survive. Unfortunately, our political environment and government
structures and systems are fraught with problems. For instance, the fact that political power
is mainly in the hands of the elite and the absence of a strong government presence
enhanced the Filipino's already extreme family centeredness (Licuanan, 1994). The
economic and political environments are among the elements that developed the culture of
corruption in the Philippines.

Meanwhile, how did mass media reinforce our colonial mentality? What did you notice with
the ads, the music, movies, fashion, etc. shown on TV, aired over the radio, printed in the
newspapers/magazines, or went viral online? These were greatly based on American pop
culture. The emphasis on the superiority of an imported brand or product through mass
media is, in fact, part of a Filipino's daily life.

Filipinos highly respect authority, we lean on our leaders and role models. Any person with
authority is looked up to. Thus, when our leaders violate the law and when there is lack of
accountability for leaders who break the law, the Filipino mindset is hugely affected in a
negative way (Licuanan, 1994).

Strengths of the Filipino Character

The Filipino traits listed here is certainly not exhaustive, but these are what we have in
common the most. The strong aspects of the Filipino character are:

1. Pakikipagkapwa-Tao

2. Family Orientation

3. Joy and Humor

4. Flexibility, Adaptability, and Creativity

5. Hard work and Industry

6. Faith and Religiosity

7. Ability to Survive

Pakikipagkapwa-tao is demonstrated in the Filipino's openness, helpfulness, and

generosity; in the practice of bayanihan or mutual assistance, and the famous Filipino
hospitality (Licuanan, 1994; Guevara & Gripaldo [Ed.] 2005). Filipinos also possess a genuine
love for family. This love is not just for one's spouse and children but also to parents,
grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins (even very distant ones), and even to ceremonial
relatives. This love is shown through giving honor and respect to parents and elders, care for
the children, generosity towards kin, and the personal sacrifices that a Filipino endures for
the welfare of the family (Manauat & Gripaldo [Ed.], 2005). This strong family orientation
gave Filipinos a sense of belonging and security.

Filipinos are also cheerful and fun loving. Our various fiestas and social gatherings
demonstrate the Filipino joy and humor. We can laugh at those we love and hate, and can
make jokes about our good or bad fortune. Even in the most trying times, Filipinos will
always find a reason to smile or laugh. This pleasant disposition contributed to our ability to
overcome life's challenges. Filipinos are also tremendous in adjusting and

adapting to any circumstances. We can improvise and make use of whatever is at hand to
create and produce. Our flexibility, adaptability, and creativity are reasons why many
Filipinos thrive in various parts of the world (Licuanan, 1994).

Filipinos also value hard work and industry. This trait is most noticeable in our willingness
to take risks and work in other countries. Filipinos also value faith and religiosity. This can be
related to our bahala na mindset. There is actually a positive side to this fatalistic trait. For
Filipinos the bahala na attitude could serve as a "kickstarter"

or a "pampalakas loob" to move him or her into action (Gripaldo, 2005).

All these positive Filipino traits mentioned contribute to our ability to survive. The salawikain
or proverb "matutong mamaluktot habang maikli ang kumot" aptly depicts our survival
instinct. We can endure, make do, and get by on so little while looking forward to the
coming of better days. This trait is the reason why Filipinos continue to carry on even
through our harsh economic and social circumstances (Tianco & Gripaldo (Ed.], 2005;
Licuanan, 1994).

Weaknesses of the Filipino Character

Aside from identifying the roots and strengths of the Filipino character, Dr. Patricia B.
Licuanan also pointed out our weaknesses. This is important because this enables the
Filipino to identify the areas that need improvement in order to grow and develop as a
person. An informed and improved Filipino will also result in a stronger and more
progressive nation.

Generally, these weaknesses are:

1. Extreme Personalism

2. Extreme Family-Centeredness

3. Lack of Discipline

4. Passivity and Lack of Initiative

5. Colonial Mentality

6. Kanya-Kanya Syndrome

7. Lack of Self-Analysis and Self-Reflection

Licuanan noted that Filipinos function in the world by personally relating to things, events,
and people. We find it difficult to separate objective tasks and emotional involvement. This
is where the palakasan system spring from. Filipinos want to get special treatment and will
always look for "inside connections" in most (if not all) of his or her transactions. For
example, family and friends are given preference in hiring, in the delivery of services; and
even in voting (Licuanan, 1994). Since personal contacts are involved, requests of this nature
also become difficult to turn down. Extreme personalism is another element that led to the
prevalence of graft and corruption in the country.

The family may be a source of strength for Filipinos, but extreme family-centeredness is also
his/her flaw. Family is valued above anything and everyone else. Thus, concern for the rest
of the community and for the common good is less important. Extreme family-centeredness
is manifested in our political system where political dynasties lord over our elected
government posts starting from the barangay level all the way up to the national positions
(McCoy, 1994; Licuanan, 1994).

The Filipino's lack of discipline is characterized by our idiomatic expression "ningas cogon"
Projects start out with full enthusiasm and interest, but no sooner was it started that the
enthusiasm and interest just as soon died down (Licuanan, 1994). Another related
characteristic is "Filipino time". Filipinos are known to be always late - we arrive late or we
start late. Since global trends strictly follow schedules, this trait that disregard the
importance of time is adversely affecting Filipino productivity (Tan, 2016).
Filipinos have very high respect for authority. Unfortunately, this also led to general
passivity and lacking initiative. For instance, there is strong reliance on leaders and
government to solve the nation's problems but ordinarily Filipinos also do not feel the need
to initiate or contribute to the solution. This trait is also related to our lack of discipline. Look
at our traffic problem. We expect the government to solve the monstrous traffic jam; yet,
traffic rules and regulations are also blatantly ignored every day.

Generally, Filipinos love anything foreign. Foreign elements are adapted and incorporated
into our image. In the process, we are also losing our cultural identity. Licuanan noted that
this colonial mentality is connected to our general feelings of inferiority, where we think
foreigners - especially Westerners, are superior (1994).

The kanya-kanya syndrome is related to the Filipino traits of extreme personalism and
extreme family-centeredness. Personal and in-group interests are supreme and the drive to
fulfill these interests is completely insensitive to the common good. The kanya- kanya
syndrome dampened our sense of community and cooperation and we trample on each
other's rights as a result. The expression crab mentality, where we tend to pull others down
to climb up, exemplify the kanya-kanya syndrome.

Dr. Licuanan further observed that the joyful and fun-loving Filipino also has the tendency to
be superficial and somewhat flighty. This means that in times of crisis, either personal or
social, there is a general lack of analysis and reflection (1994). A manifestation of this lack of
self-analysis and self-reflection is the expression that Filipinos are "madaling makalimot" or
have a short memory. This means, as a nation, we easily forget the mistakes we made;
hence we make the same mistakes again. This is one reason why traditional politicians or
"trapos" are always re-elected into office.

The Filipino character is a contradiction. For example, our bayanihan culture coexists
comfortably with our kanya-kanya syndrome. Many of our strong points, in fact, are linked
to our weaknesses. Despite these weaknesses, however, there is still much good in the
Filipino character. What is important is that we know our values as a nation because these
help us grow and develop. We need to understand our character as a Filipino because this is
the first step towards creating the future we want as an individual and as a nation.

What is Moral Character

First let us take the most basic definition of the terms moral, character, and moral character.
Moral is "concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior or the goodness and
badness of the human character" (Merriam-Webster 2017). Character is defined as "the
mental and moral qualities distinct to an individual" (Merriam-Webster 2017). But in
Philosophy, the term character usually denotes to the moral dimension of a person (Timpe,
2007). Moral character refers to the "existence (or lack of) virtues such as integrity, courage,
fortitude, honest, and loyalty" (Merriam-Webster ©2017)

Moral Character as Disposition

Moral characters are those dispositions or the tendency to act or think in a particular way
for which a person can be held morally responsible. Thus, moral character traits are rational,
informed, stable and reliable dispositions (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ©2017).

Philosophical Views on Moral Character

What do the great ancient minds think about moral character? Let us look at the viewpoints
of Eastern and Western thinkers.

Confucian Traditions

The philosophy of moral development is rooted in ancient views. For Confucian traditions
moral development was attributed to "four beginnings" of the human personality (Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ©2017). These "four beginnings" were considered as seeds of
human personality that will naturally unfold to become human activities. Take note though,
that contrary to Western understanding of personality as a given human condition;
personality in Confucian perception meant - "an achieved state of moral excellence"
(Ammes, 1997; Klemme, WEB).

Thus, in this concept, every person is born with four beginnings. However, each of these do
not yet capture the concept of self. However, when the four beginnings are put together, it
may then be perceived in Western understanding as the "pre-self "or "potential
self"(Klemme, WEB).

The four beginnings in Confucian traditions are:

1. The heart of compassion, which leads to Jen.

2. The heart of righteousness, which leads to Yi.

3. The heart of propriety, which leads to Li.

4. The heart of wisdom, which leads to Zhi.

Jen means goodwill, sympathy towards others, and generosity. Yi means righteousness and
the respect of duty, that is, respect your position as guardian towards nature and humanity.
Li deals with outward behavior such as etiquette, customs, and rituals. Zhi means wisdom,
and this wisdom is a product of practicing Jen, Yi, and Li in one's life (Liu, 2002).

Aristotle & Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics is an approach that reduces the emphasis on rules, consequence, and particular
acts. Instead, virtue ethics focus on the quality of the person. Although action and
consequence are significant, virtue ethics does not focus on whether an action is right or
wrong; nor on whether the consequences are good or bad. It is more concerned with
whether the person is acting as a virtuous person should act in the situation.
Virtue Ethics is largely identified with Aristotle. In ancient Western philosophy, Aristotle's
discussion on moral character, particularly virtue, is the most influential view on the topic.
Aristotle argued that each person has a built-in desire to be virtuous and that if a person is
focused on being a good person the right actions will follow effortlessly and you will do good
things.

What does it mean to be a good person? Aristotle believed that humans have an essence.
He called this essence proper functioning where everything has a function and the thing
that performs as intended is called good when it is able to fulfill this function. Thus, a scissor
is a good scissor if it can cut. A car is good if it runs and takes you to your destination. A
person is also good if he or she fulfills what nature expects of him or her. Hence, a person
needs to sleep, be healthy, grow, and develop as nature intended. However, aside from its
natural instincts, a person according to Aristotle is also a "rational animal" and a "social
animal". Therefore, using reason to live and get along with other people is also the human
person's function. A "good" person is one who fulfills all these functions.

So what does it mean to be virtuous? Virtue for the Greeks is equivalent to excellence. A
man has virtue as a flautist, for instance, if he plays the flute well, since playing the flute is
the distinctive activity of a flautist. A person of virtue is someone who performs the
distinctive activity of being human well. The principle of being virtuous is called the
"Doctrine of the Golden Mean" - that moral behavior is the one that is in the middle of two
extreme behaviors (or what he called vices). When he said "extreme behavior", it meant the
act was either excessive or deficient. For example, in Aristotelian view eating is a human
function as demanded by nature. When a person overeats (gluttony), this behavior is
excessive; while a person who diets too much (starvation) is deficient. Thus, the virtue when
eating is temperance or to eat just the right amount at all times to keep your body nourished
and healthy. Temperance is the golden mean between gluttony and starvation. Aristotle
understood virtue as a character that can be developed, and that this can be developed by
practicing the golden mean (the doctrine of the Mean). In time, good behavior will come
naturally.

It is important to note that Aristotle's Doctrine of the Mean does not claim that you behave
in moderately at all times; such as when you get angry, you should only ever be 'moderately'
angry. In Aristotle's philosophy, you should be as angry as the situation demands which can
be very angry or only slightly irritated. He concluded that virtue is a choice of behaving the
right way, at the right time, with the right people, and that this choice is determined by
rational principle and practical wisdom (Lacewing, 2015). The virtuous man is the kind of
man (note: the term 'man' in Aristotle's writing is equated with person and not just as
opposed to woman) who is able to satisfy both inclinations and rational desires because his
or her inclinations and desires are aligned. The virtuous man wants to do what is good and
does it because he/she derives pleasure from choosing and doing what is moral.

But why do we have to be virtuous? The reason, according to virtue ethics, is Eudaimonia.
Generally, eudaimonia can be translated as "happiness", "well-being" or the "good life" and
that this is the goal of human life. Aristotle believed that to achieve eudaimonia you need to
practice the virtues in your everyday activity all through your life.
Lawrence Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Developmentadapted from General Psychology
with Drug Education book by Virgie S. Otig, M.A. and Winston B. Gallinero, M.A.

Lawrence Kohlberg was a 20th century developmental psychologist and moral philosopher.
When he was the director of Harvard's Center for Moral Education, Kohlberg's research
focused on the moral development of children particularly on how they develop a sense of
what is right or wrong, as well as justice. He observed that children move through what he
believed as definite stages of moral development.

Kohlberg's Theory

Lawrence Kohlberg studied morality using a very interesting (if controversial) technique. In
his research, Kohlberg would ask children and adults to try solve moral dilemmas in short
stories and asked the participants to think out loud so he could follow their reasoning. The
reason for this was that Kohlberg was not interested with the specific answers to the
dilemmas - he wanted to know how the person got to his or her answer.

His theory holds that moral reasoning, which is the basis for ethical behavior, has identifiable
developmental stages and each become more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas as
the person progresses from one stage to the next. Kohlberg asserted that the process of
moral development was principally concerned with justice, and that the process goes on
throughout the individual's lifetime.

After looking at hundreds of interviews using several stories, Kohlberg outlined three broad
levels and six specific stages of moral development.

Level I: Pre-conventional morality

Judgment at this level is solely focused on the self. This line of moral reasoning is common
among children although some adults would also exhibit such behavior. The child, having no
concept about society's conventions on what is right or wrong, would base its judgment
mainly on the external consequences of its actions.

Stage 1: Punishment-Obedience Orientation

This is also called the 'pre-moral' stage where decisions and actions are determined by
immediate physical consequence and not the true moral value. The overall goal at this stage
is to avoid punishment. For example, "I am going to study my lessons because mom will get
mad at me if I do not pass this test."

Stage 2: Reward Orientation

As children grow older, they begin to see that there is actually room for negotiation because
other people have their own goals to meet and wants that must be satisfied too. Children
learn to behave in a manner based on the principle "What's in it for me?" For example, an
older child might reason: "IfI get good grades mom and dad will buy me a new smart phone.
So, I'm going to do my homework"

Level II: Conventional Morality

This level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. Conventional morality is to
reason in a conventional (something that is generally accepted) manner. It is accepting the
rules and standards of one's group. This means decisions and the morality of his/her actions
are based on society's views and expectations. The focus on this level is the "significant
others" or what is also called "Tyranny of the They" (They say this.... They say that... They say
I should....)

Stage 3: Good Boy/Good Girl Orientation

At this stage, the child tries to seek approval from other people by living up to their
expectations. He/She also now understands the concept of loyalty, trust, and gratitude as
well as become interested in motives and intentions behind a particular decision or action.
For example, children understand and live by the Golden Rule.

Stage 4: Authority Orientation

By this time, individuals have reached adulthood and they usually consider society as a
whole when making judgments. The focus at this stage is following the rules, maintaining
law and order, doing one's duty, and respecting authority. For example, when someone
violates the law, it is morally wrong; culpability is therefore a significant factor in this stage
because it separates what is bad from what is good.

Level III: Post conventional

This is also known as the 'principled level. It is marked by a growing realization that people
are unique and are an independent part of the society. Therefore, the individual's own
perspective is more significant over what the rest of the society thinks and that this would
sometimes lead to disobeying the law to follow personal principles.

At this level, a person does not see rules and laws as absolute or beyond question, but a
changeable mechanism. Kohlberg asserted that post conventional individuals view rules and
laws to be important in maintaining peace and order but it only serves as a guide that needs
to be weighed against personal principles and beliefs to uphold one's human rights.

Stage 5: Social contract orientation

This stage means the individual is aware that much of what is considered to be moral or
good is mainly based on personal beliefs as well as on the social group they belong to and
that only a very few of the known fundamental values are actually universal.

The person at this level understands that the world holds different opinions, rights, and
values; thus different views should be mutually respected. Laws are also regarded as a
matter a social contract with one's fellow human beings in order to promote universal values
and that decisions are made for "the greater good for the most number of people". The best
example for this level is the Democratic form of government.

Stage 6: Ethical - Principle Orientation

At this point, social contract takes a clear back seat and the person makes a personal
commitment to uphold universal principles of equal rights and respect. At this stage, an
individual already has a principled conscience; and will follow universal, ethical principles
regardless of what the laws or the rules say. Judgment here is based on abstract reasoning
such as being able to put oneself in other people's shoes.

(Garz, Detlef, 2009; Munsey, B., 1980; Otig & Gallinero, 2015)

ɢʀᴏᴜᴘ 2

ᴍᴇᴍʙᴇʀs;
ʙᴀʏʀᴏɴ, sʜᴀɴᴇ ᴡʏᴀɴᴇ

ʙᴏɴɢᴄᴀʏᴀᴏ, ᴊᴇssɪᴇ

ʙᴜᴛᴀʟᴏɴ, ᴀᴜsᴛɪɴ ᴊᴇɪ

ᴇᴍᴘᴇñᴏ, ɢᴇʀᴏᴍᴇ ᴇ.

ᴇsᴛᴏʀʙᴀ, ᴇʀᴠɪɴ

ɪʙʀᴀʜɪᴍ, ᴊᴏʜɴ ᴍᴀʀᴋ