LESSON 1: FUNDAMENTAL

CONCEPTS AND ISSUES

PREPARED BY: STEPHANIE LOTINO

WHAT IS THIS LESSON ABOUT?

Ethics is about systematizing and recommending notions of what is right and wrong
behavior. It is about what is acceptable and unacceptable in human behavior which may
involve obligations that we are expected to fulfill, prohibitions that we are required to
respect, and ideals that we are encouraged to meet. Thus, in general, ethics is all about
the systematic study of notions related to morality as well as it digs into the moral issues
that we encounter in our everyday life. Nonetheless, before we proceed in tackling the
practical moral question. It is important for us to first clarify the fundamental concepts of
ethics. In this lesson, the basic concepts of ethics and vital issues will be discussed.
Ultimately, the topics discussed here will serve as your groundwork for the next lesson.
ETHICS AND MORALITY

Morality can be used either descriptively or normatively. Morality in its descriptive sense refers
to certain codes of conduct put forward by a society or a group such as a religion. However, in
its normative sense it refers to a code of conduct that would be put forward by all rational
persons given in specified conditions. In other words, if we use “morality” in its descriptive
sense we will almost certainly deny that there is a universal morality that applies to all human
person since standards of societies may vary. However, if we use “morality” in its normative
sense, we will all hold that morality refers to a code of conduct that applies to all who can
understand it and can govern our behavior by it (Gert 2016).

“ethics is the
study of morality”
ETHICS AND MORALITY

Ethics on the other hand, “refers to the discipline that examines the moral standards of
an individual or society. Therefore, ethics is the study of morality” (Evangelista and
Mabaquiao 2020, p. 2). As a philosophical discipline, ethics is systematic in its approach.
By systematic it means that it follows a certain process to understand, analyze,
recommend and defend matters of right and wrong as they relate to the welfare of
individuals, their relationships with one another including the environment. Its analysis is
based on sound and logical reasons based on facts and ethical theories. Moreover, as we
have distinguished normative and descriptive morality earlier, we also need to
distinguish between descriptive and normative study of ethics.
METAETHICS
METAETHICS
NORMATIVE ETHICS
NORMATIVE ETHICS
APPLIED ETHICS
APPLIED ETHICS
ETHICS AND MORALITY

A descriptive study of ethics reports how people, particularly groups, think about right
and wrong, acceptable or not acceptable, how they behave, or how they reason about
ethics. This kind of study is often the work of the social-scientist such as historians,
sociologists, anthropologists. Emphasis must be made that this kind of study of ethics is
not an area of moral philosophy. On the other hand, the normative study of ethics is often
done in philosophy. It is concerned with the moral standards to determine right from
wrong conduct. It involves the formulation of moral norms that can serve as a basis of
the kinds of actions, institutions, and ways of life we should pursue (Evangelista and
Mabaquiao, 2020)
ETHICS AND MORALITY

Consequently, it quite clear that individuals learn morality and ethics in

different ways. Moral beliefs and convictions are usually adopted through
social interaction, whereas ethics is an academic discipline that is learned
academically. There are ethics courses and exams, but there are no
equivalent activities for morality; there are only moral tests, both in everyday
life and in more extraordinary situations. An individual’s actions on these
tests determine whether that person is living under his or her moral
convictions (Knalves 2020). The significance of ethics is it will guide the
individuals to assess and to justify their morals by the aid of sound ethical
frameworks.
GENERAL SUBJECT AREAS OF ETHICS

Philosophers usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas:
metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Metaethics investigates where our
ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Are they merely social inventions?
Do they involve more than expressions of our emotions? Metaethical answers to these
questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in
ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. Normative
ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that
regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that
we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our
behavior on others. Lastly, applied ethics involves examining specific controversial
issues, such as abortion, infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns, 
homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war (Fieser, 2020).
GENERAL SUBJECT AREAS OF ETHICS

Furthermore, by using the theoretical tools of metaethics and normative

ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial
issues. The lines of distinction between metaethics, normative ethics, and
applied ethics are often blurry. For example, the issue of abortion is an
applied ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial
behavior. But it also depends on more general normative principles, such
as the right of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for
determining the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests on
metaethical issues such as, “where do rights come from?” and “what kind
of beings have rights?” (Fieser, 2020).
 MORAL STANDARDS AND NON-MORAL STANDARDS

Characteristics of moral standards further distinguish it from non-moral standards (Mañebog 2016):
A. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits.

 Moral standards deal with matters which can seriously impact, that is, to injure or benefit individuals. Unlike the case with
many non-moral standards, for example, following or violating some basketball rules may matter in basketball games but
does not necessarily affect one’s life or wellbeing. Thus, moral standards are only concerned with serious actions or
significant benefits that involve an individual’s life or wellbeing.
B. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values.
 Moral standards have an overriding importance. If a moral standard states that a person has the moral obligation to do
something, then he/she is supposed to do that even if it conflicts with other non-moral standards, and even with self-
interest.
C. Moral standards are not established by authority figures.
 Moral standards are not invented or made by authoritative individuals such as legislative bodies, although, these moral
standards ought to be considered in the process of making laws. However, moral standards cannot be changed nor
nullified by the decisions of a particular authoritative body. Nonetheless, one thing about these standards, is that its validity
lies in the soundness or adequacy of the reasons that are considered to support and justify them.
MORAL STANDARDS AND NON-MORAL STANDARDS

D. Moral standards have the trait of universalizability.

 This means that everyone should live up to moral standards. However, this entails that
moral principles must apply to all who are in the relevantly similar in situation. This
characteristic is exemplified in the Gold Rule, “Do unto others what you would them do unto
you”

Non-moral standards, on the other hand, refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical
considerations. These standards are either not necessarily linked to or by nature lack ethical sense.
Basic examples of non-moral standards include rules of etiquette, fashion standards and house rules or
in games. In other words, non-moral standards refer to those standards which we judge as good or bad
in a non-moral way.
 MORAL DILEMMA
A dilemma is a situation that requires a choice between two options that are equally undesirable
or unsatisfactory. There are non-moral dilemmas in which the choice is between options that are
undesirable or unsatisfactory for some reasons other than morality. For example, if a person wants
to buy both a book and a shirt but can only afford to purchase one of them, choosing one over the
other will inevitably lead to disappointment, in that it will fulfill only one of the two desires. There
need not be any moral dimension to this decision for it to be a dilemma. Nonetheless, in terms of
morality, a moral dilemma is a situation in which the decision-maker has to give priority to one moral
value over another. Such dilemmas arise when an individual is faced with a difficult situation such
as two or more values which are conflicting, or when an individual is assessing another’s moral
choice. The individual who faces a dilemma must decide which moral duty to prioritize (Kvalnes
2019).
a moral dilemma is a
situation in which the
decision-maker has to give
priority to one moral value
over another.
MORAL DILEMMA
Anne is the project manager for a large industrial project (run by a Nordic company) in a developing country. On a crucial day during
the project, the entire plant’s electricity suddenly went out. Large quantities of cement were beginning to congeal in their mixers, and it
was crucial to quickly reactivate them. More than one thousand employees were unable to do their work. Anne contacted the local
authorities to solve the problem. A bureaucrat turned up at the plant and explained that he could turn the electricity back on very
quickly—on the condition that he be allowed to bring ten of the company’s PCs back to the town hall, which had a desperate shortage
of PCs that was preventing the bureaucrat and his colleagues from providing adequate service to the local community. Thus, he
suggested a trade-off: PCs for electricity. In this manner, Anne and her company had the option to make a significant contribution to
the local community
Time was of the essence, and Anne had little time to dwell on the alternatives. There was no time to contact her supervisors in the
firm’s home country for advice or instructions. She had to figure the situation out by herself. If the cement were to congeal, that would
mean a considerable delay in the project, and several operations would have to be redone, at a high cost. That cost would be much
higher than that of losing ten PCs, which could be easily replaced. Anne also had sympathy for the local bureaucrats and (the
population they serve), who she believed would probably make very good use of the PCs. On the other hand, the demand was
blackmail, and if she gave in this time, then it may happen again at other crucial stages of the project. Anne faced a difficult choice.
What should she do?
Anne wanted to honor not just the moral value of finishing the project on time and within budget but also that of not giving in to
blackmail and corruption. One of these values had to give way. There was no way in which Anne could act in a completely moral
manner.
ETHICS AND CULTURE

Darius, a king of ancient Persia, was intrigued by the variety of cultures he met in his
travels. He had found, for example, that the Callatians, who lived in India, ate the bodies of
their dead fathers. The Greeks, of course, did not do that—the Greeks practiced cremation
and regarded the funeral pyre as the natural and fitting way to dispose of the dead. Darius
thought that a sophisticated outlook should appreciate the differences between cultures. One
day, to teach this lesson, he summoned some Greeks who happened to be at his court and
asked what it would take for them to eat the bodies of their dead fathers. They were shocked,
as Darius knew they would be, and replied that no amount of money could persuade them to
do such a thing. Then Darius called in some Callatians and, while the Greeks listened, asked
them what it would take for them to burn their dead fathers’ bodies. The Callatians were
horrified and told Darius not to speak of such things. This story, recounted by Herodotus in
his History, illustrates a recurring theme in the literature of social science (Rachels 2013).
Should you eat the bodies of the dead or burn them? Which cultural practice do you think is correct?
 Cultural Relativism

The following claims by cultural relativist:

Different societies have different moral codes.
The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is, if the
moral code of a society says that a certain action is right, then that action is right, at
least within that society.
There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one society’s code as better
than another’s. There are no moral truths that hold for all people at all times.
The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is but one among many.
 It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures. We should always be tolerant of them
Cultural Relativism

 Cultural relativism is a view that good and bad are relative to culture. Different
cultures have different moral codes. What is thought right within one group may horrify the
members of another group and vice versa. What is “good” is what is “socially approved”
in a given culture. Our moral principles describe social conventions and must be
based on the norms of our society. Perhaps the most appealing of its claims is that
that it emphasizes that no culture is superior to any other culture when comparing
systems of morality, law, politics, etc. as a result, resulting in moral tolerance.
Cultural beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the
cultural environment. Thus, those who hold to cultural relativism hold that all
religious, ethical, aesthetic, and political beliefs are completely relative to the
individual within a cultural identity.
Cultural Relativism

 Perhaps it is undeniable that different cultures have different moral codes. What is thought right
within one group may horrify the members of another group and vice versa. To raise questions
from the story, we can ask this following. First, should individuals eat the bodies of the dead or
burn them? Second, can they judge the culture of others? The answer to the first question is that,
if you were a Greek, to burn the bodies of the dead would seem correct; but if you were a Callatian,
to eat the bodies of the dead would seem equally certain. For the second question, to call a custom
“correct” or “incorrect” would imply that we can judge that custom by some independent standard
of right and wrong. But according to Rachels (2017), no such standard exists; every standard is
culture-bound. Culture plays a major part in our perception of what is moral, and because of that, it
could also pose some issues since each culture has a unique feature that other culture doesn’t
have. With this regard, cultural relativism challenges our belief in the objectivity and universality of moral
truth.
FILIPINO CULTURE

Core concepts in Filipino Culture

 Hospitality
 Hiya
 Modesty
 Courtesy
 Warmth
 Respect
 Kapwa
 Fatalism
  
FILIPINO CULTURE
 

 
Given
  the diversity of the Philippines, the unifying element of Filipino culture is a complex matter. It
comprises
  a diverse set of landscapes, languages, and cultures. As Evason (2016) discussed, “the
long  history of contact with Spain and the United States continues to have a significant impact on
the  Filipino identity. One example is the influence of American standards of beauty, which are often
measured in the Philippines by the possession of Western physical traits – such as fair skin and
curly hair. Another example is the prominence of Christian ideology since the introduction of
Christianity by the Spanish. Indeed, when compared to other countries on the Asian continent, the
Philippines has one of the highest Christian populations.” Nonetheless, a sense of national identity
emerged out of the long-standing struggle for independence. In the contemporary Philippines,
many Filipinos are very aware of the colonial history of their country. For example, Jose Rizal who
is a national hero who fought for Philippine independence is being looked up by many of as an
exemplar of a virtuous person. The sense of national identity is however fragile, with loyalty resides
first to their kin, group, or community. That is why the Philippines is a collectivist society thus
Filipinos see themselves as part of a collective group where the interest of the collectives overrides
the interest of the individual (Evason 2016). With this regard, let us survey the core concepts of
Filipino culture which contributes not only to their national identity but also their moral identity.
SOCIAL HIERARCHY AND “HIYA”
 

 Social hierarchy in the Philippines is very vital. All Filipinos at a very early age are being
taught of the importance of social hierarchy. One obvious example of this is the gestures, terms of
address, and communication styles which depend on the person they interact with as well as the
position in the social hierarchy. To give a more specific example, it is expected if you are referring to
someone who is older than you but within the same generation, we use the terms Kuya for males
and Ate for females, while for family members or even to close family friend, not within the same
generation, we use the terms tito or tita. Failing to do so is considered highly disrespectful and a
lack of acknowledgment of the established hierarchy.
  

 The term Kapwa, on the other hand, refers to “shared self”, “shared identity”, or “self-in-the-
other” (Reyes 2015). Thus, it generally refers to an identity that is shared and whereby people
connect despite differences in social status or wealth. Moreover, kapwa is related to
the collectivistic nature of Filipino society. It is believed that what is good for one person will be
good for the collective and ought to be is shared with fellow people. Being branded as not having
any kapwa is an insult as it implies that the person does not belong to a community (Evason 2016).
SOCIAL HIERARCHY AND “HIYA

 The concept of ‘hiya’ is also one of the important factors influencing

how Filipinos behave and interact with others. According to Evason
(2016) hiya translates roughly into English as ‘shame’ or ‘embarrassment’,
on a deeper level it refers to one’s sense of self, propriety, and respect.
Filipinos may be more motivated to succeed by a fear of shame rather
than fear of failing the task at hand. To avoid experiencing shame, they
may try to give face to those around them through complimenting them
and avoiding direct criticism. Individuals will often try to be generous and
hospitable to avoid hiya and to maintain kapwa.
WARMTH AND ACCEPTANCE

 It is an undeniable fact that Filipinos are very welcoming and friendly. They love the
presence of other individuals around them, and it is common to find strangers engaging in
conversation or sharing stories to family, friends or foreigners. Also, are often expressive
and sentimental while maintaining a light-hearted character. For example, the word ‘hugot’
(‘to pull out’) is often used to describe someone drawing out deep sentimental memories or
experiences Evason (2016). They are often willing to share stories of their past that may be
considered personal.
Moreover, Filipinos have the general approach to life is of acceptance. ‘Bahala na’
(come what may) captures the strong belief among many Filipinos that whatever may
happen is a part of God’s will. Evason (2016) explains that any individual or group's
success is often attributed to fate or God rather than efforts. This indicates
a fatalistic attitude throughout society whereby Filipinos are generally accepting of theirs
and other circumstances. However, this does not mean Filipinos are passive. Rather, they
are hardworking and will often do their best to help themselves and their family.
 
 LOÓB AND KAPWA: AN INTRODUCTION TO A FILIPINO VIRTUE ETHICS
BY JEREMIAH REYES (2015)

1. Kagandahang-Loob - this word is literally translated as “beauty-of-will”. The beauty of the will in
this context is determined by one’s relationship towards the kapwa. Someone who has an affective
concern for others and the willingness to help them in times of need is a person with kagandahang-
loob. It is best understood through the paradigmatic example of a mother’s love and concern for her
child, most especially during the child’s weakness in infancy.

2. Utang-na-Loob—This word is literally translated as ‘debt-of-will’. It is the natural response to

kagandahang-loób. It is the self-imposed obligation to give back the same kind of kagandahang-loob
to the person who has shown it to you. When utang-na-loob is returned with interest, that is more
than what is due, it can bring about a circular dynamic between two persons where the one who
previously showed kagandahang-loób is now the one with utang-na-loób, and then vice versa; it
continues to alternate and strengthen the relationship in the process. 
 LOÓB AND KAPWA: AN INTRODUCTION TO A FILIPINO VIRTUE ETHICS
BY JEREMIAH REYES (2015)

3. Pakikiramdam—The closest translation might be relational sensitivity or empath’. It is about being

skilled in reading the other person’s feelings and correctly guessing his inner state. It requires receptivity to
many non-verbal cues, such as subtle facial expressions, tones of voice and bodily gestures. This indirect
communication, though it might seem tedious or frustrating to the foreigner, is a way of practicing a kind of
emotional intelligence, a way of evaluating and deepening the relationship with the other person.
4. Hiya—Hiya has been variously translated as embarrassment or shame. It has often been negatively
criticized when studied in isolation, especially for the Filipino tendency to be roundabout and not direct to
the point. But it is a virtue when it controls and restrains selfish desires for the welfare of the other. One of
the most common manifestations is withholding a direct verbal confrontation that could embarrass the
other, especially in public.
5. Lakas-ng-Loob/Bahala na—Lakas-ng-loob is literally translated as courage, bahala na is sometimes
translated as ‘fatalism’ or ‘resignation’, but it is translated more positively as courage to face uncertainty’.
The unique history of the Philippines must also be taken into account in order to see that this is not just any
kind of courage, but a courage for self-sacrifice for the kinship group.
GENERATIONAL VALUES

 Moral behavior doesn’t just vary by culture but also by generations. We

commonly hear the terms silent generations, baby boomers, generation x,
generation y or millennials, and generation z, which most of the times
differentiated by social behaviors and values. But what do these different labels
mean, and do any of the stereotypes attached to them contain any grains of
truth? Dr. Alexis Abramson, an expert in what is known as “generational
cohorts”, says we define generations because “when you are born affects your
attitudes, your perceptions, your values, your behaviors.” This means that each
of them has its characteristics (BBC 2020). Below is a survey from the BBC
regarding each generation's characteristics and their values.
THE SILENT GENERATION

 This is the first defined generational group. It refers to those born between 1926 and 1945, so
these are people who lived through World War Two. The name comes from an article in Time
magazine from the 1950s and alludes to the fact that the children of this generation were
taught to be seen and not heard. According to Dr. Abramson, this group is:

 Disciplined
 value-oriented and loyal
 interested in direct communication, so
enjoy speaking in person as opposed to
via technology
 
BABY BOOMERS

 This is the only generation that’s been defined by an official government body: The US Census Bureau
(which is part of the country’s Department for Commerce and is responsible for collecting data from
across the US). They’re so named because of the huge surge of births after World War Two. The group
starts in 1946 and ends with those born around 1964 when the birthrate began to decline again. Dr.
Abramson says boomers are:

 committed
 self-sufficient
 competitive (she thinks this may have
something to do with how many of them
there were)
 
GENERATION X

 The Resolution Foundation think tank defines Gen X as those born between 1966 and 1980. They grew
up in a time when technology was advancing fast, but it wasn’t nearly as readily available as it is today.
Because of this, this generation straddles both the digital and non-digital world and understands the
importance of both. Dr. Abramson says these people are:

 resourceful
 logical
 good problem-
solvers
 
MILLENNIALS (GENERATION Y)

 This is the cohort you’ve probably heard the most about. It’s not entirely certain where the generation
starts and ends, but it’s approximately those born from 1980 to 1995. They’re often described as ‘lazy’ in
the media and that they spend all the money they should be saving for a house on avocado toast, but
they’re also the first generation to be “digital natives”, as Dr. Abramson describes them. She thinks this
makes them extremely self-sufficient, as they no longer have to rely on others to solve their problems or
teach them things - they have the internet for that. Other defining characteristics include:

 confident
 curious
 questioning authority - Dr Abramson thinks that this can
be perceived quite badly by some of the older
generations, who would be less likely to do so
 
GENERATION Z

 There are a few conflicting ideas about where this generation starts. Pew Statistics says 1997, Statistics
Canada says 1993, and the Resolution Foundation says 2000. Wherever it begins though, we can safely
say this group is young and has never known a life without tech. That might be why their alternative
name (coined by American psychologist Dr. Jean Twenge) is iGen. Some of their characteristics include:

 ambitious
 digital-natives
 confident
 
BRIDGING THE GENERATION GAP

 The important thing to note according to Dr. Abramson is that while these separations
can be useful, at the end of the day we are individuals. It’s like with horoscopes: you may
identify with one or two characteristics of being a Sagittarius or a Leo, but you won’t ever fit
your star sign’s description exactly. The same goes for cohorts, although as the stereotypes
are given more prominence in the media, she notes that people in the different groups can
“pigeon hole themselves into aligning themselves with those characteristics”. What they can
help us with, as Dr. Abramson explains: is "so that we know how and when to work
differently with a group.” In other words, you wouldn’t treat a 60-year-old the same way
would a teenager, so having these cohorts gives us a rough idea of what different age
groups might want and need (BBC 2020). Moreover, in terms of communication, Dr.
Abramson says the key difference between all of these cohorts are the different methods of
communication they use. Where the silent generation and baby boomers had to rely on face-
to-face relationships and are as a result more “engaged” in their real-life communities, the
younger generations have social media for that and create their communities online instead.
BRIDGING THE GENERATION GAP

 Nonetheless, the key to overcoming these differences, according to Dr. Abramson,

is that “the younger folks can teach the older folks something and the older folks can
teach the younger folks something”. Thus, she suggests “mentor-mentee relationships,
downward and upward”. Historically it’s usually the older person holding the position of
being a mentor. So for example, in a workplace, an older person might take a young
newbie under their wing to teach them what they know and give them a leg up in the
organization (BBC 2020).

 Values differ not only by culture but also by generations. There are notable
characteristics among generations. Each is unique and needs to be openly understood
and ultimately, be respected.