Chapter VI:

Synthesis: Making Informed Decisions

MORAL DELIBERATION

THE MORAL AGENT AND CONTEXTS

What one ought to do in one’s life is not dictated by one’s physical, interpersonal, social, or historical
conditions.

THE MORAL AGENT AND CONTEXTS

What one ought to do is also not abstracted from one’s own specific situation.
Moral Agent...

 One always comes from somewhere. One is always continuously being shaped by many factors
outside of one’s own free will. The human individual thus always exists in the tension between
being conditioned by external factors and being a free agent.

 The moral agent is not a calculating, unfeeling machine that produces completely objective and
absolutely correct solutions to even the most complex moral problems.

Moral Agent...
Culture and
Ethics
CULTURE AND ETHICS

 Ethics should neither be reduced to one’s own cultural standards, nor should it simplistically
dismiss one’s unique cultural beliefs and practices. What is important is that one does not wander
into ethical situations blindly, with the naive assumption that ethical issues will be resolved
automatically by his/her beliefs and traditions. Instead, s/he should challenge himself/herself to
continuously work toward a fuller maturity in ethical decision-making.

 Moral development then is a prerequisite if the individual is to encounter ethical situations with a
clear mind and with his/her values properly placed with respect to each other.

Religion and
Ethics
RELIGION AND ETHICS

 Many religious followers assume that what their religion teaches can be found either in their
sacred scripture (e.g. the Bible for Christians, the Qur’an for Muslims, etc.) or body of writings
(e.g. the Vedas, including the Upanishads, and other texts for Hindus; the Tao Te Ching, Chuang-
tzu, and other Taoist classics for Taoists) or in other forms (other than written texts) of preaching
that their leaders had promulgated and become part of their traditions.
  The moral agent in question must still, in full responsibility, challenge himself/herself to
understand using his/her own powers of rationality, but with full recognition of his/her own
situatedness, and what his/her religious authorities claim his/her religion teaches.

American moral psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927−1987) theorized that moral development
happens in six stages which he divided into three levels: pre-conventional, conventional, and post-
conventional.
MORAL DELIBERATION
FEELINGS
IN MORAL DELIBERATION
MORAL PROBLEMS
The Value of Studying Ethical Theories and Framework
Moral Deliberation
Moral Deliberation
The significance of studying the different ethical theories and frameworks becomes clear only to the
individual who has achieved, or is in the process of achieving, moral maturity. For someone who is still in
Kohlberg’s pre-conventional or conventional stages, moral valuation remains a matter of seeking reward
or avoiding punishment, or at best, a question of following the dictates of other people.
FEELINGS IN MORAL DELIBERATION

 Aristotle precisely points out that moral virtue goes beyond the mere act of intellectually
identifying the right thing to do. Instead, it is the condition of one’s character by which the agent is
able to manage his/her emotions or feelings.
 The mature moral agent realizes that s/he is both a product of many forces, elements, and
events, all of which shape his/her situation and options for a decision. Instead, a meaningful
moral decision is one that s/he makes in full cognizance of where s/he is coming from and of
where s/he ought to go.

 Aristotle recognizes the importance of continuous habituation in the goal of shaping one’s
character so that s/he becomes more used to choosing the right thing.
 A moral individual is always a human being whose intellect remains finite and whose passions
remain dynamic, and who is always placed in situations that are unique. There are no automatic
moral decisions; one must continue to manage his/her reason and passions to respond in the
best way possible to the kaleidoscope of moral situations that s/he finds himself/herself in.

MORAL PROBLEMS

 The ethical theories or frameworks may serve as guideposts, given that they are the best
attempts to understand morality that the history of human thought has to offer.
  What the responsible moral individual must instead perform is to continuously test the cogency
and coherence of the ethical theory or framework in question against the complexity of the
concrete experience at hand.

THE VALUE OF STUDYING ETHICAL THEORIES AND FRAMEWORK

 INDIVIDUAL/SELF
 SOCIAL LIFE: IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT AND IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE
 THE NON-HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

SELF,
SOCIETY, & ENVIRONMENT
SELF, SOCIETY, &
ENVIRONMENT
Individualor
Self
INDIVIDUAL/SELF

 In the realm of the self, as noted earlier, one has to pay attention not just on how one deals with
oneself, but also on how one interacts with other individuals in personal relations. One may
respond to the demand for an ethically responsible “care for the self ” by making full use of the
four ethical theories or frameworks.
 John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism, though seemingly a hedonistic theory given its emphasis on
maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, elevates the human element above the animalistic and
above the merely selfish.

 Thomas Aquinas’s natural law theory states as its first natural inclination the innate tendency that
all human beings share with all other existing things, namely, the natural propensity to maintain
oneself in one’s existence.
 Kant’s deontology celebrates the rational faculty of the moral agent, which sets it above merely
sentient beings.
 Aristotle’s virtue ethics teaches one to cultivate his/her own intellect as well as his/her character
to achieve eudaimonia in his/her lifetime.

INDIVIDUAL/SELF
THE NON-HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

 In the case of utilitarianism, some scholars point out that this hedonistic doctrine that focuses on
the sovereignty of pleasures and pains in human decision-making should extend into other
creatures that can experience pleasures and pains, namely, animals. Thus, one of the sources of
animal ethics is utilitarianism.
  Since Kantian deontology focuses on the innate dignity of the human being as possessing
reason, it can be argued that one cannot possibly universalize maxims that in the end will lead to
an untenable social existence.

THE NON-HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

 Thomas Aquinas, on the other hand, may not necessarily talk about the physical environment and
human moral responsibility to it as such, but one can try to infer from his philosophy that certain
actions should be avoided because they do not produce a harmonious, peaceful society.
 Lastly, Aristotle’s virtue ethics also pick up on the problem of such shortsightedness and ask how
this can possibly lead to becoming a better person.

THE NON-HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

SOCIAL LIFE: IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT AND IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE

 One’s membership in any society brings forth the demands of communal life in terms of the
group’s rules and regulations. The ethical question arises when the expectations of a particular
society come into conflict with one’s most fundamental values.
 Mill’s utilitarian doctrine will always push for the greatest happiness principle as the prime
determinant of what can be considered as good action, whether in the personal sphere or in the
societal realm. Thus, Filipinos cannot simply assume that their action is good because their
culture says so.

SOCIAL LIFE: IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT AND IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE

 Thomas Aquinas, on the other hand, in his natural law theory has a clear conception of the
principles that should guide the individual in her actions that affect her larger society.
 Immanuel Kant argues for the use of the principles of universalizability and of humanity as end in
itself to form a person’s autonomous notion of what s/he ought to do.
 Aristotle’s virtue ethics prescribes mesotes as the guide to all the actions that a person has to
take, even in his/her dealing with the larger community of people.

SOCIAL LIFE: IN THE PHILIPPINE CONTEXT AND IN THE GLOBAL VILLAGE

SUMMARY
A CLOSING THAT IS REALLY AN OPENING

 In the end, there is only a beginning: We do not have a computer program here that can
automatically calculate what the right thing to do in a given situation.
 There is only the human individual and his/her community of fellow human beings who need to
accept that they must continue to explore the meaning of what is good and right while hoping to
arrive at the best judgments they can make at this point in time.
  Realizing he finitude of human understanding and of the capacity to make choices, but at the
same time hoping that one’s best attempt at doing what is right does mean something in the
end—these are part and parcel of making informed moral decisions.

Thank You For Listening