Chapter IV

Culture and Moral Behaviour

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
At the end of the chapter, the students should able to:

 Explain the meaning of culture;

 Recognize the role of culture in shaping moral behavior;
 Attribute facets of personal behaviour to culture.

Culture is the sum total of all influences found in society such as, customs, traditions,
beliefs and values. Man as a social being naturally lives with other men in a society and the
continued co-existence will eventually lead to the acquisition of knowledge that will define that
society making it apart from other societies. Over time, culture provides a unique character to the
society that forms it. Since culture nurtures the individual and collective character of the people
of that society, influences on human behaviour becomes a necessary effect of what that society
provides for the development and survival of the people.
Culture shapes human behaviour; and human behaviour is related to human action; and,
many human actions are related to morality, hence ethics. Remember that ethics comes from the
Greek word ethos which means “custom” or “character” and the Latin equivalent of the term
“custom” or “habit” is mos or moris from which the term morality is derived from. For example,
in general westerners act and think differently from the easterners. Our manner of dressing,
grooming, language, belief system and attitude are designed to fit into the society which accepts
us.
Culture, therefore, plays a big role in determining how an individual behaves in any given
environment. People in some remote tribes consider bare breasts to be normal, while in some
places it is forbidden. Some places allow males and females to mingle freely in public places:
others do not. These societal orientations have tremendous impact on behaviour, and are evident
when persons of different cultural background come in contact with each other. This may result
in what is called “culture shock” and it is manifested in an adverse reactions and behaviours
when faced with an environment that appears strange to one’s established way of life.

1. Formation of ethics

An individual’s ethics are formulated through the operation of forces in the individual’s
environment. The following are the key aspects in the formation of ethical orientation of the
person.

a. Family influences
The formation of ethics begins when the individual is a child. When he/she attains
consciousness, he/she becomes curious of his surroundings and the actions of people around him.
Thus the family environment has a significant influence in determining what the child learns
about good and bad, right and wrong.
b. Peer influences

1
 As the child develops contacts outside the home through home, school, play and work,
peers influence could shape the individual’s ethical beliefs.
c. Experiences
As a person grows and matures, he or she will be exposed to many critical experiences
that will affect his or her choice of ethical standards and values.
d. Values and morals
One’s ethical standards are also greatly influenced by values and morals. People who
place high value on money and material possessions may not have strong ethical standard
regarding behaviours that facilitate the accumulation of that wealth.
e. Situation Factors
People often change their ethics in response to unknown situational factors. An
employee, who is threatened with losing a job that has been held for years, may commit
unethical acts in order to save the job.
f. Religion
One of the oldest sources of ethical inspiration is religion. More than 1,00,000 different
religion exist across the globe .Despite doctrinal differences, the major religion coverage on the
believe that ethics is an expression of divine will that reveals the nature of right and wrong in
business and others walks of life.
g. The legal system
Laws are rules of conduct, approves by legislatures, that guide human behaviour in any
society .They are created in order to meet a necessity in society. But law cannot cover all ethical
expectation of society. Obeying the law is presumed to be ethical behaviour.

2
 Chapter V

Cultural Relativism
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
At the end of the chapter, the students should able to:

 Define and explain cultural relativism.

 Recognize differences in moral behavior of different cultures.
 Respect the cultural uniqueness of other people.
 Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of cultural relativism

Ethics is basically the study of what right and wrong. But what makes something right or
wrong? In most cases it is the society where we live that defines what is right from wrong.
Generally, our conception of right and wrong are defined by customs, traditions, and beliefs of
the people in the society. Being determined by the cultural orientation of the particular society,
the idea of right and wrong is considered a matter of social values. Hence, if there are many
cultures, then cultural values may differ from culture to culture. As a consequence, the values of
‘right’ and ‘wrong’ are relative to the culture to which it is employed. This is called cultural
relativism.
Cultural relativism considers this notion: “There is no objective “truth” in morality. Right
and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.” Where there
is cultural relativism, there is ethical relativism.

1. What is ethical relativism?

Relativism is the view that states that moral principles are valid, but they vary by
culture or by individuals. By this definition of ethical relativism, two ethical theories are to be
considered: Conventionalism and Subjectivism.

a. Conventionalism
Conventionalism holds that moral principles are valid but they vary by culture.
Conventionalists like Ruth Benedict argue that since different cultures hold different principles,
how can one judge another? Each of these different moralities is equally valid. She uses the
argument from ‘normality’: each culture defines what behavior is normal, to fit the behavior of
the majority. The majority of that population then defines normality and also lives by it, and only
a small minority is aberrant or abnormal. Benedict calls morality “a convenient term for socially

3
approved habits” and the normal “a variant of the concept of the good.” In other words, whatever
behavior is socially acceptable and normal is also good. For example: the Japanese considers
suicide as an act of honor; while, most Filipinos consider it an act of cowardice.

b. Subjectivism
Subjectivism is the extreme end of relativism. This view holds that morality is
determined at the individual level, not a social or universal level. Thus, the only moral principles
that are valid are the ones you believe in—in short, all principles are equally valid.

2. What happens if we follow the conventionalist and the subjectivist way?

Following the conventionalist or the subjectivist point of view would definitely result in a
moral vacuum. How can one society or individual judge the behavior of another if all socially
accepted behaviors or personal moral principles are valid? If conventionalism holds true,
slavery was a morally right act at the time that it was popular, and only when conventions
changed did it become wrong. The terrorists of September 11 may be considered heartless
criminals by our standards, but in their own they are saints in paradise. If conventionalism holds
true, then the actions of those men were absolutely correct because their society agreed with
them.
If subjectivism holds true, then any court system or law is useless, since the only standard
by which a man can be judged is his own, and whether or not he upheld his own principles.
Essentially, all behavior is correct to the subjectivist. Thus, the subjectivist cannot even deplore
murder or terrorism because these acts are as valid and acceptable as love and altruism, so long
as they are a part of the individual’s moral principles. Simply put, all is good so long as you
believe in it.

3. What is ethical objectivism?

Objectivism is the view that holds that certain moral principles are valid for all
individuals and cultures. There are different levels of objectivism: the fixed view, which says that
principles are fixed and do not change; the universal view, which includes the fixed view and
adds that principles apply to all people everywhere; and the absolutist view, which includes the
universal view and adds that certain principles are non-conditional and true for all situations.
People who hold this theory answer the question “where do these principles come from?”
in several different ways: from the essence or commonality of human nature, from natural
reality, from God or the divine or from the intrinsic good that comes from their application.

4. The Consequences of Cultural Relativism

a. We could decide whether actions are right or wrong just by consulting the standards of
our society.
b. The idea of moral progress is called into doubt. Some societies refuse to adapt to
changes in moral perceptions influenced by science, technology and social trends.
c. We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to our
own.

4
5. Why does it appear that culture may have more agreement than
disagreement?
a. The difference is in our belief systems, not in our values. If only we will look closely,
there are more similarities than differences.
b. Other values must be more or less universal (e.g. truth-telling).
c. There are some moral rules that all societies must have in common, because those rules
are necessary for society to exist.

Conclusion

Cultural Relativism warns us, quite rightly, about the danger of assuming that all our
preferences are based on some absolute rational standard. They are not. Many of our practices
are merely peculiar to our society. It teaches us to have an open mind. Cultural relativism, by
stressing that our moral views can reflect the prejudices of our society, provides an antidote for
dogmatism.

Chapter VI

The Filipino Way

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

At the end of the chapter, the students should able to:

 Identify Filipino qualities that define the Filipino character.

 Analyze Filipino qualities within the framework of their moral experience.
 Establish the positive and negative ways and the means by which change may be achieved.

When something is important to us, it means that the thing has value to us. Those things
we value can affect our actions, for we act in consideration to those things that we cherish in life.
Though not everything we value matters morally, many of our moral decisions are predicated
upon things we value as right (good). It is for this reason that we consider the Filipino values in
the light of morality.
Individuals are unique, but when you take them collectively, a nation is also unique. This
distinct and singular characteristic of a people doesn’t define its limit or weakness but simply
makes them different in some ways from other people with the same collective orientation.
Filipinos are interesting people. Though the values they possess are no different from the values
other people cherish, their character traits are sometimes source of pride and shame. Values are
not necessarily matters of moral consideration but when they influence the choice of actions and
guide to moral deliberation, they could determine the moral disposition of a nation.
Filipino values define the Filipino character and culture. As a nation with unique
character traits, the Filipinos have fascinated people around the world. Foreigners envy their
strengths while mourn for their weaknesses; celebrated the successes they have achieved and
laments at the opportunities they have wasted.

5
1. What is the connection between ethics and human values?
A value is anything that we cherish or hold dear in life, like our parents, friends,
relatives, pets or things. It may be anything that satisfies a human need or which enriches our
experience in life, such as friendship, relationship, travels or education. We may also value
occasions and events. Practically, all the things that we value are those things that would make us
completely happy. That’s why it is essential that our actions should be good in order to ensure
happiness and not unhappiness. An action that is evil but disguised as good is called apparent
good. (Agapay, p. 93) Sometimes, in choosing between two values, subjective choice may define
what one may consider as moral. For example, if a person is faced between honesty and
friendship but then he chooses friendship as a “good” more important than honesty, the choice is
justified as moral for its apparent goodness.
The branch of philosophy that studies value is called Axiology. There is a clear
connection between ethics and values. Ethics acquires significant meaning if accompanied with
values, and vice versa. For example, one who values life would act to preserve and protect life.
However, there are certain situations when values may not carry any moral significance. For
example, food is good, hence you value it for the nourishment of the body yet it does not make
the food moral (Babor, p.142).

2. Is there a hierarchy of values?

Values are ranked from the lowest to the highest:

1. Moral values – these values correspond to the spiritual development of man. They constitute
moral integrity and are necessary for the development of human character.

2. Intellectual values – these values correspond to our mental growth. The most fundamental
value within this category is truth.

3. Social values – these values correspond to the psychological growth of the person. The most
fundamental value here is love, the basic foundation of family, marriage, companionship, and
society.

4. Biological values – these values correspond to our survival and procreation. The most
fundamental value is self-preservation and health (Agapay, 2008).

3. What are the characteristics of moral values?

Moral values have the following characteristics:

1. They have intrinsic worth. Moral values are good in themselves regardless of the motive or
intention of the person doing the act. Example: giving alms to the poor is good regardless of
one’s intention in performing the act.
2. They are universally accepted by people. Actions which are morally good hold its intrinsic
value anywhere, anytime and to anybody. Extending help to victims of calamity is an act that is
usually shared by people from all nations in the world.

6
3. They are Obligatory. Acts that are morally good are bound to be performed regardless of the
situation. Fire victims must be rescued or giving to the person what rightfully belongs to him.

4. Filipino Values

Values are integral part of every culture. With worldview and personality, they generate
behavior. Being part of a culture that shares a common core set of values creates expectations
and predictability without which a culture would disintegrate and its member would lose their
personal identity and sense of worth. Values tell people what is good, beneficial important,
useful, beautiful, desirable, constructive, etc. They answer the question of why people do what
they do. Values help people solve common problems for survival. Over time, they become the
roots of traditions that groups of people find important in their day-to-day lives. Filipino values
may be attributed into many influences. These can be from its ancestors or influenced from its
colonizers. Some values are bipolar, meaning it can be positive or negative.

5. Positive Filipino Values

1. “Bayanihan system” or spirit of kinship and camaraderie- A Filipino community

spirit and cooperation characterized by collective effort of individuals extending a helping hand
without expecting reward, payment or remuneration. It is exemplified by relocating a “bahay
kubo” or pushing a passenger jeepney.

2. “Damayan system”- sympathy for people who lost their love ones. In case of death of
a family member, the whole community sympathizes by extending “limos” or “abuloy” to the
bereaved family.

3. Familism or close family relations- a Filipino trait of familial affection and love. This
is characterized by family centeredness wherein family members support and take care of each
other. Filipinos never care much about emancipation, independence and home for the aged.
Families stay together as long as possible. OFW’s have to sacrifice a lot just to give their
families a better life.

4. Fun-loving trait- a trait found in most Filipinos that exemplify the Filipino character
of being resilient. In the face of devastating calamities or disasters, Filipinos still manage to find
a reason to smile or to be positive about life.

5. Hospitality- a Filipino trait of being receptive and generous to guests. Sometimes this
trait may cause unanticipated problems to Filipinos because they sometimes go beyond their
means just to accommodate their guests.

6. Compassionate- a Filipino trait of being sympathetic to others even if the person is a

stranger. An example of this is giving alms to beggar or victims of fire. This is observed when
we hear Filipinos saying “kawawa naman or nakakaawa naman.

7
 7. Regionalism- a Filipino trait of giving more priority or preference in giving favors to
his province mate before others. This is also characterized by forming groups or societies when
outside one’s province or when in a foreign land.

8. Friendly- a trait found in most Filipinos. They are sincere, loyal, kind and sociable
person.

9. Flexible or “magaling makibagay”- This is the Filipinos’ talent of adaptability - the

ability of Filipinos to ride on or adjust to the norms of other group just to attain smooth and
harmonious relationship. In a way nothing shocks a Filipino. Our OFW’s are in demand the
world over because of their ability to work in any environment.

10. Religious- most Filipinos possess strong religious belief and have the sense of
dependence to Divine providence. The Filipino draws his strength in the belief that God will not
abandon him and that his prosperity is only possible through God’s blessing.

11. Respect to elders- a Filipino trait of being courteous and respectful both in words
and in actions to older people.

12. “Remedyo” attitude- a Filipino trait of being creative and resourceful. They have the
ability to do things that are next to impossible. Example, Filipino engineers abroad are known to
fix broken machinery without the need of ordering spare parts, much to the fascination of their
employers.

13. Matiyaga- Filipinos are renowned for their tenacity and strong determination in
every undertaking. Owing to their strong religious belief, they brave through life in the belief
that someday God will reward them with prosperity.

14. Utang na loob- a feeling of obligation to repay someone who extended help or
assistance to another and which may take place in undetermined time and in whatever manner.

Negative Filipino Values

1. “Bahala na” attitude- a Filipino fatalistic trait characterized by retreating or

withdrawal from certain undertaking and leaving everything to God to interfere and determine
the outcome of his deeds.

2. Colonial complex or blue-seal mentality- a Filipino value of showing high

admiration and preference to foreign produced goods, products and creations over local ones.

3. Crab mentality- a Filipino attitude characterized by an attempt to “pull down”

someone who has achieved success beyond the others. This is done out of jealousy and
insecurity.

8
 4. Euphemism- a Filipino way of substituting a word or phrase that is thought to be
offensive or harsh with a mild and acceptable one in order to not offend or hurt another person.

5. Filipino time- in reality, it means “always late”, a Filipino attitude of not being
particular about time.

6. “Gaya-gaya” attitude- a Filipino attitude of imitating or copying other people of

different culture specifically in the mode of dressing, language, fashion or even haircut.

7. Jackpot mentality- a “get rich quick” mentality of some Filipinos who would rather
engage in fast ways of acquiring money than through hard work and sacrifice by getting in
lottery, joining raffle draws and other. This may explain the Filipinos’ propensity for gambling.

8. “Kapalaran” values- another Filipino fatalistic trait of accepting his fate by believing
that everything in his life has been written. this trait contributes to the lack of initiative and
perseverance among Filipinos.

9. Mañana habit- delaying or setting aside a certain task assigned on the next day when
it could done today.

10. “Ningas-cogon”- being enthusiastic only during the start of new under taking but
ends dismally in accomplishing nothing. A common practice observed in some politicians who
are visible only during the start of certain endeavor.

11. Oversensitive- Filipinos have the tendency to be irritated easily or hurt upon hearing
some criticisms or comment.

12. Lack of sportmanship- not accepting defeat in competitions, then blame their
opponents for cheating or officials for favoritism or poor officiating.

13. “Pakikisama”- submitting oneself to the will of the group for the sake of
camaraderie and unity. Failure to comply with the group’s demand, the person will be branded
“walang pakikisama or selfish”. The adherence to group demands often leads to bad habits like
smoking, alcoholism and even drug addiction.

14. “Tsamba lang” attitude- simplicity by declaring that his/her accomplishments are
results of luck and not from perseverance and ability.

9
 Chapter VII

Stages of Moral Development

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

At the end of the chapter, the students should able to:

 Identify and explain each stage of moral development.

 Compare and measure personal growth against the stages of development

Lawrence Kohlberg introduced the theory of moral development. The theory holds that moral
reasoning, the basis for ethical behavior, has six identifiable developmental stages, each more
adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than its predecessor.

The six stages of moral development are grouped into three levels of morality: pre-
conventional, conventional, and post-conventional morality.

Level 1- Pre-conventional
• The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in children,
although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners at this level judge the
morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of
the first and second stages of moral development and is solely concerned with the self in
an egocentric manner. A child with pre-conventional morality has not yet adopted or
internalized society's conventions regarding what is right or wrong but instead focuses
largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring.
Stage one (obedience and punishment driven)
• Individuals focus on the direct consequences of their actions on themselves. For example,
an action is perceived as morally wrong because the perpetrator is punished. "The last
time I did that I got spanked, so I will not do it again." The worse the punishment for the
act is, the more "bad" the act is perceived to be. This can give rise to an inference that
even innocent victims are guilty in proportion to their suffering. It is "egocentric",
lacking recognition that others' points of view are different from one's own. There is
"deference to superior power or prestige.
Stage two (self-interest driven)
• expresses the "what's in it for me" position, in which right behavior is defined by
whatever the individual believes to be in their best interest but understood in a narrow

10
 way which does not consider one's reputation or relationships to groups of people. Stage
two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it
might further the individual's own interests. As a result, concern for others is not based on
loyalty or intrinsic respect, but rather a "You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours"
mentality. The lack of a societal perspective in the pre-conventional level is quite
different from the social contract (stage five), as all actions at this stage have the purpose
of serving the individual's own needs or interests. For the stage two theorist, the world's
perspective is often seen as morally relative.
Level 2 – Conventional
• The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. To reason
in a conventional way is to judge the morality of actions by comparing them to society's
views and expectations. The conventional level consists of the third and fourth stages of
moral development. Conventional morality is characterized by an acceptance of society's
conventions concerning right and wrong. At this level an individual obeys rules and
follows society's norms even when there are no consequences for obedience or
disobedience. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid, however, and a
rule's appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned
Stage three (good intentions as determined by social consensus),
• the self enters society by conforming to social standards. Individuals are receptive to
approval or disapproval from others as it reflects society's views. They try to be a "good
boy" or "good girl" to live up to these expectations, having learned that being regarded as
good benefits the self. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality of an action by
evaluating its consequences in terms of a person's relationships, which now begin to
include things like respect, gratitude, and the "golden rule". "I want to be liked and
thought well of; apparently, not being naughty makes people like me." Conforming to the
rules for one's social role is not yet fully understood. The intentions of actors play a more
significant role in reasoning at this stage; one may feel more forgiving if one thinks that
"they mean well".
Stage four (authority and social order obedience driven)
• it is important to obey laws, dictums, and social conventions because of their importance
in maintaining a functioning society. Moral reasoning in stage four is thus beyond the
need for individual approval exhibited in stage three. A central ideal or ideals often
prescribe what is right and wrong. If one person violates a law, perhaps everyone would
—thus there is an obligation and a duty to uphold laws and rules. When someone does
violate a law, it is morally wrong; culpability is thus a significant factor in this stage as it
separates the bad domains from the good ones. Most active members of society remain at
stage four, where morality is still predominantly dictated by an outside force.
Level 3 - Post-conventional
• The post-conventional level, also known as the principled level, is marked by a growing
realization that individuals are separate entities from society, and that the individual's
own perspective may take precedence over society's view; individuals may disobey rules
inconsistent with their own principles. Post-conventional moralists live by their own
ethical principles—principles that typically include such basic human rights as life,
liberty, and justice. People who exhibit post-conventional morality view rules as useful
but changeable mechanisms—ideally rules can maintain the general social order and
protect human rights. Rules are not absolute dictates that must be obeyed without

11
 question. Because post-conventional individuals elevate their own moral evaluation of a
situation over social conventions, their behavior, especially at stage six, can be confused
with that of those at the pre-conventional level.
Stage five (social contract driven)
• the world is viewed as holding different opinions, rights, and values. Such perspectives
should be mutually respected as unique to each person or community. Laws are regarded
as social contracts rather than rigid edicts. Those that do not promote the general welfare
should be changed when necessary to meet "the greatest good for the greatest number of
people". This is achieved through majority decision and inevitable compromise.
Democratic government is ostensibly based on stage five reasoning.
Stage six (universal ethical principles driven
• moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws
are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries
with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Legal rights are unnecessary, as social
contracts are not essential for deontic moral action. Decisions are not reached
hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way, as in the
philosophy of Immanuel Kant. This involves an individual imagining what they would do
in another's shoes, if they believed what that other person imagines to be true. The
resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an
end in itself; the individual acts because it is right, and not because it avoids punishment,
is in their best interest, expected, legal, or previously agreed upon.

12
 Chapter VIII

Moral courage and the 7-step Moral Reasoning

Model
LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

At the end of the chapter, the students should able to:

 Compare real-life experiences against the 7-step model.

 Apply the 7-step model, to emphasize reason and impartiality in resolving a moral
problem.

Making moral choices is not always an easy task. Sometimes, when conscience is strong we
often find ourselves reeling from the effects of wrong decisions especially when people are
adversely affected by our decisions. Fear is a dangerous feeling. It modifies our action and often
leads to cautiousness resulting to inaction. We need moral courage when facing a moral problem.
Here, it becomes necessary that systematic way of arriving at the right decision is needed.
Following the 7-step guide to moral reasoning could build moral courage in us.

A Seven Step Guide to Ethical Decision Making

(From Michael Davis, “Ethics and the University” (Routledge. Londom, 1999), pp. 166-167)
+1. State problem. For example, “there’s something about this decision that makes me
uncomfortable” or “do I have a conflict of interest?”
2. Check facts. Many problems disappear upon closer examination of situation, while
others change radically.
3. Identify relevant factors. For example, persons involved, laws, professional code, other
practical constraints (e.g., under $200).
4. Develop list of options. Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemmas”; not “yes” or “no” but
whom to go to, what to say.
5. Test options. Use such tests as the following:
• Harm test: Does this option do less harm than alternatives?
• Publicity test: Would I want my choice of this option published in the newspaper?
• Defensibility test: Could I defend this choice of option before a Congressional
committee or committee of peers?
• Reversibility test: Would I still think choice of this option good if I were adversely
affected by it?

13
• Colleague test: What might my profession’s governing board or ethics committee
say about this option?
• Organization test: What does the organization’s ethics officer or legal counsel say
about this?
6. Make a choice based on steps 1 – 5.
7. Review steps 1 – 6. What could you do to make it less likely that you would have to
make such a decision again?
• Are there any precautions you can take as an individual (e.g., announce your policy
on the question, change jobs, etc.)?
• Is there any way to have more support next time?
• Is there any way to change the organization (e.g., suggest policy changes at the next
department meeting)?

14
15