Mallari, Rachelle M.

BEEd 2A
GE-Ethics | ASSESSMENT 4

1. Discuss your understanding of the different frameworks discussed in this

modules by presenting the main concern of each. Provide real life
situations where these frameworks can be used.

Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics is obtained in his approach to his examination of

moral philosophy, the Nicomachean Ethics. It is a philosophical inquiry into the
nature of the good life for a human being. In this study, it was explained that the
happiness is the human’s ultimate goal. It is the highest good at which all human
activity ultimately aims. It is also discussed here that between opposed vices of
excess and deficiency, there will always be a virtuous habit that lies in the mean.
In simple words, Aristotle is implying that virtue lies in the middle of two
extremes; one of excess and one of deficiency. Excess pertains to the amount of
something that is more than necessary while deficiency is related to the term
lack or shortage of something (in other words, shortcoming). For example, when
it comes to “Self-Expression”, “truthfulness” is the mean between the excess of
boastfulness and the deficiency of understatement/mock modesty.
The second framework is Saint Thomas Aquinas’ Natural Law Theory.
In this study, Aquinas said that God created the world according to natural laws
and that humans had received the gift of life in which everything functions
smoothly. Why did he said that? Simple because we had all the things that we
seek naturally, the things that we need and want in order to live; the basic goods.
Our existence, food, drink, to reproduce and have a family, society, and the
desire to know. Along with these, pre-philosophical principles are already had by
everyone as well, according to Aquinas. He said that all creatures are ordered to
an end, have natures whose fulfillment is what it is because of those nature. In
my own understanding, he is implying that all human beings are designed to find
his own good (and choose the good) freely as he want to direct himself or not to
his true end.
The next framework is Kant’s Moral Philosophy. In this theory, He
thought that there is no real possibility of moral perfection in this life and few of
us fully deserve the happiness we are lucky enough to enjoy. He also said that
we are bound to perfect ourselves morally and promote the happiness of others
and we have an unlimited span of time to do these, for Kant said that even in the
afterlife, we can still perfect ourselves morally. He is also promoting the use of
the universal laws as he once said that we do not need religion to determine
what laws are those, because what’s right and wrong is totally knowable just by
using our own intellect. For example, you woke up late and are not able to eat
breakfast before going to class, because you are hungry, the thought of taking
some food away from your classmate comes on your way. By that you will think if
you’ll steal that food because you are hungry or refrain from doing it because you
know that stealing is morally wrong.
 Next is the Utilitarianism, which states that “the morally right action is the
action that produces the most good and the morally wrong action is the one that
leads to the reduction of the maximum good.” In this theory, it’s all about the
consequences, the result from doing something whether the means is morally
good or bad as long as it benefits the majority. For example, in school, the
teacher shocks the class by bringing up a surprise quiz. Everyone did not
prepare nor study for this quiz. In order to pass (which makes the students
happy), majority of the class will cheat. If everyone succeeds from cheating and
it made them fulfilled and happy, then it is considered to be as morally right, on
the other hand, if everyone is harmed because of this act, then it is considered to
be morally wrong.
Lastly, we have the Justice and Fairness, which are indeed related and
some were confused between the two because they can be interchangeable.
Justice is the principle that people receive what they deserve while Fairness is
the quality of making judgments that are free from discrimination.
In the module, it is stated that “Individuals should be treated the same, unless
they differ in ways that are relevant to the situation in which they are involved.”
For instance, Rachel and Anne are siblings, they did the household chores
together. From sweeping the floor to the dishwashing. If they did the work
together, then they must be given the same reward. If Anne was given more
reward than Rachel just because she is older, then we have an injustice and
unfairness which can result to conflict between the two.

2. Whenever you make important decisions in life, which among the

frameworks discussed do you use the most? Explain your answer.

When I make important decisions in life, I think the most influential

framework for me is the Kant’s moral philosophy of Universal Laws. I always
think about the existing and non-existing laws before doing an act. I must say
that I have always been careful when it comes to important decisions that I take
up too much time thinking about what to do and what to not. I also think about
the consequences of my act as well. If I do this, will the result be good or bad?
Am I doing the right thing or not? Does it harm others? And if I came up with the
decision that has the least amount of negative consequences then I must take
that alternative, of course with respect to the universal laws and moral standards.
In church, I was a Youth Leader, and the people that I am dealing with
have unique differences that sometimes they are getting out of hand. I have all
the reasons to be angry and sulk but I did not. Why? Because I know that if I
yelled and burst my anger in them, they will probably not attend in church
gatherings anymore because of the fear that I would throw hatred in them. Or
maybe because of the shame that I humiliated them in some way. And if that
happens the church will have less servants than it usually has.
 What I mean here is, between anger and patience, I must choose patience
for it will not harm or hurt anyone. I can just tell them what’s wrong and what has
to be done in a more calm manner for it will always be a good idea to pick the
choice where we wouldn’t hurt or harm anyone.

3. What is your opinion on Philippine Taxation? Do you think it’s fair? Explain
your answer.

Tax is indeed a need for every government. It is the fuel that makes the
government function. It helps to fund the government’s projects for economic
development and progress. It’s also the lifeblood of outstanding government
employees like teachers and etc.
When it comes to paying the taxes here in the Philippines, I must say that
the contribution of every citizen is fair because the amount of their tax payments
depends on their annual income. So if you earn a little, your tax will be lesser
than those who earn bucks of money. However, the Government seems to not
use the funds wisely. The Philippines is one of the highest maximum tax rate of
35 % in South East Asia but also one of the poorest nations. And I think the term
“unfairness” points to the relationship of the Government and the citizens. Come
to think of it, the people are reducing their salaries in order to pay taxes and end
up getting nothing but poor quality government and poverty rate. What I mean is,
the Government must use these funds wisely and wholly dedicated to the
citizens of the Philippines.
Paying taxes is never painless as they say, but if the so-called “Kaban ng
Bayan” is being pocketed by the corrupt politicians, then UNFAIRNESS and
INJUSTICE will always be the word to describe what Philippine Taxation is all
about.