Notes on Theoretical Frames in Ethics

1. The Divine Command Theory and Natural Law

- Divine command theory is an objective and universal frame of ethics. It teaches us that morality is
dependent on what God commands and forbid us to do. This is an ethical theory that teaches people
the necessary obedience to the law of God and the law of man.

- This command may be in a form of God’s plan for his creation. Before the world was made, he sets
the plan-the grand design, master plan and the purpose for each of His creatures like man, animals
and the world as a whole. It may also be in a form of His will. The will of God is pleasing, good and
perfect. Thus, anything that is not good, nor pleasing to God and others, or is not perfect, is not the
will of God. Death, for example, is not pleasing to God and man. Thus, it is not His will when we die.
Illnesses are not pleasing to both God and man. Both of these are not within God’s will. Both of his
will and purpose in creating us and the world are called eternal law.

- This command or order was revealed through time, history and even in stories of faith. This
command is called divine law. The Divine Law (revealed in history over time and on daily basis) was
recorded in scriptures, both in Old and New Testaments. In OT, the divine law is summarized in
Decalogue or the ten commandments, while the law or order in NT is summarized in two: loving God
with all our hearts and soul; and loving the neighbors the way we love ourselves. But what is in the
scriptures do not represent the entire will or plan of God for this world to have order. What is in
scriptures are very few, limited and are not the only laws or orders (commands) of the Lord.

- The natural law is another command that God has placed in each heart, conscience and intelligence
of man. This law cannot be understood unless we take it from the point of view of creation and the
concept of “Image and Likeness” in creation account from scriptures. Before man was created on the
sixth day, He wants him to share for His Goodness, Love and Life. With these purposes, these are
engraved in our nature as man. And that nature becomes the order or law in itself.

- The image of God in us is in the form of spirit or soul which gives life to each man. Thus, the soul is
the first principle of life. As creator, God is the biggest spirit. Our life or soul is a share of such big
spirit- the perfect one. But ours is limited. The likeness of man to God is by virtue of being endowed
with natural reason or intelligence, free will and conscience. Ocampo (2018) cited Thomas Aquinas
calling natural reason as the rational soul. It is in the conscience of man God has placed the law –as
his nature. As human being, our nature is good which we share from the greatest good, God Himself.
That goodness shared from the creator becomes a law in man’s heart or conscience- a subjective
norm of morality.

- The participation of man in the eternal law is through the natural law (Lott, 2016). The first
measure of action is the natural reason or intellect- the first principle of human action. The judging
activity of man in the light human reason is what constitutes the second principle. The dictate of
man’s intelligence or reason is to do good and avoid evil. These three constitute the natural law. This
law is in our nature for being gifted with intelligence, will and conscience. The conscience is at the
core of our being where God communicates us to do good and avoid evil. It is inside of our being
God commands us something. It is just right to conduct ourselves in constant discernment and
reflect such order. If we cannot follow this law, then we are not acting according to our very nature
as human beings. And so the call is, we have to heed or follow the voice of God in our conscience to
maintain a life of virtue (Bulaong et al., 2018).
7 RULES OF NATURAL (THOMAS AQUINAS)

1. LIFE or PRESERVATION OF LIFE

2. REPRODUCTION
3. EDUCATION/ EDUCATING THE OFFSPRING
4. SEEKING GOD
5. LIVING IN THE SOCIETY
6. AVOIDING ANY OFFENCSE
7. CHUNNING THE IGNORANCE

ORDER

1. ETERNAL LAW – came from God

2. DIVINE LAW- revealed by the time and history by chosen people
3. MORAL LAW- either eternal or divine law
4. POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE HUMAN LAW- positive- promoting basic rules of natural law and
negative – opposing the basic rule (death penalty)

2. Virtue Ethics
A theory of virtue should have several components: 1. An explanation of what a virtue is 2. A list
specifying which character traits are virtues 3. An explanation of what these virtues consist in 4. An
explanation of why these qualities are good ones for a person to have.

-the theory should tell us whether the virtues are the same for all or whether they differ from person
to person or from culture to culture.

What is a virtue?

-Rachels and Rachels (2007) cited Aristotle for defining it. Virtue is a trait of character manifested in
a habit. A virtue is habitually characterized not only done once or twice but a continuous living up of
the trait. Example: Being honest cannot be a virtue when you are honest in some instances and
sometimes you are not. Virtue= you are honest in all circumstances and at all times.

What are virtues? -benevolence -fairness -patience -civility -friendliness -prudence -compassion
-generosity -reasonableness -Conscientiousness -honesty -self-discipline -cooperation
-industriousness -self-reliance -courage -justice -tactfulness -courteousness -loyalty
-thoughtfulness -dependability -moderation -tolerance

What do courage, generosity, honesty, loyalty consist of? -Aristotle define virtue as the “mean by
reference to two vices: the one of excess and the other of deficiency. 1. Courage- is a mean
between cowardice and foolhardiness. 2. Generosity –is a willingness to extend one’s resources to
help others. It is a mean between stinginess and extravagance. 3. Honesty – is characterized by
someone who does not lie. 4. Loyalty-

Why are the virtues important? -Courage is good because life is full of dangers and without courage
we would be unable to cope with them. -Generosity is desirable because some people will inevitably
be worse off than others and so will need help. -Honesty is needed because without it, relations
between people would go wrong in myriads ways. -Loyalty is essential to friendship; friends stick by
one another even when they are tempted to turn away.
“Virtue ethics is rooted in the philosophy of Aristotle and remains a major force in ethical thought.
As reinterpreted for Christianity by Thomas Aquinas…. Virtue ethics turns up in nonsectarian
classrooms as well, and it has been quite fashionable at times… Aristotle was interested in
excellence, not obligation” (Hooker, 2018, p. 103). This is opposite to what Immanuel Kant promotes
that we have the duty and obligation

“Excellence is achieved when potential is fully actualized. An excellent paring knife is one whose
sharp blade and ergonomic design maximize its cutting efficiency. An excellent human being is one
who fully actualizes his or her potential. It’s not so obvious what that potential is, but Aristotle
offered a suggestion. Much as the heart brings to the body a unique pumping capability, he saw
humans as bringing to the world certain splendid characteristics that no other being possesses.
Aristotelians call these the virtues, whence the name virtue ethics. They include intelligence, honor,
courage, loyalty, a sense of beauty, and sophrosyne, which is the ability to find the right balance
among these” (Hooker, 2018, p. 105).

-Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics has a central question about “character.” He asked, “What is the
good of man? And his answer is “an activity of the soul in conformity with the virtue. To understand
ethics, we must understand what makes a person virtuous like courage, self-control, generosity, and
truthfulness.

Character - Habit- Virtue

-To develop a virtue, you have to maintain and observe a life of excellence. This is simply “achieving
the highest purpose of a human person which concerns the ability to function according to his
reason and perform an activity well or excellently. Therefore, virtue is something that one person
strives for in time or over time. This means that virtuous life cannot be realized by a single act. Being
an excellent person must work on doing well in her day-to-day life. (Bulaong et al., 2018).

-Bulaong et al., (2018) cited Aristotle in saying that excellence is an activity of the human soul.
Therefore, one needs to understand the structure of his soul which must be directed by his rational
activity in an excellent way.

-The human soul is divided into two parts: the irrational element and the rational one. The irrational
man consists of the vegetative and appetitive aspects. The vegetative plays the function in giving
nutrition and providing activity of physical growth of the person. The irrational part of the man is
the realm where we grow and develop virtues. The appetitive aspect functions the desiring faculty of
man. And so, desires belong to the irrational part of the soul. The act of desiring

is an impulse that naturally runs counter or opposite to reason and most of the time refuses to go
along with your reason. Sexual impulse, as an example, is so strong in person that one tends to
ignore reasonable demands to control such impulse. Unlike vegetative aspect, the desiring faculty
can be subjected to reason. Aristotle said: Desires are subject to reason even though these do not
arise from the rational part of the soul.

-it is clear that only the rational faculty of man is responsible of exe
3. Deontological Ethics and Kantian Ethics

Terms to define: 3.1 Deon – means duty, obligation, necessary, ought to be done or a moral
mandate. 3.2 Ontology – means nature- nature of reality

- In this moral frame, ethics or morality is something that is absolute or categorically an imperative.
Morals are rules which obligated people to do and there are no exceptions. These morals are
something universal or applicable to different cultures and societies. Religion or race has no place in
this frame.

- In this frame, there are really acts or behaviors that are good, right and acceptable by their nature.
There are also bad, wrong and unacceptable ones based on their nature too. Regardless of their
means, end and circumstances, there are acts which are really good, even before a person can do or
pursue it. But these good acts cannot justify a bad means or end.

- Kant (1721-1804) argued that, lying is never right, no matter what the circumstances are. That
reason requires all that we should never lie. Our behaviors or conducts are governed by “ought”.
Whatever is ought to be done should be done, and whatever is ought to be avoided, should never be
done.

- Rachels and Rachels (2007) describe Categorical Imperatives as moral obligations and these are
necessary. These categorical ought are binding on rational agents simply because they are rational.
This means, categorical imperatives/oughts are possible because of human reason. Categorical
oughts derived from a principle that every rational person must accept. They must be based on a
moral maxim or binding basis which Kant described as:

“Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law.

- On the other hand, there are also hypothetical imperatives. They tell us what to do provided that
we have the relevant desires. This means that the binding nature of hypothetical imperatives is
dependent on one’s desire. Example: If you don’t like to be a politician, then there is no reason for
you to enroll in political science course or public administration. But if you want to be a politician,
then you have to undergo schooling the needed course and file for a candidacy for the election. See?
Hypothetical imperatives, whose oughts or demand to act, were dependent on one’s desire. What is
the desire? To be a politician. What is the Hypothetical imperative? file a candidacy and enroll to a
course. But those who do not like to be a politician cannot be obliged to either enroll in political
science or to file a candidacy.

Therefore, hypothetical imperatives are not necessary. And so others can be exempted (Rachels &
Rachels, 2007).

- An act becomes universal if you want others to do the same. Do you expect others to be honest? Of
course, it is always a yes. Then, this becomes a universal rule. Always tell the truth and never lie. To
never tell a lie is not dependent on your desire. Honesty is applicable to all. Everyone expects others
to be honest too. You too or all of us will expect the same.

- Kant would have these reasons (1) we should do only those actions that conform to rules that we
could will to be adopted universally; (2) if we were to lie, we would be following the rule “It is
permissible to lie”; (3) This rule could not be adopted universally, because it would be self-defeating:
people would stop believing one another, and then it would do no good to lie; and (4) therefore, we
should not lie.

- Aside from the categorical imperative, Kant also teaches the value of duty/agency, autonomy,
human dignity, rational will, treating man as end not a means in itself. Let’s talk about human
dignity. Every person has the same self-worth or value because he is rationale. This value is intrinsic
which makes every person valuable. It would not increase nor decrease. Prostitutes have the same
dignity with us who are not prostitutes. That’s why man cannot be used as means to others’ end.
Thus, it is a categorical imperative when Kant says:

“Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end
and never as a means only.”

- Respecting one’s rationality is to recognize that every person is autonomous. Autonomy is the
property of our rational will. Autonomy is governing our own selves or life and no one can dictate
what we are to do.

4. Consequential Ethics and Utilitarianism –

Consequentialism is an ethical frame in which its basis of morality is the result of the action. Thus,
the nature of an action is dependent on the nature of the result. If the result is good, then the act
itself is good and when the result is bad then the act itself is also bad. Consequence is among the
elements to consider before judging whether an act is bad or good. But in this frame, consequence
is the sole basis whether our action is bad or good.

- Utilitarianism is one among the consequentialist theories of ethics. Others utilitarian theories are
hedonism, altruism, Utilitarian ethics is upholding the principle of utility. - Jeremy Bentham, is one
of the proponents, explained that morality is not about pleasing God, nor it about being faithful to
abstract rules. Morality is about making the world as happy as possible (Rachels et al.,2007). He also
urged that there is one ultimate moral principle, the principle of utility. This principle requires you to
choose whether actions would have the best consequence for everyone concerned. - Bentham put
it, “By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action
whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish the
happiness of the party whose interest is in question.”

- John Stuart Mill is one of the leading advocate of utilitarian moral theory. Mill presents the main
idea that we should envision a certain state of affairs that we would like to see come about-a state
of affairs in which all people are as happy and well off as they can be. Thus, in deciding what to do,
we should ask what course of conduct would promote the greatest amount of happiness for all
those who will be affected. This seems to be a radical idea. - The classical utilitarianism of Bentham
and Mill can be briefly summarized (1) actions are to be judged right or wrong solely by virtue of
their consequences, nothing else matters; (2) in assessing consequences, the only thing that matters
is the amount of happiness or unhappiness that is created by such action. (3) each person’s
happiness counts the same. –
UTILITARIAN- others first before the self

HEDOISM- self first before others, self pleasure

INTENSITY- hoe intense the pleasure is

DURATION- how long the pleasure will last

CERTAINTY- how sure your action

REMOTENESS- how far it is when the action is done

5.Cultural Relativism –

Briefly, it means that “different cultures have different moral codes” (Rachels & Rachels, 2007, p.18).
This means that to understand morality you do it from the perspective of one’s culture. There are
folkways, norms and codes in one culture that are not accepted or considered morally good or
acceptable in another. These cannot be judged as morally wrong or morally rights outside of such
culture. You can only judge them when these actions are observed and judged within that group or
society. Outside of that society, it is an act of disrespect to the people of that culture.

Major Claims/Propositions held by Cultural Relativists (Rachels & Rachels, 2007, pp. 18-19): 1.
Differences have different moral codes; 2. 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, that is right,
at least within that society; 3. There is no objective standard can be used to judge one society’s code
as better than another’s. in other words, there is no “universal truth” in ethics, there are no moral
truths that hold for all people at all times. 4. The moral code of our own society has no specific
status; it is but one among the many. 5. It is mere arrogance for us to judge the conduct of other
peoples. We should adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.

Consequences of Taking Cultural Relativism as our Ethical Frame (Rachels & Rachels, 2007, pp. 21-
22): 1. We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to our own. 2.
We would decide whether our actions are right or wrong just by consulting the standards of our
society. 3. The idea of moral progress in called into doubt.

Major lessons to learn:

1. Respect other culture.
2. Practice tolerance toward other cultures.
3. Avoid judging one culture against or over another
4. Be sensitive to other cultures.