EASTERN VISAYAS

STATE UNIVERSITY

VISION
A Leading State University in Technological and Professional Education.

MISSION
Develop a Strong Technologically and Professionally Competent Productive Human Resource
Imbued with Positive Values Needed to Propel Sustainable Development.

CORE VALUES
E – EXCELLENCE
V – VALUE-LADEN
S – SERVICE-DRIVEN
U – UNITY IN DIVERSITY
 This module was created for special purposes, reproducing without prior notice to the author is
prohibited.
________________________________________

The author made his utmost best in order to

complete this module. More so, the author is highly open for any suggestions and critiques given
by the different readers who will happen to use this as a reference and read it with purpose.
_________________________________________

COPYRIGHT 2021

EASTERN VISAYAS STATE UNIVERSITY

CARIGARA CAMPUS
I dedicate this instructional workbook in Ethics to my students, this will help them learn the
importance of moral valuation and help them to a better citizen of our country.
 Understanding the foundation of moral valuation necessitates different approaches to the
study and learning of ethics contextualized in contemporary Filipino experience. This module is
designed to follow philosophical pedagogy developed for students taking this course.
First, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to EVSU – Carigara Campus for the continuous
support, motivation, and immense knowledge.

My special and heartily thanks to our Department Head, Dr. Eduvigis O. Leano who encouraged
and directed me. Their challenges brought this work towards a completion. It is with their supervision
that this work came into existence. Their guidance helped me in all the time of my work. I could not
have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my teaching in this institution.
I am also so thankful to my colleagues which provided me fruitful experiences for my professional
development.
Furthermore, I also thank my family who encouraged me and prayed for me all throughout.
May the Almighty God richly bless all of you.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

COVER PAGE
MISSION AND VISION
TITLE PAGE
DEDICATION
FOREWORD
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

CHAPTER 1: Understanding Morality and Moral Standards

Lesson 1: The Importance of Rules
Lesson 2: Moral and Non-Moral Standards
Lesson 3: Moral Dilemmas

CHAPTER 2: The Moral Agent

Lesson 1: The Filipino Character
Lesson 2: Moral Values
Lesson 3: Kohlberg Stages of Moral Development

CHAPTER 3: The Human Act

Lesson 1: The Meaning of Human Act
Lesson 2: Accountability of Moral Act

CHAPTER 4: Frameworks and Principles Behind our Moral Frameworks

Lesson 1: The Meaning of Ethical Framework
Lesson 2: Kant’s Deontological Ethics: The Duty Framework
Lesson 3: The Love and Justice Framework
 Lesson 1

The Importance of Rules

Everywhere you go are rules – at home, at school, in church, in the barangay. Do these rules
make our life more difficult and so should be eliminated or do these rules make our life more peaceful
and orderly? imagine your life, your home, your church and community without rules. In this lesson we’ll
study the importance of rules.

PRE-ACTIVITY

What if …?
a. What if there were no rules? What are the
possible consequences?
b. Are rules important? Why or why not?
Note: Write your insights about the questions above on a short bond
paper.

Rules are important to social beings, just imagine the chaos that
w
results from the absence of rules. What happens when students and
professors alike come to school in anything they want? Imagine what
happens when in the classroom everyone wants to talk at the same
time.

Let's go out of the classroom for more examples. What if there were no traffic rules? Rules can be expanded
to include the Philippine Constitution and other laws. What if there were no Constitution and other laws of the
land?
Rules are meant to set order. Rules (the Philippine Constitution and other laws included) are meant for man.
The greatest Teacher, Jesus Christ. preached emphatically, "The Sabbath is made for man and not man for
the Sabbath". The law of the Sabbath,i.e. to keep it holy and observe rest, is meant to make man whole by
resting and by giving him time to thank and spend time in prayer and worship for his own good.
For 'he sake of order in society, everyone is subject to rules. In a democratic country like the Philippines, we
often hear the statement "No one is above the law," including the highest official of the country. We are all
subject to rules or else court chaos.
Rules are not meant to restrict your freedom. They are meant to help you grow in freedom, to grow in your
ability to choose and do what is good for you and for others. If there are rules or laws that restrict your ability
or strength to do good, they are suffocating laws and they are not good laws. They ought to be abolished.
Any rule or law that prevents human persons from doing and being good ought to be repealed. They have
no reasons to exist.
In fact, if you are a rule or a law-abiding citizen, you don't even feel the restricting presence of a rule or law
because you do what the law or what the rule states everybody should do. Looking from a higher point of
view, this is the state when one acts not because rules demand it but because one sees he has to act that
way. It is like saying one no longer needs the rule or law because one has become mature and wise enough
to discern what ought to be done. This is an ideal state which the ancient Chinese sages (Confucius, Lao
Tzu) referred to as state of no-more rules, no-more laws. because people discern what is right or good and
do what is right or good without thinking or a rule or law; people are no longer in need of a government
because they can govern themselves. It is a state where one owns the moral standard not just abide by the
moral standard.

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:

• to state your insights about rules, and
• explain the importance of rules.

Activity 1.1
Direction: Understand each statement and write your answer in a short
bond paper.
1. Rules/law are made for the good of man. State the good that is
derived from the following school rules:
a. No ID, No Entry
b. Student/ Teachers tardiness beyond 15 minutes means absence
c. Any form of cheating is punishable with suspension.
d. Use of illegal drug is punishable with dismissal
2. The ancient Chinese sage named Lao Tsu taught: “Leave the people
to themselves, no laws and inner goodness will flourish” “The more
laws and commands there are, the more thieves and robbers will be”
Do you agree with his statement? Why or why not?
 Lesson 2

Moral and Non – Moral Standards

We often hear the terms “moral standards” and “non – moral standards”. What do these refer to?
What about the word immoral? Is there such a thing as immoral standards? Is immoral synonymous with
non-moral? Let’s find out in this lesson.

PRE-ACTIVITY

Direction: Classify the following phrases into groups: write your

answer in the Table below. Short bond paper.
No talking while your mouth is full
Do not lie
Wear black or white for mourning; never red
The males should be the one to propose marriage not females
Don’t steal
Observe correct grammar when writing and speaking English
Submit school requirements on time
Go with the fashion or you are not “in”
Don’t cheat others
Maintain a 36-24-36 body figure
Don’t kill

MORAL STANDARDS NON - MORAL STANDARDS

1. What is common to those listed under moral standards?

2. What is common to those listed under non-moral standards?
Ethymology and Meaning of Ethics
The term "ethics" comes from the Greek word "ethos" meaning "custom" used in the works
of Aristotle. while the term: ‘moral" is the Latin equivalent Based on the Greek and Latin etymology
of the word "ethics" ethics deals with morality. When the Roman orator Cicero exclaimed, "O
tempora o mores" (Cicero, 1856) (Oh, what time and what morals), he may have been trying to
express dismay of the morality of his time. -
Ethics or moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy which with moral standards, inquiries
about the rights or wrongness of behavior or the goodness or badness of personality, Trait or
character deals with ideas, with topics such as moral standards or norms of morality, conscience,
moral values and virtues. Ethics is a study of the morality of human acts and moral agents, what
makes an act obligatory and what makes a person accountable.
"Moral" is the adjective describing a human act as either ethically right or wrong, or qualifying
a person, personality, character, as either ethically good or bad.
Moral Standards or Moral Framework and Non-Moral Standards
Since ethics is a study of moral standards, then the first question for the course is, what are
moral standards. The following are supposed to be examples of moral standards: "Stealing is
wrong." "Killing is wrong:' 'Telling lies is wrong." "Adultery is wrong." "Environment preservation is
the right thing to do". "Freedom with responsibility is the right way." "Giving what is due to others is
justice". Hence, moral standards are norms or prescriptions that serve as the frameworks for
detaining what ought to be done or what is right or wrong action, what is good or bad character.

Moral standards are either consequences standards (like Stuart Mill's utilitarianism) or non-
consequence standards (like Aristotle’s virtue, St Thomas' natural law, or Immanuel Kant' good will
or sense of duty).
The consequence standards depend on results, outcome. An act that remits in the general
welfare, in the greatest good of the greatest number is moral. To take part in a project that results
in the improvement of the majority of people is, therefore. moral.
The non-consequences standards are based on the natural law. Natural law is the law of God
revealed through human reason. It is the "law of God written in the hearts of men." To preserve
human life is in accordance with the natural law. Therefore, it is moral. Likewise, the non-
consequence standard may also be based on good will or intention and on a sense of duty, respect
for humanity, treatment of the other as a human person. an act that is moral, springs from a sense
of duty, a sense of duty that you wish will apply to all human persons.
On the other hand, non-moral standards are social rules, demands of etiquette and good
manners. They are guide of action which should be followed as expected by society. Sometimes
they may not be followed, or some people may not follow them. From time to time, changes are
made regarding good manners or etiquette. In sociology, non-moral standards or rules are called
folkways. In short, non-moral actions are those where moral categories cannot be applied.
Examples of non-moral standards are rules of good manners and right conduct. etiquette,
rules of behavior set by parents, teachers. and standards of grammar or language, standards of art,
standards of sports set by other authorities, Examples are "do not eat with your mouth open;"
"observe rules of grammar," and "do not wear socks that don't match.
What Makes Standards Moral?
The question means what obliges us to follow a moral standard? For theists, believers in
God’s existence, moral standards are commandments of God revealed to man through prophets.
According to the Old Testament, the Ten Commandments were revealed by God to Moses. One
who believes in God vows to Him and obliges himself/herself to follow His Ten Commandments. For
theists, God is the ultimate source of what is moral revealed to human person.
How about. non-theists'? For non-theists. God is not the source of morality. Moral
standards are based on the wisdom of sages like Confucius or philosophers like Immanuel Kant.
In China. B. C., Confucius taught the moral standard, "Do unto others what you like others
to do unto you" and persuaded people to follow this rule because it is the right way the gentleman’s
way, Later. Immanuel Kant. the German philosopher formulated a criterion for determining what
makes a moral standard moral. It is stated as follows: "Act only according to that maxim whereby
you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." (1993) in other words. if a
maxim or standard cannot pass this test. it cannot be a moral standard. For instance. does the
maxim "Stealing is wrong" pass this test Can one will that this maxim be a universal maxim. The
answer is in the affirmative. The opposite of the maxim would not be acceptable. Moral standard are
standards that we want to be followed by all, otherwise. one would be wishing one's own ill fortune.
Can you wish “do not kill" to be a universal maxim'? The answer has to be yes because if you say
"no" then you are not objecting to someone killing you. Thus. the universal necessity of the maxim,
what ‘makes it a categorical imperative is, what makes it obligatory. "Stealing is wrong" means "one
ought not steal" and "Do not kill" means "one ought not kill." It is one's obligation not to steal or kill.
Ultimately, the obligation arises from the need ' of self-preservation.

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:

• distinguish between moral and non – moral standards.

Activity 1.2
Direction: Understand each statement and write your answer in a short
bond paper.
1. Explain/distinguished the difference between moral standards and
non-moral standards.
2. Does belief in God Strengthen a person to be moral? Explain your
answer.
 Lesson 3

Moral Dilemmas

After learning moral and non-moral standards, you must now have an idea of what a moral
experience is. When you find yourself in a moral dilemma, you are in for a moral experience. What
is a moral dilemma? This is the main focus of this lesson.

PRE-ACTIVITY

Direction: Read “The Pregnant Lady and the Dynamite”, then

answer the question given. Write your answer in a short bond paper.
A pregnant woman leading a group of five people out of a cave
on a coast is stuck in the mouth of that cave. In a short time, high tide
will be upon them and unless she is unstuck, they will all be drowned.
Fortunately, someone has with him a stick of dynamite which will
inevitably kill her; but if they do not use it everyone else will be drown.
what should they do?
1. What would you do if you were one of the men? Explain why
you decided to act that way?
2. The situation or the experience you went through is a moral
dilemma?
3. Is finding yourself in a moral dilemma, a moral experience?
Why or why not?

w
 A moral dilemma is a problem in the decision-making between two possible options, neither of which is
absolutely acceptable from an ethical perspective. It is also referred to as ethical dilemma. The Oxford Dictionary
defines ethical dilemma as a "decision-making problem between two possible moral imperatives, neither of which is
unambiguously acceptable or preferable. it is sometimes called an ethical paradox in moral philosophy." (Oxford
Dictionary).

Based on these definitions, moral dilemmas have the following in common: 1) "the agent is required to do
each of two (or more) actions which are morally unacceptable; 2) the agent can do each of the actions; 3) but the
agent cannot do both (or all) of the actions. The agent thus seems condemned to moral failure; no matter what she
does. she will do something wrong (or fail to do something that she ought to do).

This means that moral dilemmas are situations where two or more moral values or duties make demands on
the decision-maker. who can only honor one of them, and thus will violate at least one important moral concern no
matter what he or she decides to do. Moral dilemmas present situations where there is tension between moral values
and duties that are more or less on equal footing. The decision-maker has to choose between a wrong and another
wrong. The decision-maker is a deadlock. In the case of The Pregnant Lady and the Dynamite, there were two
options - use the dynamite and kill the pregnant woman but save the other 5 or don't use the dynamite and all the 5
will get drowned except the pregnant woman whose head is out.

To have a genuine dilemma. one of the conflicting solutions should not override the other. For instance, "...
the requirement to protect others from serious harm overrides the requirement to repay one's debts by returning a
borrowed item when its owner so demands. “Hence, "in addition to the features mentioned above, in order to have a
genuine moral dilemma it must also be true that neither of the conflicting requirements is overridden" (McConnel, T.
2019). This means that none of the contlictin8 requirements is solved by the other the persons involved in the dilemma
are in a deadlock. They find themselves in a "damn-if-you-do and damn-if- you-don't" situation.

Another example of a moral dilemma is the story from the Bible about King Herod. On his birthday. his
stepdaughter. Salome danced so well in front of him and the guests at his party that he promised to give her anything
she warned. Salome consulted her mother about what she should wish for and decided to ask for the head of john the
Baptist on a platter the king now had a choice between honoring the promise to his stepdaughter, or honoring the life
of John the Baptist. And Herod chose to have John the Baptist beheaded: The king had inadvertently designed a
moral trap for himself; a dilemma where whatever he decided to do would be morally wrong.
Meaning of a False Dilemma
On the other hand, a false dilemma is a situation where the decision- maker has a moral duty to do one thing
but is tempted or under pressure: to do something else. A false dilemma is a choice between a right and wrong for
example, a lawyer or an accountant can face an opportunity to prioritize self-interest over the client’s interest.

What to Do When Faced with a Moral Dilemma

Ultimately, dilemmas are conflicts in the application of moral standards. The question is which moral standards
must be followed? In a state of emergency, necessity demands no moral law. You have to decide based on your best
judgment or choose based on the principle of lesser evil or greater good or urgency.

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:

• explain moral dilemma as a moral experience, and
• distinguish between a moral dilemma and a false dilemma

Activity 1.3
A.
Direction: Write T if the statement is true and F if its false/incorrect.
_____1. A person or persons in amoral dilemma can easily choose which
course of action to take.
_____2. In a moral dilemma, one course of action between two options is
obviously immoral while the other choice is moral.
_____3. A person involved in a moral dilemma can choose both options.
_____4. In a moral dilemma, a person has a choice for the good, only that
because he is tempted, he ends up choosing that which is not good.
_____5. In a moral dilemma, a person is a torn between two good options.
 Lesson 1

The Filipino Character

The Weaknesses of the Filipino Character: A Socio-Cultural Issue

Moral Recovery Program: “Building a People, Building a Nation”

Submitted on April 27, 1988 by the Task Force to President Corazon Aquino, Senate andt he members of the press by
then Senator Leticia Shahani, the moving spirit behind the program. The weaknesses of the Filipino character as cited
in the Report are as follows:

1. Extreme family centeredness - Excessive concern for family means using one's office and power to promote
family interests and thus factionalism patronage, political dynasties and the protection of erring family members. It
results in lack of concern for the common good, and acts as a block to national consciousness.

2. Extreme personalism - "Takes things personally," cannot separate objective task from emotional involvement.
Because of this the Filipino is uncomfortable with bureaucracy, with rules and regulations and with standard
procedures. He uses personal contacts and gives preference to family and friends in hiring, services and even voting.
Extreme personalism leads to the graft and corruption evident in Philippine society.

3. Lack of discipline - A casual attitude toward time and space, manifested in lack of precision and compulsiveness,
in poor time management and procrastination. Aversion to following procedures strictly results in lack of
standardization and quality control. Impatience results in short cuts, palusot, ningas cogon. Lack of discipline often
results in inefficient work systems, the violation of rules and a casual work ethic lacking follow through.

4. Passivity and lack of initiative - Waiting to be told what to do, reliance on others (leaders and government),
complacence, lack of a sense of urgency. There is high tolerance for inefficiency, poor service, and even violations of
one's basic rights. Too patient and matiisin, too easily resigned to his fate, the Filipino is easily oppressed and
exploited.

5. Colonial mentality - Lack of patriotism, or of an active awareness, appreciation and love of the Philippines and
an actual preference for things foreign

6. Kanya-kanya syndrome, talangka mentality - Done by tsismis, intriga unconstructive criticism ... It is evident
in the personal ambition that is completely insensitive to the common good, e.g., the lack of a sense of service
among people in the government bureaucracy. This results in the dampening of cooperative and community spirit
and in the trampling upon other's rights.

7. Lack of self-analysis and self-reflection - The tendency to be superficial and somewhat flighty. In the face of
serious personal and social problems, there is lack of analysis or reflection and instead satisfaction with superficial
explanations and solutions.

8. Emphasis on porma rather than substance - ... This lack of analysis and emphasis on form is reinforced by an
educational system that is form than substance.
 At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:
• Analyze crucial qualities of the Filipino moral identity, and
• Evaluate elements of the Filipino character.

Activity 2.1
Direction: List down 5 Filipino traits and fill in the needed information in
the table below.

Filipino Trait What is What is What should

positive about negative about be done to
it it make it a
positive trait.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
 Lesson 2

Universal Values

Values are the motive behind purposeful action. They are the ends to which we act
and come in may forms. Personal values are beliefs about right and wrong and may or may not be
considered moral. Cultural values are values accepted by religions or societies and reflect what
important in each context.

Despite the claims of cultural relativism, the concept on the reality of universal values persists.
Are there universal values? Is honesty a universal value? Plato talked about the values or virtues of
temperance, courage, and wisdom. Jesus Christ preached the value of love from which springs
patience, kindness, goodwill, forgiveness, and compassion. Confucius taught righteousness,
human-heartedness, filial piety. Are not these universal values, that is, they remain values at all
times and in all places? Yes, Plato would say, they exist apart from the concrete world. On the other
hand, Aristotle would say that they exist embodied in the concrete individual as common or essential
characteristic. St. Thomas agreed with them, but the universals do not exist apart from the individual;
they exist as universal features individuated, instantiated in the individuals. In other words, the
universals are abstracted common features from individuals. For example, the universal
characteristics of man are that he is a "rational, sentient, living, body" are abstracted as
characteristics common to all persons. A human person differs from a stone because he/she is alive.
He/she differs from living things like plants because he/she is sentient, and differs from sentient
things like animals because he/she is rational. This universal character of a human person exists in
the mind as idea. Universals are immaterial and immutable, beyond (transcendent) space and time,
or spatio-temporal conditions. In the words of Van Peursen, they are termed as "logical structures"
underlying the material world and making the world possible.
The same thing is true with moral standards and values. The values of honesty and respect
for human life are characteristics individuated in all people who respect, do not harm, injure or kill,
human beings. All the standards and values implied in the Ten Commandments can be reduced to
the value or rule of love. This is because no one can wish or will the opposite, hatred, killing, stealing,
to be universal. Values are universalized because they can only be wished to be the values of all.
For instance, one cannot wish that killing be obligatory because it is like wishing anyone to come
and kill you. Using Kant's criteria, can these identified "universal values" be willed as universal. Can
one will these values be the values of all? Certainly, the answer is in the affirmative. Related to the
empirical findings on the universal values, Dr. Kent M. Keith (2003) came up with a list of
fundamental, or universal moral principles that can be found throughout the world. These are
grouped into negative and positive statements as follows:
• DO NO HARM. Do not do to others what you would not like them to do to you. Do not lie. Do
not steal. Do not cheat. Do not falsely accuse others. Do not commit adultery. Do not commit
incest. Do not physically or verbally abuse others. Do not murder. Do not destroy the natural
environment upon which all life depends.
• DO GOOD. Do to others what you would like them to do to you. Be honest and fair. Be
generous. Be faithful to your family and friends. Take care of your children when they are
young. Take care of your parents when they are old. Take care of those who cannot take
care of themselves. Be kind to strangers. Respect all life. Protect the natural environment
upon which all life depends

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:

Explain why universal vales are a necessity for human survival.

Activity 2.2
Direction: Write an essay about the importance of Universal Values on the
survival of man. Minimum of 300 words, write your answer in a short bond
paper.
 Lesson 3

Kohlberg Stages of Moral Development

Moral development refers to the process through which a human person, gain
his/her beliefs, skills and dispositions that makes him/her a morally mature person. Kohlberg
describe the stages of moral development in 3 stages, namely: Level 1 Preconventional Morality,
Level 2 – Conventional Morality, and Level 3 Post-Conventional Morality. Each level has two
stages each so that are six stages of moral development.

Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality

This is the lowest level of moral development in Kohlberg's theory. At the pre-conventional
level children don't have a personal code of morality, Instead, their moral code is controlled by the
standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking adults' rules, Authority is outside
the individual and reasoning is based on the physical consequences of actions. There is no
internalization of moral values.
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The child/individual does good in
order to avoid being punished. If he/she is punished, he/ she must have done wrong.
Children obey because adults tell them to obey. Moral decisions are based on fear of
punishment. It is a matter of obey or you get punished. e.g. Josef does not cheat because
he is afraid of a punishment, a failing grade and "I go to school because I am afraid to be
dropped and fail.
• Stage 2: Instrumental Orientation. Right behavior is defined by whatever the individual
believes to be in his/her best interest. "What's in it for me?" In this stage there is limited
interest in the needs of others, only to the point where it might further the individual's own
interests. It is a matter of "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours “mentality. An
example would be when a child is asked by his parents to do a chore. The child asks
“what's in it for me?" and the parents offer the child a reward by giving him a treat. In this
stage, right involves equal exchange Mario sees Juan get Miguel's pen. Soon he sees
Miguel retaliate by taking Juan's favorite pen. Mario does not report the incident to the
teacher because they involve equal exchanges.
Level 2: Conventional
Throughout the conventional level, a child's sense of morality is tied to personal and societal
relationships. Children continue to accept the rules of authority figures, but this is now due to their
belief that this is necessary to ensure positive relationships and societal order. Adherence to rules
and conventions is somewhat rigid during these stages and a rule's appropriateness or fairness is
seldom questioned.
• Stage 3: "Good Boy, Nice Girl" Orientation In stage 3, children want the approval of
others and act in ways to avoid disapproval. Emphasis is placed on good behavior and
people being "nice" to others. The individual is good in order to be seen as being a good
 person by others. Therefore, answers relate to the approval of others. The individual
values caring and loyalty to others as a basis for moral judgments. E.g. if a politician is
around in times of calamities primarily because he wants to appear "good boy" or “good
girl" to electorates, he displays stage 3 moral developmental stage. "To show to my
parents and teachers that I am a good student" and "I promised by parents never to be
absent fall under this stage of good boy, nice girl orientation.
• Stage 4. Law and Order Orientation. The child/individual becomes aware of the wider
rules of society, so judgments concern obeying the rules in order to uphold the law and to
avoid guilt. It is a matter of "I have to do this because the law says so." It is still blind
obedience to the law so morality still lacks internalization. “It is the right thing to do; "school
rules say so" as reasons for going to school are in stage 4.
Level 3 - Post-conventional Morality
This is the level of full internalization. Morality is completely internalized and not based on
external standards. Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles and moral reasoning is
based on individual rights and justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as far
as most people get.
• Stage 5. Social contract orientation The child/individual becomes aware that while
rules/laws might exist for the good of the greatest number, there are times when they will
work against the interest of particular individuals. In this level, individuals reason out that
values, rights and principles transcend the law. Laws are regarded as social contracts
rather than rigid orders. Those that do not promote the general welfare should be changed
when necessary to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
• Stage 6. Universal, ethical, principle orientation. Individuals at this stage have
developed their own set of moral guidelines which may or may not fit the law. They have
developed moral judgments that are based on universal human rights. The principles
apply to everyone. e.g., human rights, justice, and equality. The person will be prepared
to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the
process and having to pay the consequences of disapproval and/or imprisonment. When
faced with a dilemma between law and conscience, the person follows his conscience.
Kohlberg doubted few people reached this stage. (McLeod, 2013)

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to:

• Describe each stage of the moral development.

Activity 2.3
Direction: Identify what stage of moral development is portrayed in the
statement below. And explain each.

1. A 3 year old boy, Natsu always obey his father Igneel so he won’t get hurt.
3. Julius, the king of Clover Kingdom sacrifice his life to save humanity.
4. A Van tries to U-TURN in a NO U-TURN spot.
5. The law itself act as a unifying factor in maintaining peace.
 Lesson 1

The Meaning of Human Act

Not all acts of human person as a moral agent are considered human act. Some
may be classified as acts of man. This is what you will learn in those lesson in addition to the
determinants of the morality of human act.

Act of Man versus Human Act

After studying the nature of the moral agent, the next thing to do is to study the nature of human act
itself. Says Fr. Coppens, (2017) "(h)uman acts are those of which a man is master, which he has the power
of doing or not doing as he pleases." In the words of Panizo, (1964) "(h)uman acts are those acts which
proceed from man as a rational being." Observing prescribed diet, tutoring the slow learners and preparing
for board exams are examples of human acts. In other words, human acts are the acts of a moral agent.
Hence, "actions committed by unconscious and insane persons, infants, or by those who are physically forced
to do something, are not considered as human acts but acts of man." Likewise, "actions which merely happen
in the body or through the body without the awareness of the mind or the control of the will are not human
acts but merely acts of man." Examples of acts of man are breathing, blinking of the eyes, dilation of pupil of
the eye, perspiring and jerking of the knee.
The Determinants of the Morality of Human Act
In his book earlier cited, Rev. Coppens, S.J. says that to know whether an individual human act is
morally good, three things are considered. These are called the determinants of morality, namely, a) the
object of the act, b) the end, or purpose, and c) its circumstances. For an act to be morally good, all three
determinants must be without a flaw, according to the received axiom: "Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex
quocumque defectu" -- "A thing to be good must be wholly so; it is not vitiated by any defect."
The object of an act is the thing done. In reality, it is not distinct from the act itself, for we cannot act
without doing something, and that thing that is done is the object of the act; say, of going, eating, praising,
etc. The act or object may be viewed as containing a further specification - e. g., going to church, praising
God, eating meat. Now, an act thus specified may, when considered in itself, be good, bad, or indifferent;
thus, to praise God is good in itself, to blaspheme is bad in itself, and to eat meat is in itself an indifferent act.
But for an individual human act to be good, its object, whether considered in itself or as further specified,
must be free from all defect; it must be good, or at least indifferent.
The end, or purpose intended by the agent is the second determinant of an act's morality. The end
here spoken of is not the end of the work, for that pertains to the object, but the end of the workman or agent.
No matter how good the object of an act may be, if the end intended is bad, the act is thereby vitiated, spoiled
or impaired. Thus, to praise God is good in itself, but, if in so acting the intention would be to play the hypocrite,
the act is morally bad. This holds true whether the vicious end is the nearest, remote or last end; whether it
be actually or only virtually intended. On the other hand, a good end, though ever so elevated, cannot justify
a bad act; in other words, we are never allowed to do evil that good may result from there. Robin Hood robbed
the rich and distributed the money to the poor. No matter how noble Robin Hood's intention was for robbing
the rich, his act of robbing the rich is not morally acceptable.
 The circumstances of time, place and persons have their part in determining the morality of an
individual act. The moral character of an act may be so affected by attendant circumstances, that an act good
in itself may be evil when accompanied by certain circumstances; for instance, it is good to give drink to the
thirsty, but if the thirsty man is morally weak, and the drink is intoxicating, the act may be evil. (Coppens,
2017)
The object of the act is the act itself. The following are instances:using the name of God with
reverence; sincerely invoking God's name or the names of saints (the evil object is using the name of God
and the saints in vain), honoring one's parent, going to Mass on days of obligation, saving human life,
respecting other's rights and property, having pure acts and thoughts, being true to marital commitments,
telling the truth, etc.
The end, or purpose is the intention of the acting subject, or what inspires the acting subject. For
example, rendering free service to a neighbor with the intention of boasting about it. Or helping a neighbor
inspired by love of God. The first instance is immoral, while the second is moral. The guiding rule is the end
does not justify the means. The intention of helping a neighbor, say giving food, by stealing the food from
another neighbor, is never justified. This is what Robin Hood did. He stole from the rich and gave it to the
poor. Of course no matter how good his intention was, i.e. to help the poor, his stealing is not made right by
his good intention.
The circumstances, including the consequences, refer to the time, place, person, and conditions
surrounding the moral act. They either increase or diminish the moral goodness or evil of human acts. A
morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil
end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting "in order to be seen
by men").

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to,

Explain the meaning of human act, the morality and accountability of human act.

Activity 3.1
Direction: Answer the following question below.

1. Can an act of man be considered human act if the action is carried out
with malice? Why or why not?

2. what do you think his statement implies ‘The End Does Not Justifies the
Mean’?

3. Robin Hood robbed the rich and gave the money to the poor. Was his act
justified? Explain your answer.
 Lesson 2

Accountability of Moral Act

There are three bases for moral accountability, namely knowledge freedom and voluntariness. These
are the necessary conditions for the accountability of actions. First, a human act must be done knowingly,
second, it must be done freely and third, it must be done voluntarily (intentional or negligent). To be credited
for a good act or held morally liable or responsible for an evil act, a person must have done it knowingly,
willingly and voluntarily. Determining moral liability is analogous to determining criminal liability. In criminal
law, for instance, for you to be liable you must have done the criminal act knowingly, freely and willingly So
similarly, in ethics, for you to be morally liable, you must have done the unethical act knowingly, freely and
willingly or voluntarily.

Modifiers of Human Act

There are various factors which either increase or decrease accountability. They are called modifiers
of human acts. These are analogous to exempting, mitigating, aggravating and justifying circumstances
in criminal law. "They affect the mental or emotional state of a person to the extent that the voluntariness
involved in an act is either increased or decreased." They are as follows: 1) ignorance, 2) passions, 3) fear,
and 4) violence. (Panizo, 1964)
Ignorance is the "absence of knowledge." There are various degrees of ignorance. Traditional ethics
classifies them as vincible, invincible, affected, and supine or gross ignorance. "Ignorance, whether of the
law or of the facts, is either vincible or invincible. When it cannot be overcome by the due amount of diligence,
it is invincible; otherwise, it is vincible. The latter is said to be gross or supine when scarcely an effort has
been made to remove it, and if a person deliberately avoids enlightenment in order to sin more freely, his
ignorance is affected." The basic rule is invincible ignorance, one that is beyond one's ability to overcome, is
entirely involuntary, and hence removes moral responsibility: vincible ignorance does not free us from
responsibility.
Passion refers to positive emotions like love, desire, delight, hope, and bravery and negative
emotions like hatred, horror, sadness, despair, feat and anger. “Antecedent passions those that precede the
act, do not always destroy voluntariness, but they diminish accountability for the resultant act. In criminal law,
the commission of a criminal act "with passion and obfuscation" means the perpetrator is blinded by his
emotions lessening his accountability from maximum to medium or from medium to minimum Consequent
passions are those that are intentionally aroused and kept. The do not lessen voluntariness, but may increase
accountability.” (Paniza 1964).
Fear is the disturbance of the mind of a person due to an impending danger or harm to himself or
loved ones. Acts done with fear is voluntary but acts done because of intense or uncontrollable fear or panic
a involuntary.
Violence refers to any physical force exerted on a person by another free agent for the purpose of
compelling said person to act against his will. Actions performed by person subjected to violence or irresistible
force an involuntary and not accountable.
Moral Accountability for What Could Have Been
It is termed as sin of omission. Whatever one fails to do but what should have been done is also
imputable to him. This refers to failure act despite knowledge of being free, therefore different from negligence
lack of foresight. It is intentionally not doing same thing when one should have done it. It is failing to act as a
Good Samaritan when one should act as such. Pilate had the case of Jesus Christ investigated and found
Him innocent. He could have set Jesus free but he did not. Withholding information could have prevented a
disaster. Damaging consequences c have been avoided.

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to,

Analyze situations on moral accountability.

Activity 3.2
Direction: Read and understand each situation and answer the question.
Write your answer in a short bond paper.

1. A nurse unknowingly gave a patient an overdose of medicine. Is the nurse accountable for her action?
Explain your answer.

2. A teacher was vindictive in giving the grade of student A who happens to question a lot and
unfortunately expose teacher's lack of subject matter mastery. is the teacher accountable for not giving
student A the grade he truly deserves? Explain your answer.

3. Schools in the city have already suspended classes due to an incoming typhoon except school B
which was waiting for the decision for the school President. Student C wrote on Facebook - "That God-
damn stupid principal and Asst. Principal. When are they suspending classes? When all students are
wet and sick!!!!???" Was the student who wrote those in Facebook accountable? Explain your answer.
4. In Euripides' play Medea is a proud, powerful, self-driven woman who strives to avenge an act
committed by her husband, Jason. Jason has recently left Medea for another woman. This crushes
Medea, as she has sacrificed much for Jason, and truly believes that they are lovers meant to be
together for life. She enters a long period of mourning, and becomes inconsolable by even her closest
of friends. Eventually her sadness turns to anger, and she begins seeking revenge for the wrong she
has been done. Medea immediately begins plotting against Jason, and devises a plan, which she
believes, will hurt him in the worst possible way. She decides to kill everyone close to him, including the
children they have together, and destroy any legacy that may survive him. She carefully draws out every
detail of the plan, ensuring its completion. Medea is successful in this aspect, as she is able to carry
out everything she plans on .... Medea is forced to battle not only those around her, who beg her not to
take the lives of her children, but she must fight her conscience as well. In the end, Medea kills her own
children. (Source: https://www.megaessays.com/ viewpaper/36254.html)
Is Medea accountable for her acts? What modifies or decreases her accountability, if any?
 Lesson 1

The Meaning of Ethical Framework

An ethical framework is a set of codes that an individual uses to guide his or her behavior. It is just
another term for "moral standards" as discussed in the early part of this text. It is what people use to
distinguish right from wrong in the way they interact with the world. It is used to determine the moral object
of an action. An ethical framework guides an individual in answering these two questions: "What do I ought
to do?" and Why do I ought to do so"? So ethical frameworks serve as guideposts in moral life.

The various dominant mental frames may be classified as follows:

1) virtue or character ethics of Aristotle, 2) natural law or commandment ethics of St. Thomas and
others, 3) deontogical and duty framework of Immanuel Kant, 4) utilitarianist, teleological and consequentialist
approach and 5) Love and justice framework. They will be introduced here but will be discussed more in
detail in the succeeding lessons.
Virtue or Character Ethics of Aristotle
Virtue ethics asks, who is the ethical person? For Aristotle, the ethical person is virtuous, one who
has developed good character or has developed virtues. One attains virtues when he/she actualizes his/her
potentials or
possibilities, the highest of which is happiness. Happiness is the joy of self-realization, self-fulfillment, the
experience of having actualized one's potentials.
Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St. Thomas
For St. Thomas, what is right is what follows the natural law, the rule which says, "do good and avoid
evil." In knowing the good as distinguished from evil, one is guided by the Ten Commandments which is
summed up as loving God and one’s fellowmen.
Deontological and Duty Framework of Immanuel Kant
Kant's framework is deon or duty or deontological framework Deontology centers on "the rights of
individuals and the intentions associated with particular behavior... equal respect... given to all persons." The
"deontological approach is based on universal principles such as honesty, fairness, justice and respect for
persons and property." It is based will be the maxim of all. This acting based on a maxim that can be the
maxim of all is a duty, an obligation of every man or woman. Acting out of duty (deon) is acting out of good
will or intentions. Treating man as an end, not a means to an end is acting with good will or intentions.
ETHICS: LIFE AS IT OUGHT TO BE
Utilitarianist, Teleological and Consequentialist Framework The utilitarianist teleological approach
focuses on consequences. "The decision maker is concerned with the utility of decision. What really counts
is the net balance of good consequences over bad." The rightness of an action depends on the said net
balance of good consequences.
 At the end of this lesson , you are expected to,
Explain the meaning of ethical framework.

Activity 4.1
1. Explain ethical framework by means of an analogy. e.g. Ethical framework is to ethical
and moral behavior as conceptual and theoretical framework is to a research paper.
Other clues - What is an "ethical framework" for a guided tour?
What is an "ethical framework” of a
functioning organization for a year or more?
2. For easier recall and for mastery, develop at least one mnemonic device on the ethical
frameworks.
e.g. Deontological framework - Duty framework
3. For mastery, formulate a matching type of test like the one you did in the Activity
phase. Exchange test with your seatmate and answer the test separately then correct
answers together,
4. Compose a cinquain describing the ethical person based on any of the ethical
frameworks. (Note: A cinquain is A 5-line poem that consists
the following:)
Line one-one word
Line 2-2 words that describe line one
Line 3 - 3 action words (-ing verbs that relate to line 1)
Line 4 - 4 words (feelings or a complete sentence) that relate to
line
Line 5 - 1 word, synonym of line 1 or a word that sums it up
Person
Just, loving
Thinking, deliberating, choosing
I am grateful he is
Ethical
 Lesson 2

Kant’s Deontological Ethics: The Duty Framework

Kant's Ethics is now referred to as deontological. The term deontological has its root from the Greek
"deon" which means “duty": Hence deontological ethics focuses on "duty, obligation, and rights" instead of
consequences or ends. An act that proceeds from the will which wills it because it can be the will of all is a
right action. Willing and doing the will of all is a duty, regardless of the consequences.

Kant's Deontological Ethics: The Duty Frame ethics, argued that doing what is right is not about the
consequences of our actions (something over which we ultimately have no control) but about having the
proper intention in performing the action. The ethical action is one taken from duty, that is, it is done precisely
because it is our obligation to perform the action. Ethical obligations are the same for all rational creatures
(they are universal), and knowledge of what these obligations entail is arrived at by discovering rules of
behavior that are not contradicted by reason.
Kant's famous formula for discovering our ethical duty is known as the "categorical imperative." It has
a number of different versions, but Kant believed they all amounted to the same imperative. The most basic
form of the imperative is: "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law." So, for example, lying is unethical because we could not universalize a
maxim that said "One should always lie." Such a marim would render all speeches meaningless. We can,
however, universalize the maxim, "Always speak truthfully," without running into a logical contradiction.
(Notice that the duty- based approach says nothing about how easy or difficult it would be to carry out these
maxims, only that it is our duty as rational creatures to do so.) In acting according to a law that we have
discovered to be rational according to our own universal reason, we are acting autonomously in a self-
regulating fashion), and thus are bound by duty, a duty we have given ourselves as rational creatures. We
thus freely choose (we will) to bind ourselves to the moral law. For Kant, choosing to obey the universal moral
law is the very nature of acting ethically. (Mackinon, B. and Fiola A., 2015) The example, borrowing money
with no intention to pay bac cannot be universalized and therefore cannot be thica this become universalized,
there will be no more lenders and all banks will close.
The Duty Framework
Correspondingly, the duty-based approach can be applied as framework for ethical decision making:
In the Duty framework, we focus on the duties and obligations that we have in a given situation, and consider
what ethical obligations we have and what things we should never do. Ethical conduct is defined by doing
one's duties and doing the right thing, and the goal is performing the correct Good will
Kant says, "Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called
good without qualification, except a good will." Kant's criteria or framework of what is right or wrong is good
will". An act is said to be right or wrong depending on whether it is intentions." Is good will enough? cited,
regarding this concept is that "The road to hell is paved with good
Categorical Imperative: To serve the will as a principle Kant has two (2) versions of the categorical
imperative. The first version states “I a universal law." If one cannot wish or want that a certain rule or maxim
never to act other than so that I could will that my maxim should become becomes the maxim of all, that it is
not right to follow it. For instance, one cannot will that "thou shalt steal” becomes a rule to be followed by all
because others may ultimately and steal his property. One cannot wish that "killing" becomes the maxim of
all because he would not of course wish that someone will come to kill him.
The second version is as follows: "Always treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of
another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end." Treating the another merely as a
means to an end means equating him to a mere instrument, a tool, an object which is cast aside after use,
or can be sold or exchanged when no longer needed, or has value only for as long as it is useful. Such act
makes one a "user."
In contemporary philosophy, like Marcel or Buber's term, it is treating the other as an IT, a thing. That's
why they call the act as "thing-ization. In the parable of "Hope for the Flowers" by Trina Paulus, Stripe's
climbing the caterpillar's pillar to reach to top, where all that could be seen as a reward of climbing are other
caterpillar's pillars, was no other way than stepping on other caterpillars as a means of moving up higher.
Ought implies Can. This means that If and only if we can or are free to act in certain ways can we be
commanded to do so. This is one more moral principle ascribed to Kant, derived from two passages in his
works. One is stated as follows: "For if the moral law commands that we ought to be better human beings
now, it inescapably follows that we must be capable of being better human beings." Another one states as
follows: "The action to which the "ought" applies must indeed be possible under natural conditions.” The
Situation Ethics author, Joseph Fletcher, used this maxim several times to illustrate his situationism. In full
statement the saying would be, "If I ought to do something, then I can do it." By way of logical analysis, the
statement means, one's ability to do something is a Necessary condition for his being obliged to do it. In
Fletcher's terms, "you are obliged to do only what you can where you are."

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to,

Explain the meaning of the Kant’s Deontological Ethics.
Activity 4.2
DIRECTION: READ AND UNDERSTAND THEN ANSWER EACH STATEMENT

1. What is ethical is in accordance with first version of Kant's categorical

imperative State it and illustrate with a concrete example.
2. State the second version of Kant's categorical imperative. Give a concrete
example of using people.
3. For Kant, the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on one's good
will or intentions. Is this enough? "The road to hell is paved with good
intentions."
4. Speaking of Kant's good will, the greatest teacher, Jesus Christ, taught:
"... when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray
standing by the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. ..."
(Matthews 6:5)
...So when you give to the needy, do not sound a trumpet before you, as
the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be praised by
men....Matthew 6:2) Do the teachings of Jesus Christ support Kant's good
will? How?
5. An "ought" implies a "can". I am obliged to do only that which I can do.
"This is all that I can do for my family muttered a laborer father to himself
who is alcoholic and a chain smoker. Is the father acting in accordance with
"ought implies I can"?
6. One can no more be responsible than what he can knowingly, freely, and
voluntarily do. What should you do so that you grow in your freedom, in
your ability to perform your duty to do good?
 Lesson 3

The love and Justice Framework

The principle of Love

Greeks, namely, agape or charity, erotic or passionate sexual encounter, Christ did as narrated in the New
Testament are all acts of love. Feeding There are three well-known concepts of love originating from the and philia,
the affection between friends. Love as a moral framework is the agapeic. Agape is the love principle preached by
Jesus Christ. What the hungry, giving drinks to the thirsty, healing the sick, rendering service to those in need. In
general, as St. Thomas defined it , agape is "willing the good of another." It is the act of sharing, or giving more than
what is just because justice is just the minimum of love. In the language of contemporary thinkers, this is love as
"affirmation of the other's being." "being-with-others," "being conscious of the other's presence."

In Joseph Fletcher's situation ethics, agapeic love is absolute norm, the absolute framework for the
determination of the right thing to do or wrong to avoid. In moral reasoning, it is asked, is it an act of loving? Fr.
Bernard Haring, the advocate of ethics of personalism, was also quoted as saying, "(t)he heart of moral life is charity
to one's neighbor."

Social Justice

Social justice is equal access to wealth, opportunities, and privileges within society. Hence, promotion of
social justice is equivalent to promotion of the common good. It may also be said that promotion of the common
good is promotion of social justice. The common good is explained as follows:

In ordinary political discourse, the "common good” refers to those facilities whether material, cultural or
institutional—that the members of a community provide to all members in order to fulfill a relational obligation they
all have to care for certain interests that they have in common. Some canonical examples of the common good in a
modern liberal democracy include: the road system; public parks; police protection and public safety; courts and the
judicial system; public schools; museums and cultural institutions; public transportation; civil liberties, such as the
freedom of speech and the freedom of association; the system of property, clean air and clean Water, and national
defense. The term itself may refer either to the interests that members have in common or to the facilities that serve

Distributive Justice

Distributive justice is “justice that is concerned with the distribution or allotment of goods, duties, and
privileges in concert with the merits of individuals, and the best interests of society.” The following have features of
distributive justice: a) Egalitarianism is the doctrine of political and social equality. "No person shall be deprived of
life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the law.”
This is not equalization in terms of quantity, it is equalization in terms of entitlement to due process of law and equal
protection of the law. b) Capitalist and free-market systems let the law of demand and supply follow its course.
Ideally it is a self-regulation process. It lets any excess of demand be regulated by the limits of supply, and lets any
excess of supply be regulated by the limits of demand. This means no artificial control or regulations. It is supposed
to arrive naturally at its own equilibrium. Free market is supposed to be an equalizer. During waiting time for natural
course of things, public necessities or utilities may demand immediate intervention which should be more of an
exception than the rule. c) Socialists follow the rule, "from each according to his ability, to each according to his
needs." This requires collective ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange with the aim of
operating for use rather than for profit. Possible downside of this system is there is no motivation for expansion and
growth. d) Taxation is government's getting a part of what its people earn in order have money to spend for public
services, operating and maintaining public places or properties, for people's use. It is practically demanding from
taxpayers a minimum of justice, to make the enjoyment of the wealth at least more equitable although not
equalizer. It is a government interference with private property more or less compelling people to give a share from
the fruits of thei labor, a way of compelling diffusion of wealth. e) Protection and Preservation of Public Welfare -
The government has constitution-granted power to govern, to make, adopt an enforce laws for the protection and
preservation of public health unethical is that which gives pain and unhappiness. That which is ethical is that which
produces the greatest good (happiness) for the greatest number.

The Consequentialist Framework

In the Consequentialist framework, we focus on the future effects of the possible courses of action,
considering the people who will be directly or indirectly affected. We ask about what outcomes are desirable in a
given situation, and consider ethical conduct to be whatever will achieve the best consequences. The person using
the Consequences framework desires to produce the best. For Bentham and Mill, avoid pain, pursue pleasure. That
is what it means to ethical. What kind of pleasure is morally preferred?

Mill asserts intellectual pleasure. So it is not physical pleasure as expressed by the song of the alcoholic "In heaven,
there is no beer; that's why we drink beer here." Mill wrote: It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig
satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig is, of a different opinion, it
is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides. (Mill,
1907)

At the end of this lesson , you are expected to,

Analyze the love and justice framework.
Activity 4.3
DIRECTION: READ AND UNDERSTAND THEN ANSWER EACH STATEMENT

1. For Bentham and Mill pleasure is what is moral and ethical. Does
pleasure here mean self-gratification?
2. Are all pains ethically bad? What about the pains of martyrdom and acts
of heroism?
3. The utilitarianist advises us to avoid pain to be ethical. How can
you reconcile this with Catholic and Muslim tradition of fasting and
abstinence? Are these not sources of discomfort and pain?
4. Do you believe in the redemptive value of sacrifice, which is pain
basically? One of the eight Beatitudes in the Gospels states: "Happy are
the sorrowing for they shall be consoled."