Page 1 of 6

INITAO COLLEGE Code: GE 5

Jampason, Initao, Misamis Oriental Course Title: ETHICS
2nd Semester, S.Y. 2021 - 2022 Units: 3
Instructor: WAREN S. ABAYABAY
Mobile Number: 09076307048
e-mail address: warenabay2x@gmail.com
Contact Schedule: Monday – Friday (8:00am-7:00pm)
Facebook Group Page: Ethics 2nd Semester SY:21-22 (BEED II & BSHM II)

Module 5-6

Topic: Desired Learning Outcome(s):

 What is Moral Dilemma (And the  Identify and differentiate the three levels of moral dilemmas.
Three Levels of Moral Dilemmas)  Understand the basic tenets why only human beings can be
 Freedom as the foundation of moral ethical.
acts  Make their own philosophical insights on freedom.
Duration: 3hrs
ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION

What is Moral Dilemma (And the Three Levels of Moral Dilemmas)

Moral Dilemma Meaning and Dilemma

Basically, the word ‘dilemma’ refers to a situation in which a tough choice has to be made between two or more
options, especially more or less equally undesirable ones. From this meaning or definition alone, we can see that not all
dilemmas are moral dilemmas.

‘What is moral dilemmas’

Many searches for the keyword “What is moral dilemmas.” Also called ‘ethical dilemmas,’ moral dilemmas are
situations in which a difficult choice has to be made between two courses of action, either of which entails transgressing a
moral principle. It is safe to say that at the very least, moral dilemmas involve conflicts between moral requirements.

Moral dilemma examples

In discussing moral dilemmas, the online Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives this example from the Book of
Plato’s Republic:

 “… Cephalus defines ‘justice’ as speaking the truth and paying one’s debts. Socrates quickly refutes this account
by suggesting that it would be wrong to repay certain debts—for example, to return a borrowed weapon to a friend
who is not in his right mind.’
 “Socrates’ point is not that repaying debts is without moral import; rather, he wants to show that it is not always
right to repay one’s debts, at least not exactly when the one to whom the debt is owed demands repayment.’
 “What we have here is a conflict between two moral norms: repaying one’s debts and protecting others from
harm…” (“Moral Dilemmas,” n.d.)

Notice that what is common to moral dilemmas is conflict. In each ethical dilemma, an agent regards himself as
having moral reasons to do each of two actions, but doing both actions seems to be ethically not possible.

Moral dilemma in ethics

The following are the key features of a moral dilemma:

(a) the agent is required to do each of two (or more) actions;

(b) the agent can do each of the actions; but the agent cannot do both (or all) of the actions.

Thus, in moral dilemmas, the agent appears condemned to moral failure. That is, no matter what he does, he will
do something wrong, or fail to do something that he ought to do.

In our example above (the case given by Plato), many would say that it is more important to protect people from
harm than to return a borrowed weapon. Or, some would suggest that the borrowed item can be returned later, when
the owner no longer poses a threat to others.

Thus, we can say that the moral requirement to protect others from serious harm overrides the ethical
 Page 2 of 6

requirement to repay one’s debts by returning a borrowed item even when its owner so demands.

Nonetheless, there are ethicists who propose that when one of the conflicting moral requirements overrides the
other, the case is not a ‘genuine moral dilemma.’

Therefore, in addition to the features mentioned above, in order to have a genuine moral dilemma, some add
that it must also be the case that:

(c) neither of the conflicting moral requirements is overridden.

The Three Levels of Moral Dilemmas

a. Personal Dilemmas

Simply put, these personal dilemmas are those experienced and resolved on the personal level. Since many ethical
decisions are personally made, many, if not most of, moral dilemmas fall under, or boil down to, this level. French
philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre gave an example or a case that could exemplify a personal moral dilemma:

“Sartre tells of a student whose brother had been killed in the German offensive of 1940. The student wanted to
avenge his brother and to fight forces that he regarded as evil. But the student’s mother was living with him, and he was
her one consolation in life.’

“The student believed that he had conflicting obligations. Sartre describes him as being torn between two kinds of
morality: one of limited scope but certain efficacy, personal devotion to his mother; the other of much wider scope but
uncertain efficacy, attempting to contribute to the defeat of an unjust aggressor.” (“Moral Dilemmas,” n.d.)

We can give many other examples of personal moral dilemmas. If someone makes conflicting promises, he faces a
moral conflict. When an individual has to choose between the life of a child who is about to be delivered and the child’s
mother, he faces an ethical dilemma.

b. Organizational Dilemmas

Basically, ethical cases encountered and resolved by social organizations are organizational moral dilemmas. This
category includes moral dilemmas in business, medical field, and public sector.

For example, a hospital that believes that human life should not be deliberately shortened and that unpreventable pain
should not be tolerated encounters a conflict in resolving whether to withdraw life support from a dying patient. This is a
common moral dilemma faced by healthcare organizations and medical institutions.

Moral dilemmas also arise in professional work. Administrative bodies in business are confronted with situations in
which several courses of action are possible but none of them provide a totally successful outcome to those affected by
the decision or actions taken.

These moral dilemmas in business involve issues about corporate practices, policies, business behaviors, and the
conducts and relationships of individuals in the organizations. Other business-related dilemmas pertain to the social
responsibility of businesses, employee rights, harassment, labor unions, misleading advertising, job discrimination, and
whistle blowing.

On the part of public sector, government leaders and employees have a moral duty to act in a manner that is fair and
unbiased. They should be loyal to the public and ought to put public interest before personal gain, and fulfill duties of
competency, integrity, accountability, and transparency.

Having said that, public officials nonetheless may encounter foreseeable moral dilemmas in fulfilling these ideals. So
ethical or moral dilemmas which arise include the following examples:

 whether or not to favor family, friends, or campaign contributors over other constituents;
 favoring the agenda of one’s political party over a policy one believes to be good for the community;
 dealing with conflicting public duties inherent in serving both as a council member and as a member of an agency
or commission;
 resigning from organizations in which membership may give rise to future conflicts;
 becoming whistle blower even if it means potentially derailing a policy objective one is pursuing; and,
 accepting gifts if it is legally permitted but creates the appearance of impropriety.

c. Structural Dilemmas
 Page 3 of 6

These structural moral dilemmas pertain to cases involving network of institutions and operative theoretical paradigms.
As they usually encompass multi-sectoral institutions and organizations, they may be larger in scope and extent than
organizational dilemmas. An example is the prices of medicine in the Philippines which are higher compared to other
countries in Asia and in countries of similar economic status. Factors affecting medicine prices include the cost of
research, presence of competition in the market, government regulations, and patent protection.

The institutions concerned may want to lower the costs of medicine, thereby benefiting the Filipino public, but such a
move may ruin the interests or legal rights of the involved researchers, inventors or discoverers, and pharmaceutical
companies which own the patent of the medicines or healthcare technologies. An example of dilemma which is also
structural in nature is that of Universal Health Care (UHC). Locally applied, it is called “Kalusugan Pangkalahatan” (KP). It
is the provision to every Filipino of the highest possible quality of health care that is accessible, efficient, equitably
distributed, adequately funded, fairly financed, and appropriately used by an informed and empowered public. “Kalusugan
Pangkalahatan” (KP), as a government mandate, aims to ensure that every Filipino shall receive affordable and quality
health benefits by (ideally) providing adequate resources – health human resources, health facilities, and health financing.

Nonetheless, health financing is first and foremost a big issue here. Government could set aside bigger budget for
health for the implementation of this provision. But then, this would mean cutting down allocations on other sectors (such
as education or public works.).

FREEDOM AS FOUNDATION OF MORAL ACTS

When talking about freedom and responsibility, aren’t these contrasting words? Freedom connotes no ties, no
hindrance, no blocks. Responsibility connotes doing something, not because you want to but because it is expected of
you. There are Eastern and Western philosophers who viewed that responsibility follows freedom. What does this mean?

Only Human Beings Can Be Ethical

Another basic tenet in ethics is the belief that only human beings can be truly ethical. Most philosophers hold that
unlike animals, human beings possess some traits that make it possible for them to be moral:

A. Only human beings are rational, autonomous, and self-conscious. The qualities of rationality, autonomy, and self-
consciousness are believed to confer a full and equal moral status to those that possess them as these beings are
the only ones capable of achieving certain values and goods. For instance, in order to attain the kind of dignity and
self-respect that human beings have, a being must be able to conceive of itself as one among many, and must be
able to consciously select his actions rather than be led by blind instinct.

B. Only human beings can act morally or immorally. Strictly speaking, an animal which devours another animal cannot
be said to be immoral. In the same manner, no matter how good an animal’s action seems to be, it cannot be
technically said to be moral. Only human beings can act morally or immorally. This is important in Ethics because
only beings that can act morally can be required to sacrifice their interests for the sake of others. Not able to truly
act morally, animals could not really sacrifice their own good for the sake of others, but would even pursue their
good at the expense of others.

C. Only human beings are part of the moral community. The so-called moral community is not defined in terms of the
intrinsic properties that beings have, but rather in terms of the essential social relations that exists between or
among beings. Distinctively, only human beings can possess or practice values such as love, honor, social
relationships, forgiveness, compassion, and altruism. Moreover, only human beings can communicate with each
other in truly meaningful ways, can engage in economic, political, and familial relationships with each other, and can
also form deep personal relationships with each other. These kinds of relationships require the members of such
relationships to extend real concern to other members of these relationships in order for the relationships to
continue. Another thing human beings have that no animal has is the ability to participate in a collective cognition.
That is, we, as individuals, are able to draw on the collective knowledge of humanity in a way no animal can.

Freedom as a Foundation of Morality

As explained above, one of the reasons animals cannot be truly ethical is that they are not really autonomous or free.
Likewise, a robot, no matter how beneficial its functions may be, cannot be said to be moral, for it has no freedom or
choice but to work according to what is commanded based on its built-in program.

Basically, morality is a question of choice. Morality, practically, is choosing ethical codes, values, or standards to guide
us in our daily lives. Philosophically, choosing is impossible without freedom. Morality requires and allows choice, which
means the right to choose even differently from our fellows. In their daily lives, people make the choice to give to charities,
donate time and money to schools, mentor and children, open businesses, or protest against animal cruelty.
 Page 4 of 6

Everyone who wishes to function morally or rationally in a society has to make choices virtually every minute of the
day. Practically, the sum of our choices can be said to define our specific ‘morality.’ Applicably, using the government or
one’s culture to coerce people to behave in a certain way is not morality but the antithesis of morality. This principle in
ethics applies even when the motive is pure.

Philosophical Insights on Freedom

1. Freedom is a Gift
According to Gabriel Marcel, freedom is the ability to act significantly. Free acts are significant because they
help to make us who we are as human beings. Freedom is not merely the ability to make arbitrary choices
because we are not free if everything that we can choose to do is insignificant in the first place. Freedom is the
ability to make significant choices and, according to Marcel, it is gift given to us by God.

2. Freedom is Complementary to Reason

One of Aristotle’s ethical doctrines asserted that freedom and reason are complementary. In Aristotle’s view,
the human person as a moral agent must exercise practical rationality in order to determine how to pursue his or
her ultimate end. Self- direction, rather than bare spontaneity, is the crucial characteristic of the free person.
Aristotle considered freedom and reason as necessary faculties for consciously making sense of things (events,
occurrences, phenomena, situations).

3. Freedom is Absolute
Existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Satre’s concept of freedom is not the freedom to do something or
anything. In Sartre’s view, the human person is “absolutely free”. Freedom sets the human person apart from
other creatures. You might say “But what about animal freedom? Animals- unless caged- are also free. Animals
just roam around, eat when they need to, and sleep where they want. Animals are not tied down with
responsibilities like humans.” Yes, it is true that animals are- unless caged- free. In fact, animals also have a
notion of freedom. When they are caged, animals will try to escape from their cages. This kind of freedom is called
freedom from restrictions. It is a primitive kind of freedom. It is freedom for mere survival.
Humans, on the other hand, have higher kind of freedom. The freedom of the human person is beyond
freedom from restrictions. In fact, a person in jail is still free. He is free to think, to change, and to become a better
person. A prisoner id free to redefine himself. As human persons, we are free to make choices. We are free to
decide. And we are free to use this freedom to attain goals higher than satisfying basic needs.

4. Freedom Demands Responsibility

Jean-Paul Sartre said “You are free” because he believed a person always has a choice, Thus, according to
Sartre, you must choose. His idea was that freedom is the capacity to choose, that even not choosing is a choice.
It is important to note however, that he also added the concept of responsibility to freedom. According to Sartre,
even though individuals must make their own choices because they are free, these choices (though freely made)
also have consequences to it. These consequences to freedom are something that the person must endure.
Therefore, it can be said that in Sartre’s concept, responsibility follows freedom.
Chinese philosopher, Lao Tzu also discussed freedom and responsibility. Lao Tzu advocated that a person
can and should choose to act, but his or her actions should be that which would result in harmony. Lao Tzu’s idea
was that in any society, the exercise of one’s freedom is not absolute. The person is free to do anything; but it is
not without consequence of one’s actions. Responsibility, as a moral quality serves as voluntary check and
balance of one’s freedom. Without proper balance limitless freedom is a dangerous as an extremely controlling
social group. Great social injustices have resulted from such radical mindsets.
ASSESSMENT

Essay: In a 1 whole sheet of paper, answer the following questions. (20 points each)

1. Which among the three levels of dilemma is the most difficult and why?

2. Make your own Philosophical Insights on Freedom.

REFERENCE:
https://myinfobasket.com/what-is-moral-dilemmas/
https://pdfcoffee.com/lecture-handout-4-freedom-as-foundation-of-moral-acts-pdf-free.html
INITAO COLLEGE
P-2A, Jampason
Initao, Misamis Oriental
Mindanao, Philippines 9022
 Page 5 of 6

PRELIM EXAM
ETHICS (GE5)
Name: ___________________________________________ Learning Hub: ___________________________
Course/Year/Group: ___________________________________ Instructor: Waren S. Abayabay

Direction: Read comprehensively each scenario and answer the following question.

Scenario 1
Contact with Students

Mr. J is very popular with the students. He often converses and jokes with the students in the halls
between classes. It is common for him to greet female students and staff with a hug and male students and
staff with a pat on the back. One student has complained to the administration that Mr. J’s hugs or physical
contact makes him uncomfortable. Mr. J has been advised by the principal to stop all physical contact with
students and staff. He agrees to try, but he can’t promise anything because that is the way he is and he
isn’t doing anything wrong.

1. What possible issues/concerns might this scenario raise?

2. How could this situation become a violation of the law, the “Code” or other school/district policies?

3. In this situation, what are some potential negative consequences for the teacher, for students and the school
community?

4. What responses/actions will result in a more positive outcome and/or what proactive measures might be
considered?

Scenario 2
 Page 6 of 6

Student Confidentiality

Ms. D, a third-year 7th grade math teacher, complains to her next-door neighbor about a difficult
student in her class, identifying the child by name and providing specific details about the student’s
academic record. Ms. D says that the neighbor doesn’t know the student personally, so there should be no
problem discussing the student and the situation.

5. What possible issues/concerns might this scenario raise?

6. How could this situation become a violation of the law, the “Code” or other school/district policies?

7. In this situation, what are some potential negative consequences for the teacher, for students and the school
community?

8. What responses/actions will result in a more positive outcome and/or what proactive measures might be
considered?