uy Se ete Cee eee cate reasrbideppamnyientmiergs) ayes ee es on ty neha wo ego in ad ale. Dee | Se ee ts to re] oe TE ee te) Ce ea he eer ene] open apart fox Scion ee a Ce od ETHICS Marc Oliver D. Pasco Ae VTS CUR O MONON ESM Jack see peor ea a cease ‘oeorETHICS Mare Oliver D. Pasco V. Fullente Suarez Agustin Martin G. Rodriguez awe WG puoltsttin co © &E Publishing, Inc. 2018i Peking Fiagle, Quene City Pinal inietenesp an Cppigat © 2018 by CF Pain, Te Mare Olver D, Paso, V- Pallet Suter, Ad Ags Marts. Rodtigee ALLIGHTS RESERVED. No gut ofthis publeation ‘Day be repo, toed a Ftieval stem, ce {Tanned In any form or by any manele techni, photocopying, recoding, o otherwise ‘atthe po witon prin the publ ogsing Pelion Data ack Dein: Past Andee U: Pages (Cove Ds Ruth Aane D: El Table of Contents PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION ‘The Study of Ete and Curl Coneptons ‘of the Good What ie Ethics? ‘The Moral Act rom the Act to the Person PART I: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS Introduction Gav and Gowa and Habituation Ethics and Ethos Plato's Insight Into the Good ‘Chapter : Virtue Ethics: Aristotle. Introduction Ethics asthe Art of Living Wel Eudaimonia ‘The Soul Virtue, the Mean, and Pruction! Wisdom Contemplation and Philosophical Knowledge Conclusion Study Questions Exercises Reference 5‘Chapter I: The Natural Low: St. Thomas Aquinas Introduction tsi Deus non daretur Conscience and Natural Law ‘Three Contemporary Questions ‘The Relational and Perfection of Love in Aquinas Conclusion Guide Questions Exercise References ‘Chapter Il: Deontological Ethics: Immanuel Kant Introduction... . ‘Autonomous Reason, Goodwil, and Duty ‘Obligation is Understood as "Man as an End in Himself/Hereelf, ‘Autonomous, and Universaizable Kantian Ethics and Religion Conclusion ‘Study Questions Exercise References Chapter IV: Utilitarianism: John Stuart Mill. Introduction ‘The Greatest Happines Prizcple Replies to Objections To the objection that happiness is unattainatle To the objection that Utiltarian morality is incompatible with self-sacrifice To the objection that social concern fsa rare motive for action The Ultimate Sanction 4s 45 a 50 shice gee or a zeae al 82 Conclusion... aon shaw 08 Study Questions aia e Beare, 34 siglo eb tbe spepaeddsniviai) 87 Reference . omc ay Eb eltlin ia ‘Chapter V: Asian Ethieal Traditions. 88 Introduction ta i ‘a ‘The Vedas and Upanishads bebe 0 Buddhism Chinese Philsopty nd Confucian Ethics Conclusion Study Questions ©. see rend witatOB Beereisas. es ond 21108 References ‘ alate sKE108 Chapter VI: Discourse Ethics . . a Beat Ge Introduction ae 106 ‘Competing Conceptions ofthe Good ceeet ty “Legislating” for Autonomous, Rational Beings us Shared Opinion and Will-Formation . . ng Conclusion, i - 2 Study Questions sings 126 Exercise t ule wr References . . m) vera PART Il: SPECIAL TOPICS IN ETHICS . 129 Introduetion 130 ‘Chapter VI: Environmental Ethics Fae 132 Introduction 182 Vesious Approaches to Environmental Ethics +135 Peter Singer and Tom Regan ‘on the Ethical Treatment of Animals . 135‘Chapter X: Blomedical Ethics . Introduction Poul Taylor and Biocentriom 00. oss 0 6 S188 : ‘ds Leo's Land Be “Sih | Reson Bonet Cae Climate Change and Sustainable Development - ood? ica of "Pxenatil Parsonhood” Kobék and the Human Being as Dweller ry Ectople Pegancy and the Principle of Double if. Conclusion . : ss fed Cuihe Bede Enbiiaciiicte; oes Mus "Setblnprovement, and General Wellbeing 197 rere . : Extraordinary Means, Euthanasia, on LO and the Significance of a ae Wil. 199 ae ‘Conclusion bw Sob von eetitl ome Study Questions ae We 200 282 Exercise... a ea Normative Theories of Business Ethics 10 ttt Referenoss ne ee The Stockholder Theory oe aie ‘CONCLUDING REMARKS ley 2 205 The Stakeholder Theory ent es i8t ‘The Social Contract Theory 0 158, nee. . oa . 207 eldenboch and Robin's Conceptual Model ‘THE AUTHORS of Corporate Moral Development 161 The Sane of Orgnitinl Nort Deverent “163 ‘Conclusion . ‘167 ‘Why Feminist Ethics? ii eT Equality and Discrimination 17 How We Can Work Toward Emancipation... . 182 Conclusion 188 Study Questions. . 189 Exercises. . 7 190 References 3 = 190Paul Taylor and Biocentrism 138 Aldo Leopold's Land Ethic io Glimate Change end Sustainable Development ua Kobsk and the Human Being as Dweller at Conclusion. . « i us Study Questions ~ aonoui Exercises 150 References : : 151 CChopter Vii: Business Ethies 6. 2182 Introduction 152 ‘Normative Theorie of Busines Ethic 20155 ‘The Stockholder Theory... - 2185 The Stakeholder Thaory . - euAst ‘The Social Contract Theory . - . 159 Reidenbach and Robin's Conceptual Model ‘of Corporate Moral Development 161 ‘The Stages of Organizational Moral Development . . 163, ‘Conclusion ‘ . 167 ‘Study Questions ee. Exercises ogee References . . ‘ eee Chapter 1X: The Question of Women ‘ond their Emancipation... . +2170 Introduction 170 ‘Why Feminist Ethics? silt Equality and Discrimination am How We Can Work Toward Emancipation 182 Conclusion = eth Study Questions eens 189 Exercises we 190 References ae 190 Piaptiereennees (Chapter X: Biomedical Ethics 192 Introduction... . « an 192 Personalist Biomedical Care ee eee: | Ethics of “Prenatal Persouhood” 193 Ectopic Pregnancy and the Principle of Double Effect . . 195 Child-Bearing Enhancements, Self-Improvement, and General Well-being aor ‘Extraordinary Means, Buthanasia, ‘and the Significance of a Living Will 199 Conclusion. . 201 ‘Study Questions 202 Exercise... 208 References 2 208 CONCLUDING REMARKS tik 1 205 INDEX. ‘arty 207 ‘THE AUTHORSPREFACE This is a course about being. human. It. is » reflection fon what it means to exist as a person, who is rational and fre and seeks to do the good. Its aim isto help each student understand the implications of human freedom and the basis for acting in a way that recognizes and honors that fevedom, However, in order to truly understand what it means to live ‘sa free human being, the various conceptions of the good where actions are based should be explored. ‘This means engaging in a dialogue with certain philosophers and studying the philosophical traditions. ‘Thus, this text will give a guided tour of some of the most important and often sed theories of thical reflection, showing that different people from different traditions understand ethical human behavior differently, that present conceptions of ethical behavior developed over time find built upon other tradition’, and that an awareness of the various traditions gives a person a broader perspective of ‘reative and insightful human behavior. Although the authors ‘make a stand that the good is not arbitrary, they recognize ‘that in any soctety, competing andl evolving conceptions of the {od exist. tis hoped that this course wil guide the students in their quest for understanding authentic human behavior ‘and lve it, ‘There are two major sections in this work. ‘The first Section discusses the different academic traditions based fu ie theories of major philosophers. Ia the Philippines fand most Westorn influenced academic institutions, the ‘standard philosophers considered as bass for ethical thinking fare Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant, and the Usilitarian philosophers. Depending on the preference of the teacher, Asian traditions, such as the Confucian and Buddhist ‘traditions, are also diseussed. The firt part reviews these‘theories to acquaint the students with various disciplined reflections on how to articulate the basis of the good and how to discern the reasonability and ethical viability of some actions. Each of these philosophers gives @ very carefully reasoned ground for living as an ethical being that is worth studying and considering for one's own discernment. ‘The second part covers particular areas of ethical thinking that have arisen in the last century. Among these fare feminism, ecology, and business agd medical ethics ‘They emerged in the 20th century fom the developments ‘of modern society brought about by new social forms and technologies, as well as economic systems and forms of life that have challenged the traditional ethical systems to focus ‘on the particular questions they are faced with and apply and ‘broaden the traditional frameworks. The course takes a quick survey of these and indicate how students can embark on ‘these questions and their resources fr deeper reflection. ‘The authors hope that this will be @ genuinely useful guide for students to think about the complex question of what it means to be good and what it means to live as food persons. The question has become more complex as wwe discover new ways of being human. And thus, we are presenting here some examples of how people have tried to come up with the student's own guide to living a good, Ibuman life. We present these discussions of eatlier thinkers because they were able to think these questions through in a way that is both profound and useful to our lives. We hope that the students ee this opportunity to reflect along with the thinkers and not simply memorize what they have said General Introductio The Study of Ethics and Cultural Conceptions of the Good Why is there a need to study ethics at all as a subject in college? Clearly, only a few, if there are any at all, of the students in this course are philosophy majors and are interested in philosophical questions academically. In fact, ‘most students in an ethics course probably think that suck endeavor is a waste of time and distracts them from their major. Why then is it important to take a course in ethics? Does not everyone already have a sense of what is good and bad behuvior? Does not everyone have an instinct about what ‘one ought to do, and what one's duties are? Why is there « need to spend time thinking about what is already inherent in everyone's mind? Firstly, it is true that there are traditions that guide ‘one’s actions It is impossible for anyone not to have grown up with some sense of good and evil, proper and improper, the ought and ought not. People mostly think that they know ‘exactly their basis of the good and that it is reasonable. owover, a person's understanding of the good hardly ever foes unquestioned, especially in today’s world. Devoting one life to one's parents’ needs seems perfectly logical until one ‘Wife, who grew up in a different tradition, questions it. The contractualization of labor for greater profit seems the most ‘oasonable course of action until onc encounters the sufferings ‘of people who have to face the end of their contracts every five months. The subtle harassment of woten, such as ogling fand throwing lewd jokes, seems harmless until a woman files ‘a case against an offender in Quezon City where ordinances ‘agninst harassment exist.People like to think that their traditions are already clear and unquestionable to serve as basis for how they should act. This is because people grow up with traditions. Traditions fare a part of culture. Culture isa system of codes that gives the world meaning and shapes the behavior of people. It also determines proper bebavier. This includes what we eat and how we prepare food, how we talk and what language we tse, what we make and how we make and utilize things, how ‘we understand the meaning of life and death, and how we recognize the ultimate meaning of life, Culture is our code ‘that shapes how we understand, what life is worth living, and what it means to be human. ‘These are some of the ways culture shapes the way people act. In the province of Pampanga, penitents line the streets during Holy Week to whip themselves. For them, it fs a way to participate in Christ's sacrifice and by doing s0, they cleanse themselves of their sins and are spared from punishment. Mostly, people who engage in these practices tome from the more traditional communitios influenced, by Spanisl-style Catholicism and the so-called animistic world ‘view. Other Catholics who are educated in moce Westerized, modern systems, do not feel the need to engage in such practices and even judge the flagellants as “backward” However, the flagellation is perfectly natural and acceptable to those who practice it because in their culture, flagellation is a way to participate in Christ's existence and, in a way, participate in is being and power. Tn come cultures, engaging in excitement and fun is amoral. Sexual partners may oot flways have serious relationship with each other and merely “hook-up” for fun, and that is perfectly acceptable fas long as contraceptives are used and partners protect themselves against diseases. Thus, the meaning of sexual ‘activity in these cultures is not necessarily connected to activities for SGunerac inTRooUcTION Jove and procreation, lineage’ propagation, and property transmission. In other cultures, which are more agricultaral or ‘where the transmission of property is important, perhaps sex ‘sa leisure activity is less acceptable, Also, in cultures wire ‘monogamy Js. associated with romantic love and. personal flourishing, sex is often related to committed relationships, although not always to marriage. Among these people, theit system of meanings coded by their eulture shapes how they understand sex and acceptable sexual behavior. Some people fannot even conceive of sex as a leisure activity because in their cultuse, the idea or set of behaviors related to it does not exist. The experience of sex as fun is not even a real ‘experience for them because itis not part of the experiences that their culture provides. Wile beating is another kind of behavior that is eulturally determined. In some cultures where the status of women Js that of property or is tightly controlled because of the Importance of lineage, it is cystomary that women accept their husbands’ authority, submit to their will, and serve all ‘heir needs. Thus, women can be forced to have sex with their husbands. Women accept the fact that they cannot ‘move in public without a male chaperone, that they cannot ‘own real estate as individuals, they cannot travel without. a ‘male family member's permission, and they can be beaten for ‘whatever reason their husbands deem right without recourse {0 any relief. In other cultures where women's happiness fand fulfilment are valued above those of the clan or the community, all of the aforementioned scts are considered vlolence, violations of basic rights, and crime. People from ceultures whose women are more “liberated” cannot begin to lunderstand how women of the non-“iberated” cultures accept such abuse. But because the culture of the non-"liberated” ‘women shape their perceptions of the relationships between ‘men and women, their rights and duties, and their felingsGenenat INTRODUCTION regarding the “strictness” of their husbands, itis possible that they do not feel abused or violated. Tt ean, therefore, be noted that the conception of the good 4s shaped by culture as itis the very basic system of codes ‘that shapes human behavior. This could be dangerous in a way because not all cultures and their conception of the good reflect the good or what ought to be. Some cultures can be destructive to human beings. For instance, some cultures ‘tend to encourage war and colonial plunder. Others encourage fovereonsumption and exploitation of the poor for profit. Because of these peoples cultures, they are oriented toward violent behavior and do not even realize that they do violence toward their neighbors, Most corrupt government officials do ‘not think that they are doing harm because they were formed in weulture where self-interest allows for the violation of rules of governance and the comman good. Thus, one cannot rely folely on one’s culture to come to a genuine understanding of the good. ‘There is always the possibility that one's cultural conception of the good can lead to destructiveness and violence ‘Bat whose conception of the good is “the good”? Usually, the good fs defined by @ dominant system or group. The jgood is defined by what has worked for people to flourish. People value cooperation over conflict because it makes hhuman survival easier. People value arranged marriages to ‘build alliances. Thus, what people usually believe to be the oon is usually what is useful and effective for survival and flourishing Rut people are not only concerned about the ‘useful and effective. People also seek to realize what they consider to be ethical acts that lead to human flourishing. How does one know what is actualy the good that genuinely Jeads to human flourishing? Thus, the discipline of ethics is Important because it provides people with a basis upon which to discern their own accepted ethical systems and a basis for ‘broadening thei own conceptions of the good. What is Ethics? ‘What do people think about when they think ethically? What is the experience on which ethical reflection is ‘grounded? It is grounded on the experience of free persons ‘who have to actin difficult situations. It developed from the reality that whea people act, they do not merely need to Iknow the best way to realize something but there are times ‘when they need to act in a way that realizes the good. And ‘the good doos not always mean the easiest or most expedient ‘way. Ethical norms and the question of good and evil arise sehen peoflle need to act as free persons. But not all actions ‘are inberently ethical. Actions only require ethical reflection when they are free acts that involve a person's desire to realize the god. Questions of the good are not questions of practicality or ‘questions of realizing one’s desired end. They are questions that refer to a person's freedom and ability to live according to what he/she considers to he the good. In different ages of Jnuman civilizations, the particular norms of the good have taken on different forms. However, at heart, these norms express the human realization that free action is defined by ‘an ought that is not measured by how practical results are ‘achieved but by how human beings act in a way that realizes ‘their capacity to freely and creatively respond to the order of things: whether this order is grounded on a transcendent ‘order or human reason, Ethical questions arise when human beings intuit that their actions must authentically fulfil ‘heir freedom in response to a ground of authentic human Eating and breathing are not usually thought about ‘a ethical or unethical. After all, these are just functions of the body. Howover, when eating is thought of in relation to ‘human freedom, the ethical question comes in. For instance, eating could involve the eating of food produced by peopleGenemac introoucTion who are exploited. They are not pald a living wage so that the factory owners earn more. On top of that, they source their raw materials by polluting the waters of a community, ‘Whoever eats that product participates in the exploitation and destruction because buying, the food supports the activity of the manufucturer. In this ease, eating bocomes an ethical question because although eating isa bodily function, eating Hy caplet pROSGLe ood Bes’ tee ABA entails the human capacity to choose what makes one good. Tt also reveals how human beings have a choice to act in a creative or destructive way toward others. Certainly, eating canned fish could be an easy and inexpensive way to get ‘triton, but i could also be winethica!. ‘Thus, ethics has something to do with realizing the fullest potential as free persons acting in the world and doing right for others. Its not about being efficient or achieving goals. It is about realizing what people intuit to be the good. Human beings intuit that life is not just about existing or survival, ‘and human actions are not just about expediency. Somehow, ‘human beings sense that there is this thing they call the good ‘which they are bound to realize to genuinely be human and to build better societies ‘This course explores how philosophers have tried. to ‘explain this mysterious intuition of the good and what they understood were the paths to realizing a life lived according to the good, HEM The Moral Act ‘Human beings are complex beings. Unlike other organisms that are simply driven by the survival instinct, Inman beings ‘experience the world in 8 variety of ways through a variety ‘of perceptive capacities. Bacteria are driven solely to replicate themselves; plants seek only nourishment and growth, ‘and animals seek to address their bunger and reproduce ‘themselves. Apart from our rational eapacity which allows us ‘to reckon reality with imaginative and calculative lenses, our feelings also play a crucial part in determining the way we ‘navigate through various situations that. we experience, We ‘do not simply know the world and others; we also feel their ‘existence and their value. ‘We are pleased when others compliment us fora job well done. We got angry when we are accused of a wrongdoing ‘we did not do, We become afraid when we are threatened bby someote, and we feel anguish and despair in moments ‘of seemingly insurmountable hardship. Most of the time, we ‘act based on how we feel. This is something we share with ‘animals to a certain degree. We seek food when we are ‘hungry and we wish for companionship when we are lonely. ‘However, unlike animals thet are instinctively programmed to ‘act in accordance with how they fool, we have the capacity ‘to refloxively examine a situation before proceeding to act ‘with respect to how we fel. In other words, although feelings provide us with an initial reckoning of a situation, they should not be the sole basis for our motives and actions {A person who is in'a state of rage towards a perceived ‘enemy or competitor is likely unable to process the possible ‘consequences of his/her actions done impulsively. Feelings seek immediate fulfilment, and i is our reason that tempers ‘these compulsions. Feelings without reason are blind. Reason sets the course for making ethical and impartial decisions ‘especially in moral situations although it is not the sole ‘determining factor in coming up with such decisions, Reason and feelings must constructively complement each other whenever we are sahing, cloices. Whe felings outl a> anger, jealousy, and shame are out of control, hence without ‘the proper guidance of reason, one's moral capacities become ‘short-sighted and limited. Reason puts these emotions in their proper places secking, not to discredit their validity butGENERAL INTRODUCTION calibrating them in such # way that they do not become the primary motive in making moral decisions. However, it must be noted that reason in and by itself {is also not’ sufficient instrument in assessing moral situations. Reason can sometimes be blinded in implementing and following its own strict rules that it becomes incapable of empathy for the other. While it is morally wrong for someone to steal food out of hunger, to punisl a person for doing it without even trying to listen to his/her reasons for committing such an act may be considered cold and eruel ‘That is not to say that the act is deemed right after one finds out why someone stole. It is then viewed as a complex fact, connected to-a web of various circumstantial factors and motives. A pereon's act of stealing may, in fact, appear to be ‘a symptom of a greater injustice in one's society prompting ‘one to do good not by simply punishing an immoral act but by proactively seeking justice for the disadvantaged people ‘who are pushed by poverty and societal injustice to feed ‘themselves by stealing. In other words, reason, while a reliable ‘ground for moral judgment, needs the feeling of empathy to ‘come up not just with a moral but also a just decision. ‘Moral situations often involve not just one but othe ‘as well. Our decisions have consequences and these have an effect on others. Matters of moral import need to be analyzed with a perspective that takes the welfare and feelings of ‘others into consideration. What is good for one may not be ‘gpod for others. For example, if jocpney driver thinle Wt fe only right for him to get as many passengers as he can in order to address the needs of his family of by breaking a few traffic rules that to his mind harms nobody (be does not run anyone over or he ‘does not bump other vehicles on the road), hls reasoning may bbe construed as narrow and selfish. The inconvenience and stress he causes other drivers by picking up and dropping off passengers anywhere and anytime he pleases actually harms ‘others more than he thinks. Some people may come late for work and get fired because of this habit. Some drivers may feel too much stress which endangers their lives and this has aan effect on the people that depend on them. In other words, if one's reasoning does not consider the interests of people that are affected by his/ber actions, then he/she is actually being. prejudicial to his/her own interests, Saying. that the actions do not harm anybody is not a sufficient moral justification until one actually takes into rational account the effects of the actions on others. Simply put, morality involves impartiality because it ensures that all interests are accounted for, weighed rationally, and assessed without prejudice. Prejudices make decisions impartial. Reason recognizes not only the good of oneself but alto the good of others. (One way of ensuring the rationality and impartiality of moral decisions is to follow the seven-step moral reasoning model. These steps can serve as a guide in making choices of moral import. 1, Stop and think. Before making any decisions, itis beat to take & moment to think about. the situation itself, your place init, and other surrounding factors ‘which merit consideration, such as the people involved and the potential effects of your decisions on them. ‘This involves a step-back from the situation to make sure that you do not act out of impulse. 2. Clarify goals. It fe also necessary to clarify your short-term and long-term aims. One often decides ‘on the basis of what he/she wants to accomplish. Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, short- term wants eclipse long-term goals. Thus, you must determine if you are willing to sacrifice more important life goals to achieve your short-term goals,1f you, for example, are seeking retsibution for harm ‘caused by another person, you have to think about the long-term consequence of revenge-on your character in ‘he long run Determine facts. Make sure you gather enough Information before you make a choice. An intelligent ‘choice is one that is supported by verified facts. You ‘must first mae sure that what you know is enough to merit action. Without verifying facts, you may regret your choice in the Future onee various aspects of the Situation come to light. Never make a choice on the basis of hoarsay. Make sure your sources are credible ‘and have integrity. Develop options. Once you are clear in terms of your goals and facts, try to come up with alternative ‘options to exhaust all possible courses of action. Most of the time, the pressure of @ situation may make ‘you feel you have less options than you think. Clear ‘Your mind and try to think of other creative ways'of ‘darifying your motives and implementing your actions with the leat ethical compromise. Consider consequences. Filter your choices and ‘separate the ethical from the unethical choices bearing in mind both your motives and the potent consequences of your action. ‘Think’ of long-term consequences and act in accordance with the principles of justice and fairness. Consequences are Iatorical realities that bear upon the lives of others ‘A decision turns something in your mind into reality ‘Make sure you do not regret the decision you have conferred reality upon, Choose. Make & decision. If the choice is hard to make, try consulting others who may have knowledge ‘or experience of your situation. Pind people with %0 GENERAL InrRopuETION virtuous character and compare your reasoning with your moral analysis: Once you make up your mind, ‘summon the will to do the right thing evem if itis hard and seemingly counter intuitive 7% Monitor and modify. Monitor what happens after your decision aid have enough humility to modify your action or behavior as necessary. Pride may get in the way: of admitting that you might have not thought out a decision well enough. As you become more aware of the consequences of your actions, ‘especially on the lives of others, summon the strength and determination to make changes to rectify tly shortcomings. Do not hesitate to revise your decisions in light of new developments inthe situation. ‘These seven steps can help you ensure that you do not take moral decisions lightly. They shed light on the various aspects of moral situations that you have vo Consider before ‘making « decision, Au important element, though, is your will to commit to an action based on moral principles. You must hhave the necessary resolve to put your cholce in motion after 1a Jong process of deliberation. Goodwill, though sufficient as 1 ground for morality according to some philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, must nevertheless be enacted and applied to ‘make a difference in the worl of practical moral affairs, ‘While feelings and reason set up the theoretical basis for ‘moral action, it isthe will which implements your decision ‘and projects your motives into reality. It is not enough to ‘want to do tive good, you must actually da it not only for your sake but for the benefit of those that may bear the consequences of your decision. To a great extent, you ‘owe it to others to do the right thing. It shows how much you respect them that you cannot allow yourself to not do something that may benefit them. It is only by habituating yourself to doing good that your will becomes used toGENERAL INTRODUCTION propelling your decisions into actions. The will is like a ‘muscle that you must constantly exercise in oder to develop and strengthen. ‘Moral courage isthe result of a morally developed will It isthe capacity to initiate and sustain your resolve whenever ‘you are certain of doing the good. Many factors can derail ‘you from consistently standing by your moral priniples, such ‘as intimidation from others, but remember that a person ‘of moral courage is not afraid to stand his/her ground in matters that involve doing what is right and just. Moral courage is what some of our heroes displayed in the face of dictators and colonizers. Moral courage is a kind of virtue ‘that enables one to be ethical not just in thought but, more Importantly, in deed. HB From the Act to the Person Focusing exclusively on human acts is limited. Contemporary ethielsts point to the importance of “personhood.” It is the human being himself/herself who ves meaning aid receives significance from the acts that he/ she executes. While human acts and personhood are always ‘bound together and even inseparable, the primacy of the person cannot be contested. Human acts are only Inman ‘insofar as there is thi center of identity and intogrty that ‘grounds them Human acts are particular actions that flow from the personhood of the human being, ‘Human act, in turn, determine the reality of the person. ‘Though personbiood rather than particular acts isthe deeper reality, the significance of the latter cannot be overlooked. ‘Human beings as doers of moral acts are responsible not only for what they do but for the persons they grow into through their moral acts. Human acts are relevant to the kind of GENERAL INTRODUCTION [person one becomes. It is personhood that gives actions significance, Particular moral actions shape the “person” that fone desires, It is, therefore, not only “good moral actions” that are important for ethics. Asking students about “the kind of person” they want to become is more meaningful and significant in such a study Students of ethics tend to think of other people as victims of a wrong decision oF bad actions of a particular moral agent. It should be noted, however, that in the relationship between personhood and moral actions, as previously mentioned, ‘the moral agent himself/herself Is the first victim of a bad decision or a wrong ection. However, the depth of personhood cannot be fully objectfied and always escapes conceptualizaion. Kant insists fon this mysterious center that is in the human person that hae refuses to say that the person is inherently evil. For Kant, the human person's inexhaustible ability to always change for the better is a source of surprte even for the moral agent. No ‘matter how much a human person is conditioned by culture fand environment, there is within that person a source for change and a turning towards the good. This is confirmed by the conversions and even cultural revolutions that happen in thuman history.PART I The Academic Ethical TraditionsPART I THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS Introduction Gawi and Gawa and Habituation In Filipino, the words gawi and gawa can give a sense ‘of what philosophers mean by ethical action. Filipinos inguish between thoughtless, instinctive mannerisms fand reflexes from gawe (action) and gow (inclination). In reflecting on how Filipinos use these words, one can understand that human actions aze differnt fom mete bodily movements Freedom figures closely into action and inclination. Freedom here means not only the ability to act free from outside influences or the independence from the impediments to one's wishes. It is the willful act and decision that give form and shape to the actions and inclinations of people. This freedom is oriented toward the wherefore, the what for, and the whom far of the doings of people. ‘These are the common aspects of human action that jos understand as action and inclination: that free human acts are governed by reflection and are freely decided such that they are not determined by internal or external forces. However, gawi and gawa are not identical. Gawa refers to the free action that is oriented toward a particular end. For example, a worker uses his/her free imagination and will to ‘ring about services and products that contribute to the well. being of society As one governed by free decision making, the creative worker embraces all the information he/she can gather to effectively realize his/her purpose. A process of discernment ‘accompanies the creative work, The carpenter, for Instance, ust learn many details about wood: its feel, its hardness ‘and pliability, as well a its strength. He/She should know ‘about the qualities that will help him/her accomplish the task fat hand very well. Part of this knowledge is the knowledge ‘about the body's movement in accomplishing this work. The ‘carpenter should study how heavy or light the hand should ‘move over certain kinds of wood, what tools to apply 60 that te wood yields the best piece: a stool, a table, or the wheel of aeart. ‘The wort gewi also refers to free kind of work. However, instead of focusing on a particular end like a product or fulfillment, gawi refers to the kind of acts that people are ‘used to actomplishing, Gawi does not only refer to particular acts of a person. A person's kegawian or habitual action reveals truth about himself/herself. While the beautiful table ‘and the intricately designed chair are products of a carpenter that has gotten used to being one, in his kogawian, he reveals himself/herself as a good or a bad person. A worker ‘who produces for tho society is judged skilled or unskilled. Bat a person is judged good of evi, right or wrong based on ‘hagawrian or habituation, Kegawian isthe Filipino equivalent of ethos in Greok and mos or moris in Latin Ethics and Ethos ‘The term ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, which ‘means custom, a characteristic, or habitual way of doing things, or action that is properly derived from one's character. ‘The Latin word mos or moris (and its plural mores) from ‘which the adjective moral is derived is equivalent to ethos From a purely etymological point of view, ethical and ‘moral are, therefore, synonymous. Also, restricted to such rootword considerations, ethics and morality may only be a “simple description of the mores or ways of behaving, whether ‘of the human person in geaeral or of particular population.” It seems then that as a field of study, ethics need not bePART |: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS “normative” in guiding human action and itis oven sceraingly imperative to preserve an attitude of neutrality that excludes all judgments of value, Etymologically, ethics is but a survey of patterns of behavior that is done by the human being in general ora socety in particular. Looking closely, however, human action ought to be understood clearly in a very strict sense. As eonsiderod above, human action has to do with human movements that are ruled by one's freedom. Given that freedom is not. only the independence from what could hinder but also consideration of the goal of the action, ethics eannot be limited to pure description. Since goals are inherently directional, they imply normatnity, Tn the same manner that gaw for the Filipino is diferent from gawa, Aristotle differentiates between human actions that are “praxis” and *to poiein.” What is important forthe Jnuman agent who engages in “to poiein,” gowa for Aristotle, is to successfully complete a particular work be it artis or technical: that the tabletop is smooth, the carvings are precise, and the chairs logs are balanced. ‘The human person himself/herself is significant enly in considering the result matters of “to poiein” or gawa. Ethics, on the other hand, not only has such “normative” considerations as to the end product of the actions Ethies, as concerned with “praxis” for Aristotle, properly focuses on the human agent that is revealed through his/her actions. Ethies is normative with regard to ts belng m practical seeew. 1 dues uot ouly limit itself to the description of human actions but also aims to guide them. Students who study ethics are not to stop at the pure description of human mores but are ushered into a disciplined science that guides them in judging and rectifying ‘human patterns of behavior. Ethics proposes guidelines, ‘considerations, and norms to provide advice and rules so that the way of right ving and its practic are clarified If kagawian isthe Filipino equivalent of the Greek ethos ‘and the Latin mor/moris, awa is “to poiein” and gawi is praxis", Ethis for Filipino students is philosophy of human action that allows them to learn the att of living. It is an ‘at that enables them to be reconciled with their feedom and ‘that which is expected of them (by others and themselves), ‘Thus, ethics is a way: for them to find Iappiness. Ethics also considers that which is worthy of « human being. ‘This'means that living rightly is not only’ about searching for happiness but living as one ought to live a8 a ‘human being. In living rightly, one receives contentment ‘and approval both from others and himself/herself, and in living wrongly, l/she deserves blame (from others and from ‘himself/herself). Such an ethics not only serves as a path to Ihappiness but also reaches out in fulless of reflection for that ‘action which is an obligation for a human being, The gravity ‘of such an ethical consideration is given yoie in the Filipino saying, madaling maging tao, niahirap magpakatao. ‘The effort in living rightly, though task, need not ‘exclude the promise of the gift of happiness. There is no reason to presuppose why a life that is consistent with ‘what the human person ought to do should not bring hitn/ hhet happiness. The Filipino student is, therefore, invited to ‘outgrow kung saan ka masaya suportahan bite and get to va dapat mong gawsn tolega kang sasaya: Plato's insight Into the Good An academic introduction to the discipline of ethics is {incomplete without reference to Plato [427-347 BCE]. Even fhe word “academic” itself harks back to academia, the institution of learning established by Plato for the training of is followers who later will be called philosophers, lovers of ‘wisdom. Ethics, being a discipline of study in universities thatPART I: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS. {all under the umbrella of philosophy, ean aldo trace its roots ‘back to Plato as the systematic thinker who grappled with the ‘question ofthat which is good. ‘The context of the life of Plato is not totally unfamiliar with students of today. Athens and Greece went through ‘an expansion of trade around 600 BCE. This “global” ‘awakening on the part of Grecks like Plato plunged him to an experience of social, political, and intellectual challenge. Given the exchange of different experiences between Greece and its neighboring countries around the Mediterranean Sea, Plato was interrogated by different points of view. Plato and the students of today share this “global” challenge; it leads to questions of truth and inquiry into what is good. Given this pluralism of perspectives, is it valid to ask “what is truly good?" {A serious claim faced by Plato was given voice by a thinker named Protagoras [4817-411? BCE] who said that “mam is the measure ofall things.” The implications of euch ‘claim sit well with those who easly let go of the validity of traditional mores and ethos to arrive at a conchision that i relativistic. Ths easy relativism holds that man, being the ‘measure of all things, can only hold on to beliefs and truths ‘that are for himself/herself or his/her society only. It denies ‘the possiblity of ever arriving at truth that ean be shared oy all, Man, as the measure of all things, eae to be understood simplistically based on the concept that “to each his own.” Socrates [470-309 BCE], on the other hand, taught Plato about the difficulty of coming to a knowledge of the truth, This difficulty, however, did not mean impossibility for Socrates. He instilled this rigorous quostioning to his students tnd did not shy sway from interrogating even the traditional leaders of Athens. This resulted in his death in 899 BCE on charges of impiety and of misleading the youth with his ideas. Socrates, however, is immortalized in the writings of Plato as 20 the intelligent and courageous teacher who lead his hearers ‘eater to the truth in the same way that midwives help in the birthing process of a child. ‘This confrontation between Soctatle Inquiry and ensy lack of thought is portrayed in the allogory of the cave that is found in Plato's The Republic. Glaucon's story in the dialogue best introduces the allegory that is told by Socrates, These two stories are ‘ocasioned hy the question about the good and the tas ofthe ‘human person to inguire about it. Glaucon proposes the story of Gynes' rg (The Republic, Book I, 359-360), According to Glaucon, a terrible earthquake later resulted in a break in the land and the finding of a metallic horse that contained a skeleton. A ring was sad to be worn by that skeleton, The man who found the skeleton then took the ring ‘and found out that it had the power to render him invisible. A simple inward turn would make the wearer imperceptible to others and another turn outwards would allow others to see hhim again. Free from the fear of shame and capture, Glaucon ‘concludes his story by saying that the man who found the ing would eventually become ev Glaucon’s point about the good may not be as crude as ‘the simple claim that each one is left to determine the good for himself/herself. It is nonetheless sinister in its simplistic Presentation of the relationship between the human person fand that which is claimed as good, Glaucon dismisses the topic of the good altogether and proposes to explain the ‘human persons’ ethical actions asthe result of fea It simply is the evasion of shame, incarceration, or retaliation that spells itself out in “good behavior” of man in society Responding to Glaucon's story, Plato, through the character of Socrates, later proposed the “Allegory of the Cave” (The Republie, Book VII, 5144-5203). A group of apeople are said to have lived chained facing a wall where shadows are projected from the objects passing before fire behind them, The shadows are thought of by these people fs the most real things. Once, a man is dragged out of the cave and made to see reality as itis enlightened by the sun. ‘The freed man has to accustom his eyes first to things as ithuminated at night, thea sees what is Mluminated during the day as reflected on small pockets of water. He later on sees the sun itself as the source of light that gives definition to reality, Having perceived true reality itéelf as enlightened by the sun, the man then ventures to go back to the cave to free the other prisoners. They, however, resist him, choosing to-recognize the reality they are accustomed to. The man who knows the truth ends up crucified with burt eyes. Plato then has Socrates explain to Glaucon that the sun represents the good. Once it is soen and recognized by any man who has gone beyond the shadows, that good is followed ‘and lived even at the cost of one's life. This, of course, is irect negation of Glauicon’s aforementioned claim that the actions of humans are only directed by the avoidance of shame of retribution. Plato directs humanity to the nobility that is reachable through the knowledge of the good. His confidence in knowing the good as acting upon it reaches out ‘to every age that grapples with the question of what is proper ‘human action. ‘This confidence in the human person's ability to know the good and act in accordance with it started the academic history of ethics. Plato's claim is, however, not only made in the past as they are recorded in dated documents that survived history, Plato continues to address us today and his voice builds confidence in our own ability to know the good and act ethically. 2 ach age, however, has a paieuar way of intersoat to's assertions wad further give nostee to, what is Known and how to act. Thinker who come after him or example wl challenge a cet tat seams to have bon ‘0 cofilentlylnlgedbutwcen knowlege and ction, Doe Iaoing th good automatically lead to detng on i The sone thing shot cure in ehis that the vic of Shinkers who apes tine rnearcing uch questions esl fea ad understood up to our preset tine and to allege hat we know abot the goa and How we act pmo to 23CHAPTER | Virtue Ethics: Aristotle Learning Outcomes [At the end ofthis chapter, you should be able to: 1, recognize the meaning of eudaimonia or happiness snd its relation to ethies; 2, differentiate the parts of the soul In relation to their respective functions; 3, appreciate and articulate the role of virtue in crafting ‘an ethical life; 4. determine the role of habit in the formation of a virtuous character; and 5, articulate the difference between philosophical Iknowledge and practical wisdom. HE introduction People ate often most remembered by their most significant character traits. ‘These traits are the product of ‘consistent display of a particular behavior. Some people fare known to be courageous, some as quick-witted, while others are remembered for their diligence and work ethic. To ‘certain extent, a person is defined (at least in the minds of others) by what he/she does and how he/she lives his/her life. On one hand, character traits such as thoughtfulness, temperance, and’ respectfulness are often seen in a positive light. On the other hand, cowardice, laziness, and Shamelessness are generally frowned upon by most. One who consistently exhibits certain behavior in various situations (CHAPTER I: VIRTUE ETHICS: AmIstOTLE ‘gins » peculiar identity that somehow determines how others [perceive him/her as a person. For example, people associate the nickname Bertong Tigasin (Bert “tre formidable”) to person who has consistently displayed strength and grit in character. We build our characters through how we make choices in different situations we face in our lies. In meeting and ‘speaking to different people, facing various problems, and Ihandling different day-to-day tasks, we develop a certain ‘way of being, a unique style of being a person. Through the ‘constant interaction of thought and action as prompted by ‘various situations that cal for one's decizion, a person comes to know himself/herself as a cortain type of character or personality. Being a certala way or having a particular personality ‘implies a certain understanding of the good. Personality or character is an approach or a way of reckoning the different ‘situations that one faces in his/her life-—a way of navigating fone’s way towards his/her flourishing as a human person, Character is not merely a theoretical construct but m product Of action in the world—a constant doing or way of being that is made apparent by the possession and actualization of particular virtues or vies. In one’s journey towards self-realization and self: Mourishing, there is an implied necessity to understand ‘what ho/she is actually aiming for in his/her life, In siming for a goal, the person must also first understand what he/ she actualy is and is potentially capable of. Self-actualization {is not attained through theory but by practice: character is ‘product of practice. But what does it actually mean for ‘human person to flourish? What does it mean for one to fchieve his/her goal? What is the goal of our existence as Iman beings and what doos character have to do with i 2sPART b: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS ‘The Greek philosopher Aristotle (984-22 B.C] wrote his \Nicomachean Ethics with these questions in mind. As one of Plato's most prolific students, he shares with his teacher the fundamental assumption that what radically distinguishes the yuman person from other forms of being is his/her possession of reason (logos). For both of these thinkers, the ultimate purpose eannot be fully understood without understanding. the place of reason in ordering one's life. However, if Plato firmly believes that ignorance is solely responsible for 26 (CHAPTER |: VinTUE Eres: AmistorLE committing immoral acts thinking that ence one truly knows the good, ane will inevitably do the good, Aristotle believes otherwise. Aristotle considers that morality is not merely a matter of knowing the good bat actually doing or practicing the good habitually. We become what-we are by what we do and not merely by what we know: For him, we ean only fully Actualize our potential as human beings once we understand ‘what being human essentially aims to and do the necessary ‘things to fulfill our funetion (ergon) inthe most excellent way possible. Aristotle raises significant issues for the study of ethics Important questions regarding what is good or bad for the human person with respect to his ultimate goal of being fulfilled are raised. He elaborates Une corti spon while ‘elfrealization becomes a practically a:tainable goal. His fthies ie grounded in the formation of one's character ‘way of being and living in harmony with the huraan person’ proper end. Just as he believes that o:her things have a Specific function and end, for instance, « pair of scissors, ‘whose function and end is to ent things, Aristotle also Dolioves that such a purpose also exists for human beings: To full this function in the most excellent way possible is to live ethically, that i, to achieve « way of flourishing suited tous. IB Ethics as the Art of Living Well Eudaimonia Aristotle assumes that any activity, practical or theoretical, aims towards some end or good. He gives the following examples to elucidate this proposition: health for the practice of medicine, ship for shipbuilding, and victory for generalship in war, among others. However, these endsPART I: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS. are still provisional goals to another goal. If, for instance the practice of medicine aims to promote and maintain ‘health in society, can we not ask further why we want to be Inealthy? Does one seek health for its own sake or does one seek it perhaps because one would like to be able to fulfill, ‘one's duties as a parent well because one wants to raise good ‘children? But what is the end goal of having good children? Why does one want to have good children? Perhaps because ‘one cares enough for one's society that one does not want to contaminate it with useless citizens in the future. But why ‘does one value society this much? As one can see, almost all ends are not ends in themselves but mere conduits for a furthor or deeper end. Aristotle tx not simply interested in finding out the different ends or purposes for human life. He wants to find ‘out what our chief end it. He is interested in finding out what all our lives essentially and ultimately aim to. The chief good for the human person must not be something one aims at for ‘the sake of something eso. Tt eannot be wealth, for wealth is ‘merely a means for possessing things such as houses or cars. [Neither can it be fame nor honor for they are jus instruments for feeding one's ego, a servant of pride, Aristotle names the chief good for the human person as happiness or cudaimonia. For him, happiness is the sell sufficient, final, and attainable goal of human life. It is self sufficient because to have it makes human life complete. It is final because itis desired for itself and not for the sake cof something else, and itis attainable because, as shall be ‘explained later, it is not mere theoretical construct but something that one actually does practically, In his own words: Happiness above all seems to be of this character, | for we always choose it on account of itself and never fon account of something else. Yet honor, pleas we choose on their own intellect, and every vi (CHAPTER I VIRTUE ETHICS: ARISTOTLE J account—for even if nothing resulted from them, we ‘would choose each of them—but we choose them also po thesv ct hgtean stro espn ‘through them, we will be happy. But nobody chooses | happiness forthe sake of tees thing, mere ‘generally, on account of anything else. Budaimonia is sought for its own suke. All other ends, ‘auch as health, wealth, and power, are sought because ‘they are perceived to be instrumental in one's flourishing. Budaimonia, as the proper end of man, is not some kind of {inactive state but is actually something that one does. For Aristotle, our chief good is not something we merely possess Dut sumeshing that we continually aewalize (in practice). ‘According to him, “Ewdamonia is an activity of the soul {in accordance with virtue." In addition, the chief good is not achieved by one grand act or one big decision, for it is ‘something one constantly strivés for. He says, “One swallow ‘does not make a spring nor does one day. And in this way, fone day or a short time does not make someone blessed ‘and happy cither”’ This implies that happiness is a lifelong Activity. One cannot be complacent in times of good fortune because happiness is more than one's fate—it is something we Aecide to do for ourselves, Aristotle acknowledges the fact that it would not hurt if one were born into more favorable circumstances, such as Deing brought up in a good family, haviag access to proper ‘education, having the company of good friends, and being Deautiful in physical appearance. These external goods Contribute to the attainment of one's happiness, but they 2 Arn et enon evr Rtn er aden © a, | Seip cago onPART i: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS. ‘do not guarantee it. At the end of the day, happiness is still, something one does and not merely who or where someone is. Hence, some people are rich but seemingly unfulfilled in their lives. Others have good friends but have not cultivated these friendships enough to have one's friends bold a positive impact in one's life: Obviously, therefore, happiness is not mere self-indulgence or pleasure-seeking for Aristotle. It denotes an activity that essentially corresponds to the proper nature of the human boeing, At this point, itis crucial to understand how Aristotle ‘comprehends the nature of the human person’ s0 that the precise meaning of happiness miay be explained. We must also investigate the meaning or virtue for itis eontained in the definition of happiness. What Is the uma person: for ‘Aristotle and what does his/her happiness entail as such? Secondly, what is the role of virtue in the achievement of ‘one’s end? The Soul ‘Aristotle postulates that happiness is an activity of the soul, The obvious question is, of course, what he means by “sou.” For hit, the soul is the part of the human being that animates the body. Body and soul ate inseparable for Aristotle, but he emphasizes the role of the soul more than that of the body in elucidating his ethies. ‘The sou! is ‘composed of both rational and irational elements. ‘The rational part of the soul is divided into two parts— the speculative (responsible for knowledge) and the practical (responsible for choice and action). The speculative part is concerned with pure thought and is essentially the base of contemplation, while the practical intellect is in charge of faction and the practical determination ofthe proper means to attain specific end. (CHaprin |: Vinrue Exwucs: AmIsTOTLE ‘The irrational part of the soul also has two parts—the | vegetative and the appetitive. ‘The vegetative part isin charge fof the nutrition and growth of the human being. This part ff the soul takes care of all the involuntary functions of ‘the body, from breathing to digestion and the like. Aristotle says that this part of the soul isnot reievant In discussing happiness or virtue. Since this is also found in any other living being, itis not distinet to the human person. However, the appetitive part, according to him, shares in the rational ‘element in the soul It cannot itself reason, butt does share inthe rational element in that it ean be influenced by it. For ‘example, passions, such as sexual urges and desire for wealth, ‘and recognition are quite difficult to cantrol. It is the task ‘of the rational part of the soul to-reign in such passionate demands that seek fulfilment oftentimes without any rational ‘and practical consideration of all the factors involved in its desire for satisfaction. ‘The desiring element of the soa albeit irrational, ean be reasoned with, o to speak. Hence, ifs person suddenly fees the urge to eat all the food on the table that is meant for an entire family, itis possible that be/ she stops himself/herself from doing so once he/she realizes that such an act is grossly unfit for a proper human being, ‘Examined under an Aristotelian lens, this person's decision 0 ‘keep his/her greed in check is influenced by practical reason ‘hich determines the proper thing todo in a. given situation, It is, therefore, important to remember that there is & part ofthe soul that calls for reason’s governance. Giving in to-raw and unchecked appetites is oftertimes the reason a Person commits immoral acts. A person's raw biological and Paychological desires blind him/her from the implications ‘of what he/she does to the fulfillment of his/her end, which {is happiness. In other words, giving in to passions keeps a ‘Person from Nourishing and derails him /ks from his/her true fend as a person. Aristotle is not saying that it is wrong to Ihave such desires. It is only natural to have such passions forPART i THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS they are a constitutive part of having 1 soul. However, people ‘who aim to be happy must be responsible for such desires and keep them in check. For Aristotle, moral virtue is necessary jn making sure that desires donot control the behavior. Virtue, the Mean, and Practical Wisdom ‘The Greek word for virtue is aréte which means excellence. By excellence, the Greeks thought of how a thing fulfils its Function (ergon) in accordance with its uature. For instance, if « knife cuts excellently, is sharp, durable, and dependable for different tasks, then it may be said that itis fan excellent knifo-—it does what it is supposed to do in the Dest way possible, It fulfils its essence as a tool for cutting sand slicing, Tt may then be called a “virtuous” knife. To be virtuous, in other words i to exhibit one's capacity to fulfill ‘one’s essence or purpose in such w way that one's potentiality as a particular being may be said to be actualized in the rmost excellent way. Following this, it ean be said that ‘cehorse that consistently wins races isa virtuous horse and marl dog that barks at the sight of an intruder. In the case of human beings, Aristotle says that there fare two kinds of virtues—moral and intelectual. Briefly moral virtue has to do with excellence in the performance of decisions relating to moral and practical activity, while intellectual virtues have to do with one’s capacity to harness reason’s contemplative eapacity for arriving at knowledge. Intellectual virtue owes its existence and development to teaching, while moral virtue arises from habitual practice (ethos), As be explains in the beginning of Book 2 of the Nicomackean Ethics: | Virtue, then, is twofold, intellectual, and moral. Both the coming-into-being and increase of intellectual virtue result mostly from teaching —hence, it requires wise, 2 (CHAPTER |: VinrUE Etwics: AnisTOTLE |) experience apd time—whereas moral virtue got its | nine ethike} by a slight alveratic ofthe term habit [ethos) 1 is also clear, as result, that none of the “| moral virtues are present in us by nature, since “| othing that exists by nature is habituated to be ater || than itis. For example, a stone, because it is borne | downward by nature, could not be habituated to be borne upward, not even if someone habtuates ie by throwing it upward ten thowsand times. Fire, too, could not be borne downward nor could anything else thatis naturally one way be habituated tobe another. Neither by nature, therefore, nor contrary to nature are the vires present; they are instead present in us tho are of such nature to teeive them and who are completed through abit Aristotle emphasizes the role of practice and habit in the formation of moral virtue. No person ix born morally ‘irtuoon. However, ll persons bave the Intent potentiality to te so, if only they habitually do excellent deeds. But what are excellent deeds? What ate virtuous actions? How does a person develop the capacity to bring them virtues ont ofthe eal of pont to the en of actualy? It is only in practice that we come to know that we ‘truly know how to do something. It is oaly in running that ‘we come to know how fast we can actualy run and gain the ‘ight to call ourselves runners. It is only in trying to solve ‘math problems do we find out if we are good at mathematics ‘and have the capacity to be mathems Aristotle declares that we become morally morally virtuous acts. We become just by doing just acts.PaaT THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS We become temperate by doing temperate acts. We become ‘courageous in doing courageous acts. Remember Berton Tigasin? Did we not say that he only ened that nieknatme because of his consistent display of actions that feveal strength and grit? He was not born like that, He became known as such because of how he habitually carried himself indifferent situations: Now, we are not saying that Bertong Tigasin is an exemplar of « morally virtuous person, He is only recalled at this point to shed more light ‘on Aristotle's emphasis on action and habituation as the ground of moral virtue. As for moral virtues themselves, ‘Aristotle says that these are states of charactor that enable ‘ person to fulfil his/her proper function as a human being. “These states of character are alued at an intermediary point between excess and deficncy—in a mean (mesote) that can be considered as the appropriate response to the demands of diferent situations. Virtue is a state of character which makes. a person good and capable of fulfilling his/her ond (tefos) as a human person, By state of character, Aristotle emphasizes a certain ccnsistency or constancy in one’s character in facing different situations. Consistency is not stagnancy. He is not saying that a virtuous person is incapable of adjusting to various situations. On the contrary, it is precisely the person's Capacity to read situations that makes him/her virtuous, In reading situations, the virtuous person is able to arrive at a decision or perform nn action that may be considered 8 an intermediate between deficiency and exoess, which he calls the mean or mesotes. By this, Aristotle does not merely point to a ‘mathematical mean, such that six would be the mean in a scale of one to ten. It fs a mean that is relative to the person acing a moral choice. By relative, he means that depending ‘on the particular cieumstances of a person, the mean would (CHAPTER I: VIRTUE ETwics: AmistorLe correspond to the most appropriate response given the Idemands of the situation. For example; if you and a friend de at around 10:00 a.s. to meet in'a mall to watch a ‘at 2:00 pan, several things have to be considered when try and decide how much time you will give yourself to "prepare to avoid being late and show respeet for your friend's rs tl ti You i a eae ut am bt aint aha ti fe. Oiler appetite you might hor to atand a ites poeta oral 4. "The mode of teanaportation you will Use 10 get to the ‘mall 5. The location of the cinema relative to the entrance door ofthe mall 6, If you are typically slow and sluggish in making © preparations If there are other shops you plan to visit before ‘meting your friend, 8. Ifyou have a physical disability which woutd make travel challenging 9. Your moed on that day Many other things may be added to this list, The point, though, is that it is not merely a matter of finding the mathematical mean between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m, hich would then be 12 o'lock that determines the time you should allot for yourself to prepare for your meeting without being late. A virtuous person neither prepares too ently nor {00 late, not only in. terms of the actual time—the time of reparation is actually determined by his/her reckoning ofthe‘demands of the situation and his/her relative standing to it 1s an individual. The mean is not a fixed point but rather ‘a moving target. So, applied to the previous example, if you fre planning to meet your frend at the mall at 2:00 pain, you have to take into account uot just logistical matters, but perhaps, more importantly, your knowledge and experience of yourself in dealing with such matters. It is actually your ability to adjust yourself to the situation which determines ‘whether you may be considered virtuous or not in thet situation, If you agree to meet with your friend without taking the things mentioned above into consideration, then you may be called an inconsiderate friend. On the other hand, to overthink and over-prepare ean also be seen as excessive fand can lead to over punctuality which may. strain your friendship, especially if you expect your friend to do the same without considering that he/she is not the same person as yoursalf Hence, it may be said that to feel or act in certain ways ‘that are neither deficient nor excessive relative to oneself and ‘the situation may be considered as the state of character that recognizes the mean. To be morally virtuous, one must be able to respond to situations not just with tho correct feeling ‘or action but in the proper degree, at the right time, towards the right people, and for the right reasons. In the example, if you arrive considerably easly for your meeting, would it be considered virtuous for you to eall your friend and command him/her to come immediately because you are not good at ‘waiting? Should you be angry towards your friend if he/she arrives 30 minutes late because the MRT he/she was riding in ‘broke down’? Should you scold him/her for being inconsiderate towards you? Would it not be considered excessive if you take his/her lateness against him/her? All these questions point to ‘ more fundamental issue: How does one become a good or Virtuous friend? In other words, what is the proper disposition CChaPren I: VinTUe Erwics: AnisTOrLe necessary in being friends with ancther person? How does ‘one make demands to the other properly? How does one show concern for the other's welfare? It is clear that for Aristotle, “the answer is disclosed in actual practice. One's theoretical ‘Knowledge of the meaning of friendship does not guarantee ‘that he/she.can be a good friend. Virtue is developed in practice. Aristotle defines virtue as follows: ‘Virtue, therefore, is a characteristic marked by choice, residing in the mean relative to us, a characteristic defined by reason and as the prudent person would. define it. Virtue is also a mean with respect to two |. rise, the ene’ vice related to encee, the other to |) deficiency; and further, it is & mean because some | vices fall short of and others ex:eed what should be | | the ease in both passions and actions, whereas virtue discovers and chooser the middle term. Thus, seth respect to its being and the definition that states ‘what it is, virtue is & mean; but with respect to what is best and the doing of something well, itis an extreme For Aristotle, virtue is @ state of one's character that is the result of choice. This choice is governed by prudence ‘or practical wisdom (phronésis). Phronesis is the human ‘person's instrument in dealing with moral choices. It is kind ‘of knowledge that deals with practical matters and not just ‘with ideas or concepts. Practical wisdom participates in the ‘eapacity of the rational part of the soul to reckon situations without easily giving in to the push and pall of the various desires which emanate from the appetitive part of the soul. Phronesis is the intellectual virtue responsible for bringing ‘the human person closer to his/her chif good in the realmPART THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS. of morality. In other words, practical wisdotn aids one: in ‘being happy. It is comprised both of knowledge and action. ‘One's capacity for choice and action must be guided by the Intellectual virtue of practical wisdom or phronésis in pursuit ‘of the mean oF the mesotes for ane to be able to call himself/ herself morally virtuous. It may be said that: prudent actions fre actions that are guided by reason and not just driven by passion, These actions and decisions exhibit one's state ‘of character—whether one is truly courageous, temperate, friendly, or just, Practical wisdom guides the human person in choosing the mean between the extremes of excess and deficiency. It constantly adjusts its reckoning based on the shifting conditions that permeate a specific situation, relative to ones Hence, it may be said that if mesotes is « moving target, phronésis would correspond to the excellence of an archer in hitting this target in various situations, akin to Hawkeye in the Avengers movies. If one can recall, Hawkeye has an arsenal of different arrows adapted to hit various targets, Phronésis would correspond to his rational: reckoning ‘of the various conditions that may or may uot affect his marksmanship, like the number of enemies he has to hit their speed and agility, and his position and distance relative to them. He also understands his own limitations (since he has no superpowers like ‘Thor oF the Hulk), and, therefore, ‘assesses his rolo in the Avengers accordingly. He is then rightly assigned the role of archer in the team because be is ‘an expert, someone who is excellent in the eraft of archery. Aristotle is somehow saying, that for one to attain chief good, ‘the person must continually bring himself/herself to situations ‘where his/her mettle and skills may be tested. Surely, even fan archer as excellent as Hawkeye was not born an expert archer; he became so through constant practice until he developed the necessary skill set for carrying out his fanction ‘san archer, e (CHAPTER |: VIRTUE ETHICS: ARISTOTLE In the moral realm, for instance, one becomes courageous ‘only through practice. Courage is learned intellectual ad ‘practical skill, Reason guides one in calibrating the right ree of courage in facing, for example, a situation where s life is beg threatened by an attscer. After assessing ‘the various factors (such as the attacker's level of aggression, the weapon used, the amount of morey and valuables at fake, the presence of others in the vicinity), oe ass himseli/ Dorseif the prudent thing to do. Does on simply hand over ‘es belonging and hope the attacker eaves? Does ane resist. given that one had martial arts traning in his/her teenage years! Does one try to reason withthe attacker hoping that Ie/sbe convinces the latter to not go tough with the dee? Or does ove simply run away and seream for hel? What is the prudent thing to do? For Aristale, there Is not one ‘umiversally correct response to this situation that may apply to everyone in all situations. Sometimes, it may be more prudent to retreat than to move forward. Courage is ot always bold and brazen. Courage is thinking person's vet. There is not one way of being courageous. Courage is not haphacardly Gghting th attacker without regard for ove's life (fr this seems to imply that one's belongings aze worth more than one's fe) nor i it freezing in total fear where one gives Up the capacity to deliberate upon, one's options. Courage is ‘the mean between rashness and cowardice. However, i ail Aepenis upon the person to choose the appropriate response tothe situation, In other words, i is upto the person facing ‘the situation to essentially define the meaning of courage as it applies to him/her at that moment. Since the mean is a moving target, phronesis is necessary in skillfully making the right decision. To choose either an excess or deficiency constitutes a vice for Aristotle. I is to miss the mark asi were Iti to underperform or over preform with respect to one's function (ergon) as & human being. Tis to act ia opposition to one's ultimate goal, which is eudaimonia,‘Th Principal Vetus ond Ves — Cowoge Cowarsee Sekinaigence | Mederasan Treertity Prodigal bert Meonness Vulgar Magniicence Pabrnest Voy Proper Price ‘Sratness So ‘Ambtiousess [Proper Ambien | Lackof Ambion rosy [Good Tener Locka Spt Boostfuneee runes Set deprecition ‘eatfosnery ‘weiness Boorshess [Coseaulcusness | Friendliness Suriness Sashes Modest Shoreleaness [En Properinaionaton | Mole ‘A truly virtuous action is performed by someone who is not simply compelled to do s0. A person does a virtuous ‘act and chooses to act in such a way for the sake of being virtuous. This choice comes from a certain firmness of character that is not easily swayed by one's passions oF influenced by certain factors in a given situation. A virtuous person is someone who has been so used to acting virtuously that it becomes tremendously dificult for anything or anyone to convince him/her to act otherwise. To a certain degree, vices are no Jonge an option for a truly virtuous person. Such ‘8 person actively keeps himself/herself disposed towards the ‘mean by way of habituation (ethos). Only a virtuous person can perform truly virtuous actions because he/she is initially predisposed towards virtue It should be noted that certain actions admit no middle point of mesotes. Some actions are simply bad, and so there is no “virtuous” way of performing them. Acts like adultery, theft, and murder are bad in themselves and eannot be deemed virtuous in any situation. There is no right way of (CHAPTER I: VIRTUE ETHICS: ARISTOTLE ‘committing adultery, with the right person, atthe right time, ‘Adultery is simply wrong. The mean otly applies to actions ‘and dispositions that are aot bad in and of themselves. Contemplation and Philosophical Knowledge For Aristotle, the min functions of the intellectual virtues, namely, phronésis and sophis, ace to aid human Persons in matters concerning moral choice and the Attainment of knowledge of frat princes or eternal truths, teepectively. If practical wixdom serves ax «guide for action in everyday life, the act of contemplation is a pursuit of Philosophical wisdom. Aristotle subordinates practical frisdom to conterplation beestae he believes hat He the kind of setvity most proper to human persons considering the fact that reason is human's most defining attribute Philosophiring, according to him, is tho most pleasant of virtuous activities became it does not rely on anything else forts flfiimen: thor that the desire todo it Tt the most self-sufficient act. Practical virtues sich as courage and temperance need specific conditions to be attained, while plloophy is something a person ean co by bimell/berself faytime. For him, contemplation isan act tha can be loved for its own sake because it has no other aim than to reveal the most fundamental truths of existence. In other words, person may be considered happier than person who 1s the time and the leisurely disposition for contemplation. However, it must be remembered that human life is not exchuively devoted to thought; tf mos: ofthe time engaged Iection and prectcal matters. Thuy phrontsis stil pays 4 ericil role in the attainment of one's chief good, which is etdaimonia. For Aristotle, the contemplative knowledge of the good does not autcmaticaly translate to its performance Being. virtous inthe practical scons i still cultivated through practice and bable tho. Living well means bavingPART I: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS ‘the complementary disposition of intelligent conduct and a thirst for philosophical wisdom. HB conclusion Bthies is a shatter of living well through the habitual practice of virtue which essentially translates into having ‘virtuous or excellent character. Happiness, being) the clef good of the human person, is attainable through the proper exercise of reason, both morally and intellectually. Eudaimonia is an activity of the soul that purposively attempts to choose the mean between two extremes in the realm of morality. As the saying goes, “You ean't put & good man down.” This seems to resonate with Aristotelian ethic For him, a good man, « person who has eulivated the proper virtues and has imbibed these in his/her thoughts and deeds, will always flourish. A person of virtuous character always finds a way to stay intact even in dire times. That person ‘does not compromise the dictates of reason in exchange for the immediate fulfilment of his/her passions. In other words, in being habituated to choose the mean, he/she remains virtuous and, therefore, happy in every circumstance. It is the persoa's ability to adapt while remaining true to himself/ herself as a rational human boing which allows him/her to ‘ourish in various environments. For example, according to Aristotle, a perton who has cultivated the virtue of honesty ‘throughout his/her life will not be influenced by a corrupt system. In fact, it would not even oceur to that person that taking bribes or signing dubious contracts are an option ‘because he/she has been s0 habituated to always choosing neither excess nor deficiency, but always the mean—whiel is the choice proper to a person that stays true to himself/ herself as a rational being, pp sAritoti teach. that arse Inthe ost trent fbcponent of ehies./Avirtooujcharscer ithe reult of PESecgreiiouine smaceiaprien iruaterh ed iteation (chon the pratt he wean, (cst) Being ethical i all about being excellent in being haan, Hii i, tring xcaleat in falling one's cance oso {ational ing that has cultivated an excellent arate and {ter cpa of making the moet prodeat deco in Bi cecumstancen ‘The flowing chapter dicnsies St Thomas Aquinas’ Heinat Ub Eshce Stlsricn Dereon Thematic and [Aiisitalian cies can be toed becane St, Thomas Aquinas fe known asthe thinker whe “Chratancnd Artal: Bath philosophers emphasize the role of reason in guiding moral Font tt Ais eiwe ha he aa of vis Ia not an ond ine bt nly wi fr atalning the final tee of man, who le God himsel He baleyes that by vite af reason, human beings posse the anae expat to atu Bt ciinguih right fom wong thoogh abe Study Questions 1. What docs happiness mean for Aristotle and why des Ian th hn goof in rn pel, 2. What f veto and what te place inthe ei Tory of Arte? What ith mean and bw i treated to vet? What isthe ditference between meral vrte and inlctal vie” 5 How do you understand the meaning of character? How is character rekvantin taking males? 1 ryPART I: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS 6. Can you think of a real-life example of a virtuous person? Why do you consider him/her to be wo? 7. How can you apply Aristotle's ethics tn improving the current state of your country? HM Exercises A. Form yourselves Into small groups. Evaluate the table of the principal virtues afd vices. Identify and reflect on your personal experiences where you may Ihave engaged in some of the vices listed there. What factors led to your having such dispositions In these ‘experience? B. Do research and find « movie in which Aristotle's Virtue ethics is exemplified, HH Reference Aristotle. Aristotle's Nicomachean Bthics. Tvans. Robert ©. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 201. CHAPTER II The Natural Law: St. Thomas Aquinas Learning Outcomes ‘At the end of this chapter, you should be able to: 1. recognize the meaning of natural law and its relation to ethics 2. explain how natural law is an imprint of the Divine Will on the free person; 8. appreciate and articulate the role of natural law in crafting an ethical life; and 4, discuss conscience and how this is defined by natural Jaw, Hi introduction Albert Camus opened his 1942 seminal book, The Myth of Sisyphus, by posing the question, *Why will I not kill myself today?” Locally, such a dramatic recognition of the sorry condition of the world is echoed by « column of Rina ‘Jimenez-David in the daily broadsheet Philippine Daily Inquirer on 25 October 2003 when in frustration she asked “Why would we not just close down the Philippines ‘Camus has lived through the two world wars (1914 1918; 1930-1045) and thus highlights the bitterness of his times and the task of man to live in sincerity, moderation, land justice with « playful heart even hile confronted ‘ith utter meaninglessness in life. Jimenez-David saw two 4PART I THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS Philippine people power revolutions (22-25 February 1986; 17-20 Jamnry 2001) ad sore years after got so frustrated in the country that she simply wanted to ask every Filipino to live elsewhere. 46 ‘Our present age is not impervious to such attacks of absurdity, frustration, and near desperation. History, however, ‘is gracefully replete with people who have exerted effort in ‘Pointing out a viable way out of such darkness and confusion | One of the options, if one wants to call i that, was arrived at through the meeting between Philosophy and ‘© religion of revelation that is. Christianity. ‘The est ‘representative of this integration and arguably also, an fexcellent thinking through of a reasonable way that addresses ‘the questions of the human person, is the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. Thomas’ systemic approach that is ‘meant to guide human action is known as an ethics of natural nw. While his metaphysics harks back to medieval times of belie in God, his ethical system endures until couteroporary ‘times in the moral. guidelines followed and lived out by religious believers who belong to the Catholic tradition. Etsi Deus non daretur ‘Thomas Aquinas begins from the standpoint of faith. His [Perspective presupposes the existence of a God who is the ‘author (sonree) and the goal (end) ofall reality, ‘This Creator for ‘Thomas, howover, relates in freedom with the Inman ‘Person and 0 enables him/her in freedom to recognize ‘rough reason, the very principle of foundations ofall things. In accordance with this foundational knowledge, the human Porson can choose to act. jn sich a way that is worthy of ‘one's very reality. One who ean reach the wisdom at the very ‘heart of all things is obliged to actin accordance with his/ her dignity. The husnan being then is said to be gifted with ‘the ability to know the highest. good” that engages him/her {in freedom in “choosing to act on the good that he/she ought to do.” Freedom here is knowing the best goal and being able to reach for it through decisive action, This is expressed ”PART |: THE ACADEMIC ETKICAL TRADITIONS interiory, that is in the very hear, of every Iman person as the dictate of “doing good and avoiding evil” For Aquinas, God reveals his Goodwill as the Eternal Law reflected in the order of reality. Relating with the Law fas governing all is relating with God himself whose will ‘emanates to govern all that is. The reality then of life ms ‘growth, nutrition, and reproduction is founded on the will that is eternal, Even the reality of sensitive consciousness as railed by instinct that is true of animals is also in accordance ‘with the same will, That “plants persist to carry themselves ‘out to the fullness of being plants” is an imprint of the ‘governing will that comes to human understanding as law. "That “animals governed by instincts behave in such and such 1 way” is also recognized by the human person as following the dictate ofa law that guides all of creation, ‘The reatity of the human person who is able, through his/ her intellect, to decide in freedom and, through his/her wil, ‘to move himself/herself voluntarily in accordance with the ‘good that: he/she ean know follows the very will of God who thas “created man in His own image” (Genesis 1, 27). Man in His fullness shares life with plants and animals but goes ‘beyond them in his voluntary action and freedom in decisions, Human freedom for St. Thomas, therefore, is an imprint of the divine will in the very being of the human person ‘This sharing of human reason in the eternal will or divine law is for him/her the natural law. The relationship between the Bternal and Natural law for him/her is expressed in the Sacred book for Christians thus, “since the creation of the ‘world Goel invisible will—hls power and nature—has been clearly seen being understood from what has been made visible so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1, 20). ‘The Divine will, according, to this quote, ean be understood ‘as governing all that is; man’s task is to act in such a way (CHAPTER Il: THE NATURAL LAM: St. THOMAS AQUINAS: that his/her participation in the full unfolding of nature directs it to flfillment. ‘This law impinges on the very freedom of the human being who can know his/ber options and voluntarily will to take action. ‘The rational lmuman person's participation, ability to discern what is good from what is not, is the very presence of the dictate of the law within him/her, and is also the Imprint on him/her of the Creator (Divine wil) ‘The human person then, who is able to draw up specific laws that govern himself/herself, his/her society, and his/her relationshfp with all ereation, is also the author of postive Jaws. Natural law necessarily takes precedence over positive laws. Not all that is legal in human society reflects the law ‘that dictates on the human person 1s ethieal in accordance ‘with natural law—what is logal then is not always necessarily ‘mora ‘This ethics of natural law has gained wide acceptance at one point in the history of western civilization that it bas ‘come to be espoused even if one prescinds from the faith system that has engendered it. Btsi Deus non daretur is an ‘expression that highlights the validity of this ethical eystem ‘with or without faith in the Creator God. Literally, etsi Deus hho daretur means “even if there is no God.” ‘This implies ‘that the wisdom of the ethical system that is nntural law is ‘valid and binding for the human person even if we bracket ‘elit in God ‘Those who came up with the expression etsi Deus non aretur do not advocate atheism or protest against the faith ‘They simply mean that the deposit of knowledge or “divine wisdom” that comes to us as “natural law” is valid in itself land Is, therefore, the reasonable code of conduct even for a ‘man of goodwill who may be without faith. Even the Sacred Scriptures of Christians reflect this, “For when non-believersPART l THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS ‘who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions ‘of the law, they are a law for themselves even thougl they do ‘not have the law. They show that the demands ofthe law are written in their hearts” (Romans 2, 14-18) HH Conscience and Natural Law ‘The ability of man to know is important in his/her acting ‘ethically. Hence, if one follows St. Thomas’ discussion on conscience, one is inelined to conclude that “it is the proper fanctioning of reason in moving the human person towards ‘an end goal that is fitting of his/her dignity." One cannot do the right thing if one does not know what itis. The famous dictate then to follow the conscience absolutely is tied to an obligation to educate it. Not knowing St. Thomas is not an excuse, Even if one does not know, he/sbe is obliged to know: If one acts badly out of ignorance and does not act to rectify the situation by bothering to learn, that person Is to be held ‘accountable according to the Angelic Doctor. 7 While the conscience absolutely binds us in doing the 00x and avoiding evil, conscience as reason is also absolutely tasked to be given formation. The conscience, therefore, can be mistaken, and being so does not exempt the human person from culpability. If he/abe i able to know but fils to act in his/her obligation to do so, then he/she is not free from blame and responsibilty for what was done. ‘There are different kinds of conscience that may lead us to wrongdoing: callous, perplexed, scrupulous, and ignorant. ‘The uninformed conscience simply lacks education, while tho perplexed one needs guidance in sorting out one's confusion ‘The callous and scrupulous are binary opposites but both are malformed in being too lax or too strict. Callousness of the 1 e.Tenenhainn Simao 4780812 -_ \ Bi secseoce rr isthe ng patna ding et Boeri ean tnage cote eben fe soe or bad Scroplounceyon the oter how fatto frst os silty to do daca, vey Snr st having wtb wo the pio wing nog were there really none if one hake aba iy tac een, tonsciones that lead. to bay i aton can ely be Beetle’ by eduction. Puling lr. in ornng soa course hoe apr toon fu uch nalatns liven sh opens to esr the human conte canine then ny the cite ef nt, comin? He Thre. Sains inn. obit nl Gonerens rennet he ott presinats aoe tnt bd u too the good and seh ek stl ty ging aginst ent Gps nding She contnny othe tetas of yt one Eowinly ela ax eno If he exert of what ove knows Beery ee it soe goto be des na oe eae broke he bls cbige to act seer. a “at on Be go and sun she cl Then oxo gan shone Iportace ofthe commana’ io edna ones ene Epes vosemnc aus dome ow fon are Bhd sinc e's nom frag i thot hate et by foe conan suton of owl sn what ought to be tone tsougheseton steal rea! vg, ecrding 181 Thomas Agsnas"Toogh spurte by caro, the Perel Lawrene Kobibre inter chet. Thomas Tact tnt "eda ral me ving” f (CHAPTER I: THE NATURAL LAW:'ST: THOMAS AQUINAS Three Contemporary Questions ‘There are relevant questions that can help the Filipino studcut appreciate Thosnste Natural Law. If we follow what has been earlier sid, that natural lw is man’s participation fn the execution ofthe ood and avoidance of evi through stPART i: THE ACADEMIC ETHICAL TRADITIONS the use of his/her reason and will, then three questions that originated from the writing of Alasdair Macintyre can be ‘appropriated to highlight the relevance of Aquinas today: ‘Who am 1? Who do I want to be? How can I get there?” Who am IP Thomistic Natural Law interrogates the identity of the human person. If one is endowed with his/her ‘own facticty, history, and abilities, his/her present reality is ‘cess to him/her through self-knowledge and reflection ‘This assessment of one's own strengths and weaknesses is critical in being able to do good and avoid evil. This ethical task isnot only an outward truth. Doing good determines the factor in a reality that is good and doing bad malforms him/ her too, The reality of human identity is that it i something defined yet also always in process. ‘The task of knowing the self isthe point of departure {or the task of building up the identity of the human person, Ethics here does not only cover the issues that usually call ‘our attention, such as abortion, euthanasia, or other burning ‘moral questions of this sort. Ethics for Aquinas Is primarily ‘8 question of human identity. “All human acts are moral facts.” Aquinas said. Since itis through his/her acts that man defines himself/herself the ethical man is the tak of his/her free acts. Defining the self gives one a chance to clarify his/her goal; hence, it is important to raise the second question: Who do I want to be? The human person's self-knowledge is dynamic, that is, i is always open to the direction set by ‘what one wants to make of himself/herself. Self-knowledge here is malleable towards self-determination. Ethical acts sve direction through freedom to build up the self towards a particular goal. 32 : ‘The human reason is so gifted that it is able to discern ‘through options and dai Decisions are the bas ‘of one's freedom in choosing what one wants to he. The self ‘also considers the truthful transition to what one ought to bbe. Given this knowledge of himself/herself and the ability ‘to evaluate his/her options end possibilities, the self ean also better give direction to hinislf/berself ‘The third question is not very fa from: the other questions. In truth, How can I get there? also fully utilizes ‘the sound judgment of human reason and evaluates the best ronte to get to the goal decided upon. The last question breaks down the task to be done into the particulars of actions and daily routine. Self-knowledge and self | determination are here bridged by self governance. |. The human person does not only access reason to assess his/her personal identity and personal goal; he/she is also sifted with the will to command the self to.go through the steps and, hence, be able to do the transition from knowledge ‘to a fully determined self. Goal sotting through reason and decision is complemented by the nbiity to freely move the self ‘and command the body in action. It is in orchestrating the ‘actions to be consistent with the end in mind that the self ‘Teaches improvement. For instance, if one wishes to get to the goal of finishing _adegree, oe starts with the reality of the self. Knowing what ‘one needs to Improve on supports the goal of graduating, A ound decision helps the student to maximize the training ‘and studies that go with being enrolled in the university. | One knows in honesty that « paper diploma that reflects a “degree is hardly of value without true knowlege apd mastery ‘of what one is expected to know. Hence, if one's goal is to “graduate with competence, one elects the daily, monthly, ‘pemestral, or oven yearly tasks that ought to be completed. Professors, lectures, and even exams are then seen in thislight a8 aids in reaching the goal. Furthermore, the self is ‘not only a passive receiver of what transpires externally; ‘designs the path and cooperates with the situation to reach the end that has been reasonably set by the self The Relational and Perfection of Love in Aquinas Although we have suspended God-talk to. make the abe that natural aw is eelevant even forthe human person trithout faith, the diseussion of Thomistic ethics i incomplete iFit doesnot end with the love that is directed towards Gor. ‘Thomistic natura lw is not Christian simply because itis an ethics reconilable or compatible with faith. 1 sa dscptined system that finds ultimate foundation and perfection in the reality of God, While through etsi Deus non daretur-we are afforded the autonomy of « reasonable ethies independent fom faith, ultimately this ethies is given full meaning and perfection in relationship with God : ‘The autonomy of ethics feom faith afforded a level of disciplined reflection that enables man to not only copy the perfection that is God and apply it to himself/herself and his/her surroundings. The independence that i given in the ethical order also allows the human person in particularity to be himself/herself, asthe singular subject that ho/she i. ‘That is, through personal reflection, decisions, goal setting, tnd proxi, the human person attains the ful realisation of ‘who he/she is. In this sense, the human being isnot merely a dn forthe Creator God. One is not a robot who learns the direction from everything else and applies it to oneself to funetion as tool for Deus ex machina, or the God of the machine. The subjectivity of man and one's search for fulfilment readily rest on the decisions and voluntary wing that one makes + On the otter hand, however, the Divine Will and also entirety of all creation cannot be listed hy the ope “ofrsntisfaction that is exchusively.thoven. by” man, ‘The “Taman being remains to be one particular being among the "smutty of beings. One cannot given onc limit, be the | falillment of everything Here a protest nay aro, Int hi "er goalseting inclusive of "the desire to be everything?” Truly, he/she may have the longing, even the potential to be hat he/she wants to bo, stretching it so fr as embracing hour s/he dvi i ta Tis ental however ves from what i actual inthe reality of being wanting to bo all in all snot the same as trly being all inal, Yet the re for this has to come from somewhere, Homan beings ar not capable of desiring all nal suse they are nie evokes this thirst inthe Boman person? This desis, herefore, has to come from somewhere or someone else who vale this in him/her Here the relational that is inherent in the natural order finds value. The human person is not only bound to find foll maximum capacity of one’s being in a search for slf- ‘actualization. He/She is not designed to find perfection on hhis/ber own but thoroaghiy relates with other niman persons ‘and all of creation, He/She is not designed to be a Pharisee ‘who is perfect unto himself/herself. He/She is open to be in all and to exist forall. One's goal, therefore, is not only to be the "self-made man/woman” but, in his/her ful effort, “be ‘open and svailable for everything else” and “be open for the love or fullness that is beyond hie /ber” Ultimately, as held by St. Thomas himself, the true ‘destiny of man Ties in a gratuitous perfection that is beyond the human person yet relates with him/her thoroughly in iom and, therefore, in fullness of love, This relationship [and loving invitation exceeds the possibilities of achievements ‘and realizations that ‘are reachable by the tniman person In himself/herself. It may be called spititual, beatific, or 38