What is ethics?

The term ethics may refer to the philosophical

study of the concepts of moral right and wrong
and moral good and bad, to any philosophical
theory of what is morally right and wrong or
morally good and bad, and to any system or
code of moral rules, principles, or values. The last
may be associated with particular religions,
cultures, professions, or virtually any other group
that is at least partly characterized by its moral
outlook.

How is ethics different from morality?

Traditionally, ethics referred to the philosophical
study of morality, the latter being a more or less
systematic set of beliefs, usually held in common
by a group, about how people should live. Ethics
also referred to particular philosophical theories
of morality. Later the term was applied to
particular (and narrower) moral codes or value
systems. Ethics and morality are now used almost
interchangeably in many contexts, but the name
of the philosophical study remains ethics.

Why does ethics matter?

● Ethics matters because (1) it is part of how
many groups define themselves and thus part
of the identity of their individual members, (2)
other-regarding values in most ethical systems
both reflect and foster close human
relationships and mutual respect and trust, and
(3) it could be “rational” for a self-interested
person to be moral, because his or her
self-interest is arguably best served in the long
run by reciprocating the moral behavior of
others.

Moral Standards versus Non-moral Ones

● Why the need to distinguish moral standards
from non-moral ones? It is important to note
that different societies have different moral
beliefs and that our beliefs are deeply
influenced by our own culture and context. For
this reason, some values do have moral
implications, while others don’t. Let us
consider, for example, the wearing of hijab.
For sure, in traditional Muslim communities, the
wearing of hijab is the most appropriate act
that women have to do in terms of dressing
up. In fact, for some Muslims, showing parts of
the woman’s body, such as the face and legs,
is despicable However, in many parts of the
world, especially in Western societies, most
 people don’t mind if women barely cover
their bodies. As a matter of fact, the Hollywood
canon of beauty glorifies a sexy and slim body
and the wearing of extremely daring dress. The
point here is that people in the West may
have pitied the Muslim women who wear
hijab, while some Muslims may find women
who dress up daringly despicable.

● Again, this clearly shows that different cultures

have different moral standards. What is a
matter of moral indifference, that is, a matter
of taste (hence, non-moral value) in one
culture may be a matter of moral significance
in another.
● Now, the danger here is that one culture may
impose its own cultural standard on others,
which may result in a clash in cultural values
and beliefs. When this happens, as we may
already know, violence and crime may ensue,
such as religious violence and ethnic
cleansing.

How can we address this cultural conundrum?

● This is where the importance of understanding

the difference between moral standards (that
is, of what is a moral issue) and non-moral
ones (that is, of what is a non-moral issue―thus,
 a matter of taste) comes in. This issue may be
too obvious and insignificant for some people,
but understanding the difference between
the two may have far-reaching implications.
For one, once we have distinguished moral
standards from non-moral ones, of course,
through the aid of the principles and theories
in ethics, we will be able to identify
fundamental ethical values that may guide
our actions. Indeed, once we know that
particular values and beliefs are non-moral, we
will be able to avoid running the risk of falling
into the pit of cultural reductionism (that is,
taking complex cultural issues as simple and
homogenous ones) and the unnecessary
imposition of one’s own cultural standard on
others. The point here is that if such standards
are non-moral (that is, a matter of taste), then
we don’t have the right to impose them on
others. But if such standards are moral ones,
such as not killing or harming people, then we
may have the right to force others to act
accordingly. In this way, we may be able to
find a common moral ground, such as
agreeing not to steal, lie, cheat, kill, harm, and
deceive our fellow human beings.
● Now, what are moral standards, and how do
they differ from non-moral ones?
Moral Standards and their Characteristics

● Moral standards are norms that individuals or

groups have about the kinds of actions
believed to be morally right or wrong, as well
as the values placed on what we believed to
be morally good or morally bad. Moral
standards normally promote “the good”, that
is, the welfare and well-being of humans as
well as animals and the environment. Moral
standards, therefore, prescribe what humans
ought to do in terms of rights and obligations.
● According to some scholars, moral standards
are the sum of combined norms and values. In
other words, norms plus values equal moral
standards. On the one hand, norms are
understood as general rules about our actions
or behaviors. For example, we may say “We
are always under the obligation to fulfill our
promises” or “It is always believed that killing
innocent people is absolutely wrong”. On the
other hand, values are understood as
enduring beliefs or statements about what is
good and desirable or not. For example, we
may say “Helping the poor is good” or
“Cheating during exams is bad”.
● According to many scholars, moral standards
have the following characteristics, namely: 1)
 moral standards deal with matters we think
can seriously injure or benefit humans, animals,
and the environment, such as child abuse,
rape, and murder; 2) moral standards are not
established or changed by the decisions of
authoritative individuals or bodies. Indeed,
moral standards rest on the adequacy of the
reasons that are taken to support and justify
them. For sure, we don’t need a law to back
up our moral conviction that killing innocent
people is absolutely wrong; 3) moral standards
are overriding, that is, they take precedence
over other standards and considerations,
especially of self-interest; 4) moral standards
are based on impartial considerations. Hence,
moral standards are fair and just; and 5) moral
standards are associated with special
emotions (such as guilt and shame) and
vocabulary (such as right, wrong, good, and
bad).

Non-moral Standards

● Non-moral standards refer to standards by

which we judge what is good or bad and right
or wrong in a nonmoral way. Examples of
non-moral standards are standards of
etiquette by which we judge manners as good
 or bad, standards we call the law by which
we judge something as legal or illegal, and
standards of aesthetics by which we judge art
as good or rubbish. Hence, we should not
confuse morality with etiquette, law, aesthetics
or even with religion.

● As we can see, non-moral standards are

matters of taste or preference. Hence, a
scrupulous observance of these types of
standards does not make one a moral person.
Violation of said standards also does not pose
any threat to human well-being.
● Finally, as a way of distinguishing moral
standards from non-moral ones, if a moral
standard says “Do not harm innocent people”
or “Don’t steal”, a non-moral standard says
“Don’t text while driving” or “Don’t talk while
the mouth is full”.

Morals in Society
● Is there really a standard moral code in
society these days? Yes, while most people
follow society's laws, they also abide by
certain social mores, which are governed
by morals. While morals tend to be driven
by personal beliefs and values, there are
certainly some common morals that most
 people agree on, such as:
Always tell the truth
Do not destroy property
Have courage
Keep your promises
Do not cheat
Treat others as you want to be treated
Do not judge
Be dependable
Be forgiving
Have integrity
Take responsibility for your actions
Have patience
Be loyal
Have respect for yourself and others
Be tolerant of differences
Seek justice
Have humility
Be generous

The Ten Commandments

● The Ten Commandments are often

considered the basis for societies founded
on Judeo-Christian principles. You'll notice
some overlap with the list above, as many
of these principles are still embedded in
 general society.

Do not have any gods before me

Do not make for yourself a graven image
Do not take the name of the Lord your God in vain
Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy
Honor your father and mother
Do not kill
Do not commit adultery
Do not steal
Do not bear false witness against your neighbor
Do not covet your neighbor's wife or possessions

What is a moral dilemma?

● A moral dilemma is a situation in which a

difficult choice has to be made between
two courses of action, either of which
entails transgressing a moral principle.
● It is likewise known as ethical dilemma or
ethical paradox which refers to a
decision-making problem between two
possible moral imperatives, neither of
which is unambiguously acceptable or
preferable. The complexity arises out of
the situational conflict in which obeying
would result in transgressing another.
(Wikipedia)
A moral dilemma is a situation where:
1. A person is presented with two or more
actions, all of which he does not have the
ability to perform.
2. There are moral reasons to choose each of the
actions.
3. One cannot perform all of the actions
and has to choose which action or actions,
when there are three or more choices, to
perform.

What are the types of moral dilemmas?

There are several types of moral dilemmas,

but the most common of them are
categorized into the following:

1. Epistemic and Ontological dilemmas. In

epistemic moral dilemma, the moral
agent here does not know which option is
morally right or wrong. ... Ontological
moral dilemmas, on the other hand,
involve situations wherein two or more
moral requirements conflict with each
 other, yet neither of these conflicting
moral requirements overrides each other.
2. Self-imposed and World-imposed
dilemmas. A self-imposed moral dilemma
is caused by the moral agent's
wrongdoings. ... A World-imposed moral
dilemma, on the other hand, means that
certain events in the world place the
agent in a situation of moral conflict.
3. Obligation dilemmas and Prohibition
dilemmas. Obligation dilemmas are
situations in which more than one feasible
action is obligatory. Prohibition dilemmas,
on the other hand, involve cases in which
all feasible actions are forbidden.
4. Single agent and Multi-person dilemmas.
Finally, in single agent dilemma, the agent
“ought, all things considered, to do A,
ought, all things considered, to do B, and
she cannot do both A and B”. ... The
multi-person dilemma requires more than
choosing what is right, it also entails that
the persons involved reach a general
consensus.

Freedom and Responsibility

● A long-standing position in philosophy, law,

 and theology is that persons can be held
morally responsible for an action only if
they had the freedom to choose and to act
otherwise. Thus, many philosophers
consider freedom to be a necessary
condition for moral responsibility.

Culture, according to Edward Tylor, refers to

“that complex whole which includes
knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, customs,
and any other capabilities and habits acquired
by man as a member of society”.

According to Robert Redfield, “Culture is an

organized body of conventional understanding
manifested in arts and artifacts, which,
persisting through tradition, characterizes a
human group”.

Types of Culture

● Material culture refers to the concrete and

tangible things that man creates and uses.
They range from the prehistoric stone tools
of primitive man to the most advanced
computer of the modern man
● Non-material culture consists of words
people use; the habits they follow; the
ideas, customs and behaviour that any
 society professes and to which they strive to
conform. Laws, techniques, lifestyle, and
knowledge are included, too.

Characteristics of Culture

• Culture is shared and transmitted.

• Culture is social.
• Culture is ideational.
• Culture gratifies human needs.
• Culture is adaptive.
• Culture tends toward integration.
• Culture is cumulative.

Elements of Culture

1. Norms- these are guides or models of

behavior which tell us what is appropriate or
inappropriate, what is right or wrong
a. Folkways
b. Mores
c. Laws

2. Values- values represent the standards we

use to evaluate the desirability of things a.
Achievement and Success
b. Activity and work
c. Moral orientation
d. Humanitarian
e. Efficiency and practicality

3. Language- it refers to a system of symbols

that have specific and arbitrary meaning in a
given society

4. Fashion, fads, and craze- these are other

elements of culture that are short-lived social
norms with which people are expected to
comply with

Functions of Culture

• Culture as a Category - As a general category

for the classification of phenomena

• Culture as a tool in prediction

Some of the more specific functions of culture

distinct from the objectives of the various social
institutions:

1. Culture serves as a trademark or special

feature that distinguishes one society from
another.
2. Culture brings together, contains, and
interprets the values of a society in a more or
less systematic manner.
3. Culture provides one of the most important
bases for social solidarity.
4. Culture provides a blueprint of, as well as the
materials for social structure.
5. The culture of any society is largely
responsible for producing a social personality.
6. The culture of a society provides behavioral
patterns.
7. Culture provides individuals with the meaning
and direction of their existence.

Lesson 2. What is Moral Behavior?

● Moral behavior is/are action/s that

produce good outcomes for the individuals
as members of a community, or society. It
can be applied to the whole global society.
Schulman defines it as “Acts intended to
produce kind and/or fair outcomes”.

Factors that Affect our Moral Behavior:

1. Family- the basic unit of the society. It

includes one’s biological or adoptive family of
orientation. The same provides us with our basic
needs to survive and develop as a significant
member of the society.
2. School- it may include formal or non-formal
educational system that provides a child with
his learning needs.
3. Church- the institution that determines what is
specifically considered as right or wrong. It is
composed of believers in the same faith.
4. Mass Media- those agencies that are
purposive of entertaining, informing and
educating through various channels like the
radio, television, printed materials and etc.

Lesson 3. What is Cultural Relativism?

● - A theory about the nature of morality.

● - Challenges our ordinary belief in the
objectivity and universality of moral truth.
● There is no such thing as universal truth in
ethics; there are only the various cultural
codes, and nothing more.

● *Form of Argument- the strategy used by

cultural relativists is to argue from facts
about the differences between cultural
outlooks to a conclusion about the status of
morality.

Six Claims of Moral Relativists

1. Different societies have different moral

codes.
2. There is no objective standard that can be
used to judge one societal code better than
another.
3. The moral code of our own society has no
special status; it is merely one among many.
4. There is no "universal truth" in ethics; that is,
there are no moral truths that hold for all
peoples at all times.
5. The moral code of a society determines what
is right within that society; that is, if the moral
code of a society says that a certain action is
right, then that action is right, at least within that
society.
6. It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the
conduct of other peoples. We should adopt an
attitude of tolerance toward the practices of
other cultures.

What are the Advantages of Cultural Relativism?

1. It is a system which promotes cooperation.

2. It creates a society where equality is possible.
3. People can pursue a genuine interest.
4. Respect is encouraged in a system of cultural
relativism.
5. It preserves human cultures.
6. Cultural relativism creates a society without
judgment.
7. Moral relativism can be excluded from
cultural relativism.
8. We can create personal moral codes based
on societal standards with ease.
9. It stops cultural conditioning.

What Are the Disadvantages of Cultural

Relativism?

1. It creates a system that is fuelled by personal

bias.
2. It would create chaos.
3. It is an idea that is based on the perfection of
humanity.
4. It could promote a lack of diversity.
5. It draws people away from one another.
6. It could limit moral progress.
7. It could limit humanity’s progress.
8. Cultural relativism can turn perceptions into
truths

Lesson 4. The Filipino Culture

● The summation of indigenous forces and

foreign influences that had come to bear
upon the people in varying degrees during
the last centuries defines the Filipino Culture.
 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Filipino
People

STRENGTHS

1. Pakikipagkapwa-tao
● Opening yourself to others and feel one
with others with dignity and respect deals
with them as fellow human beings.
● - sense of fairness and justice
● - concern for others
● - ability to empathize with others
● - helpfulness and generosity
● - practice of hospitality
● - sensitive to other feelings and trust

2. Family Orientation
● a genuine and deep love for family.
- commitment and responsibility
- honor and respect
- generosity and sacrifice
- sense of trust and security

3. Joy and Humor

● Filipinos have a cheerful and fun-loving
approach to life and its up and down,
pleasant disposition, a sense of humor and
propensity for happiness that contribute
not only to the Filipino charm but also to
 the Filipino Spirit. We laugh at those we love
and hate. We tend to make joke about our
good and even bad fortune, to smile even
in the most trying of times.
- emotional balance and optimism
- healthy disrespect for power and office.

4. Flexibility, Adaptability and Creativity

5. Hard Work and Industry

● -capacity for hard work given to raise one's
standard living of a decent life for one's
family.

6. Faith and Religiosity

● Faith in God - accepting reality to
comprehend as a human created by God.
"Pampalakas-loob"

7. Ability to Survive.
● -capacity for endurance despite difficult
times
● -ability to get by on so very little; survival
instinct
● -can bravely live through the harshest
economic and social circumstances

WEAKNESSES
1. Extreme Personalism
● - always trying to to give personal
interpretation to actions
● - thank you with "but" (compliment
criticism-compliment)

2. Extreme Family Centeredness - strong family

protection good or bad condition

3. Lack of Discipline : relaxed attitude but poor

time management
● - impatient and unable to delay
gratification or reward
● - love to take short-cuts or 'palusot' system
● - carelessness

4. Passivity and Lack of Initiative : strong

reliance to others fate
● - yeah proud Pinoy. It's all because of the
race (nationality/blood) not by a person's
attitude, hard-work, dream and
perseverance etc.
● - very complacent (relax) but their rarely is
a sense of urgency (It's OK we have 1 day
left to finished, just relax)
● - too patient without any plan or action
(matiisin) "Bahala na System" - No matter
what, At least we tried.
● - doubt and debate first than study, discuss
 until planning and action

5. Colonial Mentality : Patriotism vs Active

awareness
● - luck of love and appreciation on what
they have
● - open outside but side-open or close inside

6. Kanya-kanya Syndrome : self serving attitude

that generates feelings of envy and
competitiveness towards others (status vs
prestige).
● - personal ambition but insensitive to
common good
● - crab mentality
● - lack of appreciation resulting
● unhealthy competition

7. Lack of Self Analysis and

Reflection
● - Sometimes superficial and flighty

Lesson 1. Moral Character

● Moral character is formed by one's actions.

The habits, actions, and emotional
responses of the person of good character
all are united and directed toward the
 moral and the good. Because human
beings are body/soul unities, actions of the
body are actions of the self, that is, human
beings are self-possessing, self-governing,
and self-determining.
● In order to be of good character, one must
know the good, act in morally good ways,
and be disposed and inclined toward the
good through the development of virtues.
Character and action are intertwined so
intimately that one's professional duties, or
even what is perceived by others as one's
duties, cannot override one's conscience
without negatively affecting (and
changing) one's character.
● For the physician to be of good character,
it is vital that he or she follow his or her
conscience in all things: in private life and
also in his or her profession, i.e., in the
treatment of patients.

● Moral Character Damon (1988) identified six

ways that social scientists have defined
morality: -

1. Evaluative orientation that distinguishes

good and bad and prescribes good.
2. Sense of obligation toward standards of
social collective.
 3. Concern for the right of others
4. Sense of responsibility for acting out of
concern for others
5. Commitment to honesty in interpersonal
relationships
6. State of mind that causes negative
emotional reactions to immoral acts.

Moral Development
● Focuses on the emergence, change and
understanding of morality from infancy
through adulthood.
-
Morality is defined as the principle for how
individuals ought to treat one another, with
respect to justice, other’s welfare and rights.
"Virtues" are attitudes, dispositions, or character
traits that enable us to be and to act in ways
that develop this potential. They enable us to
pursue the ideals we have adopted. Honesty,
courage, compassion, generosity, fidelity,
integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence
are all examples of virtues.

Lesson 2. Kohlberg's Stages of Moral

Development

Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality

● At the preconventional level (most
 nine-year-olds and younger, some over
nine), we don’t have a personal code of
morality. Instead, our moral code is shaped
by the standards of adults and the
consequences of following or breaking
their rules.

● Authority is outside the individual and

reasoning is based on the physical
consequences of actions.

• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment

Orientation.
● The child/individual is good in order to
avoid being punished. If a person is
punished, they must have done wrong.

• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange.

● At this stage, children recognize that there is
not just one right view that is handed down
by the authorities. Different individuals have
different viewpoints.

Level 2 - Conventional morality

● At the conventional level (most adolescents
and adults), we begin to internalize the
moral standards of valued adult role
models.
● Authority is internalized but not questioned,
 and reasoning is based on the norms of the
group to which the person belongs.

• Stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships.

● The child/individual is good in order to be
seen as being a good person by others.
Therefore, answers relate to the approval of
others.

• Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order.

● The child/individual becomes aware of the
wider rules of society, so judgments
concern obeying the rules in order to
uphold the law and to avoid guilt.

Level 3 - Postconventional morality

● Individual judgment is based on self-chosen
principles, and moral reasoning is based on
individual rights and justice. According to
Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as
far as most people get.
● Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of
abstract thinking necessary for stage 5 or 6
(post-conventional morality). That is to say,
most people take their moral views from
those around them and only a minority think
through ethical principles for themselves.
 ● Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual
Rights. The child/individual becomes aware
that while rules/laws might exist for the
good of the greatest number, there are
times when they will work against the
interest of particular individuals.
● The issues are not always clear-cut. For
example, in Heinz’s dilemma, the protection
of life is more important than breaking the
law against stealing.

• Stage 6. Universal Principles.

● People at this stage have developed their
own set of moral guidelines which may or
may not fit the law. The principles apply to
everyone.
● E.g., human rights, justice, and equality. The
person will be prepared to act to defend
these principles even if it means going
against the rest of society in the process
and having to pay the consequences of
disapproval and or imprisonment. Kohlberg
doubted that few people reached this
stage.
Lesson 1. Reason and Impartiality

Definition of terms:

FEELING
• An emotional state or reaction
• A particular emotion or sensation or an
emotional perception or attitude
REASON
• Is the basis or motive for an action, decision,
or conviction. As a quality, it refers to the
capacity for logical, rational, and analytic
thought; for consciously making sense of things,
establishing and verifying facts, applying
common sense and logic, and justifying, and if
necessary, changing practices, institutions, and
beliefs based on existing or new existing
information

IMPARTIALITY
• Involves the idea that each individual’s
interests and point of view are equally
important. It is a principle of justice holding that
decisions ought to be based on objective
criteria, rather than on the basis of bias,
prejudice, or preferring the benefit to one
person over another for improper reasons.

MORALITY
• Morality refers to the set of standards that
enable people to live cooperatively in groups.
It’s what societies determine to be “right” and
“acceptable.”

DAVID HUME
● -Born 1711 in Edinburg, Scotland-died 1776
-His father died the year after he was born
 -Hume was educated by his widowed
mother until he left for the University of
Edinburgh around the age of 15 without
finishing any degree in order to devote
himself to philosophy and literature.
● - From 1734-1737 he lived at La Fleche in
Anjou. -Treatise of Human Nature, his first
work which was published anonymously in
January 1739. –At the age of 27, he had
written one of the major works of modern
philosophy.
● After his death, this work achieved
enormous fame. The 18th-century idealists
and the 19th-century British idealists took
this work of Hume as the target of their
criticisms of empiricism.

● If David Hume claimed that morality must

be rooted in feelings, the American Thomas
Nagel had a different claim. He believed
that morality must be rooted not in feelings
or emotions, because that would make
morality subjective. Morality must be
objective. Hence, it must be rooted in
reason. Accordingly, no matter how great
our feelings in a particular situation can be,
such feelings will not be considered as a
basis for universal moral principles because
my feelings on a particular issue may be
 different from the feelings of others. Our
feelings may be irrational. They may be
products of prejudice, selfishness, or cultural
conditioning. One’s moral decision may
depend on the effect of one’s action on
the person involved.

Lesson 2. 8 Steps to Moral Reasoning Process

1. Gather the facts.

➢ Before making a moral decision, it is
important that the necessary facts are
gathered. This is the essential first step prior to
any ethical analysis and reflection on the case.
In gathering the facts, questions like "what do
we know" and "what do we need to know?"
must be asked.

2. Define the ethical guidelines.

➢ Ethical issues are considered competing
interests or goods. Competing interests are
actually the reason why there is an ethical
dilemma. In this regard, issues can be
presented as _____ versus _____. This will help the
person analyze the interests that are
contradicting one another. For example, the
right of the teacher to give a failing grade to
students who are not academically qualified
and incompetent versus the obligation of the
teacher to become charitable to students.

3. Review relevant ethical guidelines.

➢ It is important to determine the different
ethical guidelines in order to determine which
one can be best applied to the issue.

4. Obtain consultation.
➢ It is important to consult people who are
more competent in terms of morality. A
religious leader, or a well-respected teacher, or
an elderly person in society who has more
wisdom than us.

5. List the alternative courses of action.

➢ Making moral decisions requires creative
thinking, which will help one identify various
alternative courses of action.

6. Compare the alternatives with the principle.

➢ Connect the alternatives with the moral
principles that have a bearing on the case. In
many cases, the case will be resolved at this
point since the principles will remove all
alternatives except one. However, if there is no
clear decision that may come into force at this
point, then it is necessary to move to the next
step. The best thing here is that, at this point,
some alternatives have already been
eliminated.

7. Weigh the consequences.

➢ If the moral principles that have bearing on
the case do not yet provide a clear decision,
then it is necessary to consider the
consequences of an action. At this point, it is
important to take note of both the positive and
negative consequences. 8. Make a decision.
➢ A decision has to be made after weighting
all the consequences. Notice that in an ethical
dilemma, one has to undergo the painful
process of critical study and analysis. When a
decision has to be made already, it is also
necessary to consider that the decision should
be that which involves the least number of
problems or negative consequences, and not
the one that is devoid of problems.

Lesson 1. The Beginning of the Philosophy of

Aristotle Aristotle
● -born in 384 BCE in Stagria,- died 322
● -his father was Nicomachus, a physician of
King Amuntas II of Macedonia. -Learned
basic anatomy and dissection from his
father.
● -at the age of 17, he was sent to Athens to
study at Plato’s Academy for 20 years until
 Plato’s death.
● -At the academy, he earned the reputation
as the mind and the reader of the school.
● -was rejected by the trustees to be Plato’s
successor in 408 BCE that is why he left
Athens and Stayed in Assos for 3 years.
● -Became friends with Hermias, the Ruler of
the City of Troad
● - In 344 BCE, was married to Pythias, the
ruler’s niece. And bore Aristotle’s daughter.
● -In 343 BCE, Aristotle was invited by King
Philip of Macedon to train his 13- years old
son (Alexander the Great)
● -In 340 BCE, Philip sent Aristotle back to
latter’s hometown of Stagira to write the
code of laws in order to restore the
community.
● -In 334 BCE, When he was 49 years old, he
returned to Athens where he founded his
own school of Philosophy.

● -Aristotle was known to be the man who

had created the first important library,
tutored the greatest ruler of the ancient
world, invented logic, and shaped thinking
of an entire culture.
Lesson 2. The Philosophy of Aristotle
● According to Aristotle a thing would
undergo change only insofar as the nature
of such a thing permits it to be such.

Principle that allows things for the change:

1. Principle of Actuality (Act)

-it is the perfection of being.
-Aristotle calls this principle form, which signifies
the act.

2. Principle of Potentiality (Potency)

-it is the capability of a being to attain another
perfection.
-Aristotle calls this principle matter, which
signifies potency or the capacity of the matter
to obtain another act.

Hylomorphic Doctrine
● -It was the central doctrine of Aristotle's
philosophy of nature.
● -It is a metaphysical view according to
which every natural body consists of two
intrinsic principles, one potential, namely,
primary matter, and one actual, namely,
substantial form.
 ● For Aristotle, a matter has its actuality in
being precise because it is determined by
form, as the actualizing principle, to be this
particular individual. Aristotle is sometimes
called the Father of Science because he
was the first Western thinker of record to
provide an adequate analysis of a process
of change based on the claim that form is
inseparable from matter.

Lesson 3. The Human Person for Aristotle

● In applying this principle to a human being,
Aristotle went away from the concept of
Plato. According to Aristotle, a human
being is composed of a body and a soul.
Aristotle, unlike Plato, believed that the soul
and body are not separate entities in a
human being. Rather, they are correlative
constituents of one being. A human being is
neither body alone nor soul alone, but a
single substance composed of both the
body and the soul.

● According to Aristotle, the soul forms the

entelechy, the definite form of the body.
Without the body, the soul would not be
called a human person. Consequently,
without a soul, the body will not be called a
human person either. Aristotle considered
 the body and the soul to form one
substance.

● For Plato, the soul and the body are two

separate entities. Hence, Plato could speak
of the pre- existence of the soul and the
immorality of the individual soul. Aristotle,
however, tied the soul and the body so
closely together that, according to him,
with the death of the body, the soul will also
die with it. Inasmuch as Plato believed that
the soul has a pre-existence, he could
describe learning as a process of
recollection. On the other hand, Aristotle
believed that the human mind is a tabula
rasa or a blank slate.

● It has been mentioned earlier that Aristotle

believed that man is composite of body
and soul and such composition would be in
such a way that the body and soul could
not be separated from one another if a
man would continue to be a human
person. The soul is part of composite that
animates and commands; while the body is
that part that is subordinate, as the pencil is
to the poet or the slave to the master.

● Aristotle held that the soul has two main

 parts; the rational and the irrational. The
irrational soul, which is closely united with
the body, is divided in to vegetative part,
which is manifested by the activities of
nutrition, growth, and reproduction; and the
desiring part, which is further subdivided into
three progressive levels: the epithumia, the
unruly and irrational sense desires and
covetousness, thumos, which is the
spontaneous impulses, and the boulesis,
which is the wishes and desires.

● The rational soul, which is completely

independent of the body, is further
subdivided into the fronesis (phronesis), or
the (to praktikon dianoetikon), otherwise
known as practical intellect, which is
ordained towards action and determines
the appropriate means in order to attain
the end. Phonesis aims to control the
desiring part of the irrational soul. The other
division of the rational is the (theoretical
dianoia) or the speculative intellect, which
is the pure thought or intellect, the level of
contemplation.

● Although man is composed of the body

and soul, he, however, possesses a very
distinguishing attribute -- reason. Reason
 elevates man above any other creatures. It
is that which makes man resemble the
supreme reason, which rues and guides the
destinies of individuals and nations, and
leads all things to their ends. The
speculative intellect is that part of the
rational soul that is closely connected with
reason. Through contemplation, man will be
able to realize that all things are leading to
their proper ends. It was this regard that his
philosophy is identified as teleological, from
the Greek word telos which means end or
purpose.

● Every action of a human person is aiming

towards an end. There are two types of
ends, according to Aristotle: the
instrumental and the intrinsic end. The
instrumental end is that which is done as
means for other ends, while the intrinsic end
is that which is done for its own sake.

● Aristotle believed that a human person

could only be considered a good person if
and only if he is functioning as a human
person. A human person is not merely to
exist because that will make him be of no
difference from the plants and the animals.
The function of the human person is an
 activity of the human soul that implies a
rational principle. In this case; an action
can only be considered good if the action,
which is actually an activity of the soul, is
done in accordance with the rational
principle. Such action can be considered a
virtuous act.

● In this regard, the end or function of the

human person must have something to do
with his or her specific activity. For Aristotle,
the end of function of the human person
could only be the immanent activity of a
reason brought to its fullest extent, namely,
the moral virtues within the framework of
the communal life of the Polis and the Act
of Contemplation.

Lesson 4. The Aristotelian Ethics

Ethics
● Aristotle considered ethics as techne (an
art), simply the art of living well considered
as a practical science and it concerns the
nature and the purpose of human action

3 Different Versions of Aristotle’s Moral

Philosophy
1. Nicomachean Ethics
- focused on the purpose of human life
- a teleological view that each and everything
that exists in the world exists for some purpose

2. Eudemian Ethics
- the nature and purpose of human purpose of
a human person is to seek and attain
eudaimonia (happiness) - the more
self-sufficient the person is, the happier he will
be
- fame, wealth and pleasure will not lead a
person to happiness
- According to Aristotle, happiness comes from
a life of reason and contemplation, thus, a
reasonable person does not avoid life, but fully
engages with it, just like how human beings are
designed by nature to live with others.

3. Magna Moralia
- was probably the notes of his lectures made
by one of the students of Aristotle

What is the particular action that will lead the

human person to this ultimate happiness?

● A morally virtuous act consists of a

measured activity, following the rule of
 (mesotes) or just middle, meaning it is
“neither deficient nor excessive”. If the
action is coming from the just middle, then it
is ruled by reason. Subjectively, virtue is an
activity that proceeds from certain proper
dispositions. Thus, a virtuous act is a habitual
state that is acquired through constant
practice and becomes the second nature
of a human person. Furthermore, a virtuous
act is what proceeds from the right
intention. In this matter, it then says that
moral virtue is a rationally measured activity
following the rule of the just middle,
motivated by the right intention, and
proceeding from a permanent disposition
acquired through habitual action.

Lesson 5. An Action that Proceeds from

Contemplation

● In order for the human person to be sure

that his action is done in permanent
disposition, such action should be done in
the act of contemplation. Performing such
activity is said to be related to moral virtues.
This is because whenever an action is
performed based on wisdom, which
provides the insight to the truth about the
intrinsic worth and excellence and beauty
 or goodness or the (kalon) of the action
done. As an action, the phronesis is the
practical intellect that properly decides to
act.

Practical wisdom- is the proper activity and

virtue of the practical intellect by which the
human person, as the source of action, is the
union of desire and thought. In applying the
phronesis- Aristotle, like Plato, viewed the
communal life of the polis as the proper place
for the exercise of moral virtue.

Polis- constitutes one of the ends of the human

person.

According to Aristotle:
➢ Happiness is the product of our actions
based on our distinctive nature. It is the fruit of a
virtuous living, the constant and proper exercise
of reason in all of man’s actions and endeavors.
➢ Contemplation is, therefore, to engage in the
highest, most perfect type of reflection, the way
it is in God as the (noesis noeseos).
➢ The main problem of morality is seen to be
how to discipline the lower desires and passions
and how to educate and cultivate the
intellectual part of the soul in order to attain
man’s fulfillment.
Concept of Good according to:

Plato
➢ Good signifies a transcendent,
➢ Immanent in human activity and
otherworldly end of man.
achievable in this life.

Aristotle
➢ Goodness can be obtained when
one performs his function in the
community that must be rooted in
contemplation and must proceed
from habitual action.

➢ Ergon- when a human person

performs his function in a habitual
fashion, he must be able to do
such a function in consideration of
what will be the (arête), which
pertains to excellence.

Lesson 6. Critique on the Aristotelian Ethics

● Aristotle held that every human person is

aiming towards the attainment of
eudaimonia, which means the highest
 happiness.
● Aristotle’s concept of happiness is not
related to pleasure. Wealth cannot be
good as it only means to an end, in order
for the person to be honored through a
virtuous act of charity.

● Aristotle also upheld the values of mesotes,

the principle of Just Middle, which states
that the basis of morality is the avoidance
of the two extremes. Consequently, aiming
for eudaimonia may be contrary to the
idea of the Just Middle. If the basis of
morality is the middle position, then aiming
for the best would be considered an
extreme and, therefore, not good.

● Moreover, a virtuous act is that which is

done voluntarily. Aristotle held that only
voluntary actions are virtuous and vices
manifested.

Human Acts
-are voluntary actions.

Acts of Man
-are actions done involuntarily due to the
absence of knowledge and/or will. When doing
good deeds becomes a habit, it becomes a
secondary nature of the person, then some of
his charitable deeds may be done already
involuntarily, therefore, not to be considered a
moral action anymore.