Moral and Non-Moral Problems

Introduction

People encounter various problems every day, some are simple and some are complex. In

All aspects of life, things are not always simple. From the time one wakes up in the morning until

Practically bedtime, one may be preoccupied with something to be done or about things that are

Undone. Not everything is foreseeable. There are always things that are missing; some others need

Immediate fixing like someone getting a flat tire just before leaving for work and many more

Situations of the same type. We are not always ready and we cannot foresee everything.

Somewhere, somehow, something is not alright. But as soon as you deal with them, they are easily

Fixed.

However, there are problems that are more complicated in nature needing more

Considerations. Some of these problems or situations are those that call for moral or ethical

Valuation or judgment. It may be about contemplating whether or not to tell a teacher about a

Cheating incident during an examination. As a student, a problem may be about what to do having

Known that she is pregnant. Should she reveal to her parents about it? What could be her parents’
Reaction? Should a student lie to his/her professors for not having been in class very often for no

Reason at all? Must one spread rumors using the social media about someone he/she hates since

His/her identity can remain unknown and can inflict more pain and moral damage on the person?

Is suicide a better solution to end all the troubles? There can be other serious problems that anyone

Is going through and the question is what to do in these difficult circumstances. In these cases,

Solutions are not easily attainable but require thorough analysis and investigation.

Distinguishing between a moral problem and non- moral problem is the aim of this topic.

When do you say a problem pertains to what is right or wrong or when it is simply a matter of

Fact?

Learning Outcomes

1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems

2. Describe what a moral experience is as it happens in different levels of human experience.

Activating Prior Learning

In a group of 5, list down rules in your school, at home, in your community or organization.
Evaluate the rules by responding to the following questions:

a. Which of the rules do you find constricting (in the sense of restricting)? Why?

b. Why are rules important to social beings?

Try these:

In school, you may come up with rules relative to the wearing of school uniforms, ID’s and

Many more which you believe are constricting or restricting.

At home, you may come up with rules which you believe curtail your freedom. These rules

May include curfew time imposed by your parents, table manners, requiring evening prayers,

Telling the truth, respect for each member of the family, eating together or that the last one to finish

Eating will have to fix the table, etc.

In the community, you may discuss rules that may involve anti-littering, segregation of

Garbage, leashing pets, curfew time, rules restricting public disturbance and gambling, rules

Prohibiting driving without license, etc.

Presentation of Contents
Distinction between Moral and Non-Moral Problems

In the context of the discussion about constricting rules, there are rules that are formulated

By authorities for the common good or for improvement but are not moral precepts. As such, they

Are clearer when they are expressed in the imperative mood, like those we read, “No ID, No Entry”

Or “Children below 12 years old are not allowed inside.” They are constricting rules but are not

Moral concerns and hence, are classified as non-moral rules.

When does a rule become a moral problem or enter the domain of morality? It can be stated

That a rule becomes a moral rule if it violates certain standards. For instance, a rule may be stated

In the following terms: HIV infected individuals will be treated with disdain and are not allowed

To join any public forum. Such rule violates the inherent human dignity and the right of an

Individual to be part of the larger society. This type of rule implies moral valuation. The rightness

Or the wrongness of the rule is put into question. Should people who are victims of the curse of the

Virus be treated in such a manner? Is isolating them the appropriate way of dealing with them? Do

Human dignity and the right of the human person end when one gets contaminated with the virus?

Your response to this can be further clarified by knowing the different kinds of
Valuations.

Kinds of Valuations that do not imply Moral Judgment or are not part of Ethics

1. Aesthetic Valuation. Some things are considered good or bad because of their appeal

To the senses. It is possible that one finds the food served by the waiter as good or bad

Depending on whether the taste buds approve or disapprove them. Or, one might

Consider a painting good because it is pleasing to the eyes when looking at it. Or,

Someone could not appreciate a piece of music because it disturbs and is irritating to

One’s tympanic membrane and is therefore judged to be bad. These valuations or

Judgments require the sense of approval or disapproval depending on whether or not

They have good appeal to the senses. But they are not valuations in the realm of ethics.

These are known as aesthetic valuations.

Quite a number of times people use this type of valuation in different situations. People

Make judgments but they have nothing to do with morality or ethics. It is important that

People know that they are not making a judgment that has moral implication but simply
A manner of making an appreciation relative to their senses.

2. Technical Valuations. Some things are considered right or wrong depending on

Whether or not the proper manner of doing them has been respected. This type of

Valuation is within the realm of technical valuation. When baking a cake, one must see

To it that the right procedure and right amount of ingredients are respected. If they have

Been respected, chances are the result of the effort in baking will be good. If not

Respected, the cake might taste bad. In the same manner, as a driver, most likely,

Passengers will be anxious if the driver does not execute the proper rules of driving.

Driving too fast or sudden stops will make passengers uncomfortable and fear an

Eminent danger. We say that the driver is either a good or a bad driver. These examples

Are not; however, properly considered within the realm of ethics but are proper to

Technical knowledge and skills.

3. Etiquette. People approve or may disapprove about certain ways of doing. For

Example, inside a library, I see to it that I do not make noise because people inside need

To concentrate on their studies. Or, I greet my teachers when I happen to meet them
Along the school corridor. Knocking at the door before entering an office is perceived

To be the proper manner. These ways of doing are judged to be the proper observation

Of certain standards or etiquette but are not judged according to ethical standards.

Individuals who demonstrate the proper etiquettes are appreciated and those who lack

Them are not. However, there is a need to properly distinguish what is in the realm of

Etiquette and one which is beyond this realm. It is a good demonstration of a good

Etiquette when offering a seat to an elderly inside a bus for the person to feel more

Comfortable and safer but it would be utterly deplorable if you push an elderly out of

The bus while it is in motion (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018).

4. Acts of Man versus Human Acts. The distinction between acts of man versus human

Acts will further help to consider certain activities that absolutely imply no coloration

Of ethical concern and one which is clearly within the domain of morality. The acts of

Man refer to the involuntary activities that are necessary to sustain human life, like in

The case of breathing, the continuous beating of the heart and involuntary movements
Of the intestines and lungs. They are crucial activities that sustain life and without them,

Life ceases to exist. Other than that, natural human activities like speaking, hearing,

Eating and walking are also natural acts but have no moral implication as such. Not

Unless these very same acts are done with malice. Nothing is wrong about speaking or

Sleeping but backbiting someone or sleeping during working hours would be entirely

Different.

On the other hand, helping someone in need and other gestures that relieve people from

Their sufferings or the opposite, making people suffer and placing them in difficult

Situation are human acts. Understandably, the activities categorized as acts of man carry

No ethical valuation. But those that fall under the category of human acts call for moral

Or ethical considerations.

After the discussion on the different categories and situations that do not enter the

Category of moral valuation, let us now consider situations and issues which call for

Moral valuation or fall under the realm of morality or ethics. Below are some situations

In which moral valuations are called upon.

Valuations that Involve Moral or Ethical Valuations

1. Moral problems according to Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) “involve valuations that belong to

The sphere of human actions characterized by certain gravity and concern the well-being or

Human life itself.” Pre-meditating or making a plan to kill someone is an act that qualifies

Under moral problems. Or, deciding whether to allow passive euthanasia is a decision with

Gravity and concerns the well-being or human life itself. These and other acts relative to

One’s well-being and the well-being of others involve ethical or moral valuations.

Furthermore, actsthat may not be directly an affront to human life but if their consequences

Clearly indicate serious threat to it, may demand ethical consideration. For instance, open

Pit mining is certainly an activity that is intended to benefit people involved in it. However,

It is a system that seriously damage nature resulting to environmental catastrophe

Sometimes beyond imagination and seriously affecting the lives of people living close to

The mining site. In fact, it might even lead to more damages resulting to natural imbalance

With greater impact affecting an entire region and beyond as in the case of certain

Publicized mining catastrophes.

 2. Something is also about moral problem when it violates certain standards. Example,

Cultural practices and values are perceived as standards of behaviour. Disrespectful

Attitudes are judged as wrong. Among Filipinos, a very strong cultural element is respect

To the elderly. Anyone who treats the elderly with respect is considered a person of

Excellent moral upbringing. However, anyone who treats the elderly with disdain is

Unethical. It is ethically right to respect the elderly and ethically wrong to disrespect them.

3. A religious belief may also qualify as a moral standard. The religious conviction that it is a

Call to assist someone in need is a moral demand and maybe a moral imperative. Thousands

Of people and maybe more are deeply motivated by such conviction that it is an ethical

Obligation to help others who are in need. People do not hesitate to give their all-out support

And donate whatever they can to victims of devastating natural calamities. Imagine what

Happened to Tacloban and other events that triggered so much anguish and loss of lives.

People moved by their compassion and religious commitment offered whatever they could

Without second thoughts to save lives and ease the effect of almost annihilating

Circumstances.
 4. In the same vein of ideas, an act is a moral problem if it violates certain moral principles.

The examples below of some moral principles will clarify this perspective.

a.“That we should not use people.”

b.“That we should not kill one person to save another.”

c.“That every life is sacred.”

d.“That it is wrong to discriminate against the handicapped” (Rachels, 2003)

These moral rules or principles imply that they help us live a morally acceptable fashion.

Their violation would be judged as morally or ethically wrong or incorrect. There are other

Standards and principles of this kind. They are considered standards by which we pattern our life

And tell us whether we are morally upright or unethical in the way we live. These standards are

Particularly valuable and make sense when we experience extreme difficulties and the easier way

Out is to violate them. Kudos to the few taxi drivers who inspite of financial need, returned the

Money left by their passengers and took the effort to find them.

In any culture and as a way of life, most of us agree that honesty is the best policy. It is
Expected that in any situation one should always be honest. One’s value of honesty is especially

Challenged when one is in a difficult situation like that of deprivation. At this moment, a person is

Tempted to give up honesty if it would become a way out of the situation of deprivation. I might

Consider stealing as an option knowing that it will relieve me from my discomfort and respond to

Certain needs. Before acting however on such alternative, the individual makes a thorough

Consideration how the act can possibly affect the people who would be victim or victims of the act

And what it implies to the individual himself or herself. Is the act worth considering? Are there

Other alternatives that are better than stealing and will not negatively affect others or make them

Suffer? Doing acts that violate moral rules and principles are not easily acted upon because they

Call for moral judgment and people know they are violating important principles.

Activity

In the same group, discuss why only human beings can be ethical.

Why only human beings can be ethical?

From St. Thomas Aquinas point of view, the human being is ethical because the human

Person has the rational soul. If plants according to him have the vegetative soul and animals have
Sentient soul, only human beings have the rational soul, the highest form of soul. Plants may have

The capacity to feel but they are incapable of responding being unable to move and express their

Feelings. Animals may have more than what plants possess and are capable of movements but

Possess no capacity for understanding. They have limited capacity and cannot exercise judgement.

Rationality which individuals or human beings possess allows them to be aware of their situation

And their environment. Their consciousness and their ability to think make them capable of making

Judgment. These capacities allow them to foresee the consequences of their actions and make a

Judgment about the rightness or wrongness of their actions. Only human beings have this capacity.

Hence, according to St. Thomas, we can ascribe morality only to human beings.

Also, the ethical assumptions; namely, free will and reason are important bases that

Determine why only human beings can be ethical. Reason or rationality and freedom are important

Elements to determine whether actions are within the realm of morality or not. For without such

Assumptions no amount or degree of ethical valuation can be ascribed to an act. Only human beings

Have them, which make them the only ethical beings. (This will be further discussed in the topic

Dealing specifically with the moral assumptions.) We also add the element of conscience or the
Inner voice that tells one about the rightness or wrongness of an act. It is an aspect only true to

Human beings. Conscience tells us whether or not we did what we ought to do and whether we

Have done the right thing or the opposite. It makes one happy or comfortable when he or she knows

The right thing was done and feels guilty or suffers from deep sense of remorse knowing that what

Was wrong has been committed. The three, reason, freedom and conscience altogether determine

Therefore why only human beings can be ethical.

Another authority explains that human beings have rules, principles, desires (the desire to

Do what is good), consciousness, sensitivity to higher order (ability to recognize God) and

AKRASIA (Greek word for courage). AKRASIA or courage is ability. As ability it has a double

Meaning. Someone can have the ability to do something unacceptable or otherwise it also signifies

Ability to do something acceptable. Doing something moral or ethical, or immoral or unethical

Depends on one’s courage to do it. Whether acceptable or unacceptable, it requires the persistence

For doing it. When one insists on doing something, it requires the courage to do it.

What is moral experience and how moral rule is born?

Professor Bitanga explains how moral rule is born. For instance, you found a wallet that

Contains 5,000 pesos and an ATM card with the pin number as well! Something inside tells you to

Get it but at the same time you remember the prohibition; “Thou shall not steal.” That is a moral

Experience and where moral rule is born. It calls for judgment.

Summary

A moral rule constitutes a moral situation that calls for or requires moral judgment to do

Good or the opposite. This knowledge of what constitute moral problems as well as the parameters

To identify them is significant so that individuals are guided when they make decisions. By that,

One considers with seriousness their plans before acting, considering their consequences and the

Principles that can possibly be violated by the acts. It is important because individuals whose

Actions imply moral valuations also imply moral responsibilities. Therefore, one cannot just ignore

Actions that carry with them important ethical implications.

It is probably the mistake of many who confuse moral actions with those without. If people

Think that whatever actions they do are just any other action, there is a danger of ignoring their

Actual responsibility over the action. Without having to make distinction between those morally
Loaded and those that carry no moral significance, people make instant decisions and act

Instinctively knowing that they have no responsibility over them. If we think in this manner, we

Lose the chance to be better individuals and become a “neighbor” to others. With such thinking,

We permit ourselves to make promises without the intention of fulfilling them. Deceiving others

Will make no difference at all.

Moral Dilemma

Introduction

It is expected that you have a clear grasp now of what is moral and non- moral valuation.

Now, the topic on moral dilemma is of significance because of the nature of the situation

People experience which we will see later. People especially the youth are easily perturbed when

They are confronted to make choices in their life. They do not know how to deal with their problems

And make choices to solve them. Their reaction is maybe to ignore a pressing problem for lack of

Knowledge or skill to solve it, or that they just allow the problem to persist in which at the end of

The day becomes more complicated and therefore more difficult to solve.

Technology has made life very easy. Our life has been taken over by the invention of instant
Technology. You name it: instant food, instant clothing, instant domicile, instant information and

People are getting married instantly without having to know much about their future partner. This

Instant thing has psychologically made a deep imprint in the mind and attitudes of people. People

Avoid what is complicated and those that demand significant effort and anything that takes time.

In fact, people avoid reading that takes time and thinking requiring patience and energy on their

Part. Everybody prefers whatever is easily available and in unison with the Frenchman they can

Say: Voila! Or, in Spain, Presto! People want to be like the magician who makes things appear

Even in the most unusual and unexpected ways.

The problem; however, with this system is that it doesn’t work all the time. There are more

Complicated matters that require deliberation and hard work to deal with them. At this time, the

Instant choices or solutions do not apply anymore. The too easy life we live does not prepare us to

Face the more complex situations. Too often, we live with unresolved problems and undetermined

Solutions. Hence, the topic on moral dilemmas can help people decipher and make choices.

Learning Outcome

1. Explain moral dilemma;

 2. Demonstrate decision making in situations of moral dilemma; and

3. Perform the series of stages for making choices required by the situation of moral

Dilemma.

Activating Prior Learning

A student gets a warning from parents that getting into a relationship and getting pregnant

While studying will mean discontinuance of all support to continue her studies. Despite such

Warnings and admonitions, the student disobeyed and is now two months pregnant. What is she

Going to do? She is afraid to tell her parents about her situation otherwise her parents will tell her

To stop studying. But she wants to finish her studies.

The predicament is, what to do in such a case? Will she resort to abortion and continue her

Studies, or, tell her parents about her present status seeing the evil of abortion and continue her

Pregnancy but stop schooling? What is a good alternative to her problem?

Instructions. You are given 10 to 15 minutes to be able to come up with a solution to the

Question of what should be the right thing to do. Continue the pregnancy and stop schooling or,
Abort the baby and continue her studies? You may choose your partner or do it with a T- chart

(consisting of the pros and cons) for your guide.

Presentation of Contents

Moral dilemmas are not rare. We often experience making choices in the face of conflicting

Situations. Others are courageous to make up their mind and face their problems. Many; however,

Are stuck and cannot make proper decisions. Or, they remain undecided and allow others to make

Decisions for them. Let us face it, quite a number of students are not ready to decide. Decision

Making is an everyday challenge that people make in their life but there are no classes to teach

About making decisions.

What is a moral dilemma? Moral dilemma is a situation of conflict. This occurs when two

Moral points are in conflict and are confused. Or, it is a “more complicated situation wherein one

Is torn between choosing one of two goods and choosing between the lesser of two evils… We

Have a moral dilemma when there are a number of possible actions and there are compelling ethical

Reasons for the various choices” but only one can be given preference and set aside all the rest

(Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018). In the first case where one has to choose between two goods, let us study
The case of Miss X who is offered a good paying job locally. However, she has always dreamt of

Working abroad. She fears however that working abroad would separate her from her family and

The idea of separation makes her sad. She cannot divide herself and choose the two possibilities.

What would be a better choice for Miss X? In the second case, let us consider the situation of a

Poor mother whose daughter is hungry but her situation does not permit her to buy her daughter

The food she needs. But she can steal food so that her daughter can eat. What would be her choice?

Allow her daughter to go hungry or steal food for her to be able to eat? A situation of dilemma is

Complicated or difficult because out of two or several choices, there is only one choice to make.

What makes it more complicated is that there are cases when both choices are evil. Which is the

Lesser of the two evils? Thus, the expression: “Choosing between the devil and the deep blue sea”

Characterize succinctly the situation of moral dilemma. Either of the choices isn’t beneficial for

The person making the decision or for some reason or the other disadvantageous to others.

3 Different Levels of Moral Dilemma

Moral dilemmas are categorized into three levels: personal, organizational and structural.
Personal Dilemma. It pertains to choices affecting the individual himself or herself. The

Example mentioned above relating to the problem of schooling and pregnancy is a personal

Dilemma that an individual has to resolve. Personal dilemma may also involve problems between

Individuals. For instance, in a company, two very efficient employees who are both married get

Involved in a relationship. Company regulations sanction married individuals who are involved in

Illegitimate relationships. Having known about such relationship, what should the other employees

Do about it? Suppose they tell the administration about this illicit relationship. According to the

Rules, both of them would face termination from their employment. But the people are aware about

Their importance for the company because of their qualifications. Terminating these employees

Would be unfavorable for the company. If they don’t, they condone illicit and immoral relationship

Within the company. The moral dilemma here is clearly whether or not for the other employees to

Tell the administration about the existing illicit relationship of the two employees of the company.

Organizational Dilemma. Examples of this type of dilemma would refer to business,

Medical and public sector/company situation. Organizational dilemma has a broader scope and

Would tend to affect every member of the organization. Solutions arrived at also have an impact
On the life of each member.

Structural Dilemma. This dilemma would include an entire network of an institution and

Operative theoretical paradigm. The approval of the Bangsa Moro Law would fall under this

Category of dilemma. It has the broadest scope of influence and impact of the three levels. In the

Example given, the impact and effect of the approval would not only affect the people where the

Law would be applied, but the entire archipelago. It is said that Mindanao desires to have its

Autonomy. If you were to decide on this, would you approve the proposed law or not. Approval of

The law could mean peace and order in the region. But the move might result finally to complete

Separation of the region. If the proposed law should not be approved, chances are; the peace and

Order in the region will continue to be a major problem and will continue to drain the national

Budget, the maintenance of strong army presence and conflict being heavily taxed on it. What is a

Good alternative to follow

Moral dilemmas are situations when people face difficulties in making choices or choosing

An alternative from at least two or several possibilities that may be bad or evil. Making a choice

Is not always easy especially when alternatives are either disadvantageous or evil.
Exposure to the three levels of moral dilemma is important for you as students. It is a

Necessity to be aware that becoming a part of a larger community or institution will require

Participation in a more complex moral situation or dilemma.

Getting involved in some complicated situations does not come from nowhere. These

Originate from something. Your knowledge on moral dilemma and moral analysis can now make

You a wiser and better decision maker. You think twice before engaging in any gray area.

Somehow, it will help you avoid being in complicated moral situations. It is important to remember

That deliberation is worthy of consideration prior to any decision or action

Moral Assumptions

(Foundation of Morality)

Introduction

Certain assumptions are essential in ethics. Acts are considered moral or immoral, ethical

Or unethical, acceptable or unacceptable because of these assumptions. These assumptions are

Necessary because without them, no moral valuation can be passed on to certain acts. Here, we

Speak of reason and freedom as necessary assumption of moral valuation. Acts can only be judged
To be moral or immoral, ethical or unethical when these assumptions are present. Their absence

Makes these acts morally or ethically valueless. In some references, moral assumptions are referred

To as the elements of morality. This means that without reason, freedom and voluntariness an act

Is not moral or ethical.

What are assumptions and what makes them so important? To illustrate their meaning and

Significance, let us take the example of my duty to do my work. It is assumed that when I report

To work that I will be doing my job. The company or organization that hired me assumes that I will

Perform the tasks for which I was hired. For that reason, the company pays me for the services I

Render to it. The company assumes that I am doing my job. If it does not, there is no reason for it

To keep me and pay me. Assumption is therefore based on the belief that I am doing my job whether

Or not it is true that I am doing it. The significance of that assumption is that the company pays my

Salary. Because if it does not, it has ceased to believe that I am doing my task or the assumption

No longer stands to be true. Let us see why assumptions are necessary components of morality or

Ethics.

Learning Outcomes
 1. Define moral assumption;

2. Identify the assumptions of ethics or morality; and

3. Distinguish the differences among moral or ethical, immoral or unethical and amoral

Sitautions.

Activating Prior Learning

Decide whether the situation below suggests moral implication.

Suppose, the children in the neighborhood are playing one morning. As is the case when

Children play, they end up quarrelling. Suppose a boy pushes a playmate who falls down and starts

To bleed immediately. With this scenario, consider whether the boy who pushed the playmate is

Morally responsible or not. Articulate your reaction.

Presentation of Contents

One crucial assumption in making moral valuation of certain acts and ascribing moral

Responsibility to a moral agent is reason. Reason is the first element of a human act. We

Assume that any person is a thinking being. By that, he or she is aware of the purpose of his or her
Action. Furthermore, this assumption is also true about the consequences of such action. Meaning,

The person is also aware of the effects of the act. In other words, the person can make judgment

Whether an action is right or wrong. Through reason, one can assess the rightness or the wrongness

Of an act.

By this, we understand that it is not possible to ascribe moral responsibility to a child who

Is way below the age of reason. The child cannot make a judgment whether his or her act is right

Or wrong. By the same token, we cannot judge the action of an insane person as right or wrong

Because the person has no way of evaluating the rightness or the wrongness of his or her act.

Reason, therefore, is essential before we can ascribe moral valuation to any act or any moral

Responsibility to the doer of the act. Hence, only acts performed with deliberation or performed by

Anyone who knows the consequences of the act are moral or ethical acts.

When reason cannot be ascribed to such acts, absolutely no moral implication is applicable.

One can get so mad over an act performed by 3-year old child but we are in no position to ascribe

To the child any form of moral or ethical guilt or responsibility. Reason therefore is absolutely

Required or is assumed to be a basis for declaring the rightness or wrongness of an act.

Second element or assumption is freedom. It is considered an important element in making

Moral valuation and without which, no amount of reasoning can justify the ethical value of an act.

We say, moral action can only emanate from individuals who act according to their choice or free

Will to do good. Moral valuation and moral responsibility cannot therefore be ascribed to actions

Devoid of the freedom to act and as such they are not qualified as moral action. Forcing someone

To do an act will not make the person morally responsible for the action taken. For instance, forcing

Someone to contract marriage, this individual may later separate from the partner. Should the

Person act on that possibility, his action is without moral implication and is free to act on it because

There was no marriage at all that took place since the person was forced under the threat of being

Killed or for any other reason.

An act is considered human act with moral responsibility when it is undertaken on the

Basis of free choice or with a sense of freedom. Without the element of freedom, no amount of

Explanation can declare someone morally responsible over the act.

Filipinos easily blame others for certain actions committed. We have the commonly used

Expression: “Kasalanan mo ang nangyari.” (What happened was your fault.) Analyzing such
Accusation, we realize that it has some tone of moral valuation or judgment. Kasalanan is sin and

In the Filipino context, the utilization of the word is ethically loaded with strong religious

Connotation. A person who commits sin has a moral responsibility and has also offended God not

Only another person to whom the moral agent has done something wrong. A person who is accused

In these terms, may finally end up accepting not only that he or she is at fault but more significantly,

Accepts that he or she, is a bad person if he/she will use the catholic equivalent of moral significance

And does not conform to God’s law or commandments.

Based on the discussion above, there is a need to be extra cautious about accusing someone

To have committed a sin or is morally guilty even when evidences favor it. To ascertain the full

Implication of any accusation, there is a need to clarify it vis-à-vis the two moral assumptions of

Reason and freedom. Too often, Filipinos make others suffer from moral and religious perspectives

When it should not be the case because the act is not grounded on the assumptions of reason and

Freedom.

One who acts with complete or deliberate reason and freedom or voluntariness has
The full moral responsibility of the consequences of his actions.

The Minimum Requirement (Elements) of Morality:

Reason and Impartiality

Introduction

Under certain situations, most people would almost always try to get most if not all the

Benefits that they could possibly derive. When decisions are to be undertaken, they grab all

Advantages for themselves and leave nothing to other people concerned because they claim it is

Their right. Oftentimes decisions are one-sided by obstinately believing that we have all the rights

And others do not have.This is a biased or subjective way of looking for solutions to conflicts or

Problems. People decide which is more favorable for them taking all the possible advantages and

Never consider the interest of others who might be affected by the solutions arrived at.

The topic on the minimum requirement or conception of morality aims at helping people

To be objective in their decisions. This perspective requires the consideration of the interests of the

People who would be affected by any decision. Very often, an acceptable decision to all parties

That may be involved is difficult to reach because decisions only favor one party and not the others.
For instance, when siblings will have to divide their inheritance, the eldest desires always to get

The larger or the best of it. When dividing a property like land inheritance, the eldest among the

Siblings would always want to apportion what is to his or her advantage and never to consider the

Interests of the younger siblings. Alternatives in such a case are never fair and do not represent a

Good solution. Fairness is difficult to achieve. Let us give it a try by considering reason and

Impartiality.

Learning Outcomes

1. Express objectivity in decision making;

2. Analyze moral situations; and

3. Resolve conflicts or problems on the basis of moral obligation.

Activating Prior Learning

Give examples of conflict where people are not able to arrive at an equitable solution to a

Problem.

Presentation of Contents
Definitions do not make one instantly moral but it is by trying to be. To help us continue

In our journey to appropriate what is morally right and avoid what can possibly lead us to be just

The opposite; let us consider the “minimum conception of morality” by James Rachels (2003). He

Says: “Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason – that is, to do what

There are the best reasons for doing – while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual

Who will be affected by what one does.”

Rachels(2003) mentions two important things; reason and impartiality. When deciding, he

Suggests that one should have a good reason or reasons for deciding so. A good reason is not one

That is one-sided or looks only at the interest of the one making the decision. “When I decide and

I look only at the advantages I get from my decision; it does not make me a better moral agent.”

When he describes what it takes to be a better moral agent, he describes an enlightened moral agent

As a conscientious moral agent.

A conscientious moral agent according to him is the one who is concerned impartially.

That means someone who considers the interests of everyone affected by what one does or decides.

The conscientious moral agent takes every effort to carefully analyze every fact and examines their
Implications and consequences if they will be acted upon; accepts principles of conducts only after

Having scrutinized them to be sure that they are acceptable not only for the one deciding but

Including everyone who will be affected by the decision later on. Further, Rachels insists that a

Conscientious moral agent is the one who is willing “to listen to reason” which means that the

Moral agent is willing to make changes or revise earlier conviction. Finally, the conscientious

Moral agent is willing to act on the bases of such deliberations.

Summary

Learning to be impartial is too often difficult and painful because it implies the willingness

To give up some of our interests in favor of others’ interests. People cannot simply give up certain

Advantages because they have been so used to it that losing them is unacceptable and would require

Sometimes a radical change in their life.

For example, giving up a business enterprise which one has been managing for a long time

But legally does not belong to him or to her would not be easy. It would demand a tremendous

Shift in one’s life – habits, lifestyle, economic status, associations, security and even one’s identity.

To be impartial means “free from biases.” It is the readiness to re-examine facts and data
And willingness to re-consider past decisions and adopt new ones. To be able to achieve this, it

Would necessitate appealing to reason. Only a rational person would be willing to change,

Challenge traditions, consider one’s real duties and obligations and to be selfless in one’s

Perspective and in making decisions. Like Rachels’s reflection, it would take a conscientious moral

Agent who is willing to “listen to reason” and act accordingly.

Standards of Moral Valuation Based on the Self

Introduction

In the preceding discussions, it was clear that the standards we refer to when making moral

Judgments originate from external sources – culture, rules, practices, authority, and the like. It

Came out that outside references have been considered as strongly influencing people’s decisions

And choices.

In this topic, the concern is to point out that not only external references do exist in making

Moral valuations but also, moral valuations inspired by personal choices therefore originating from

A more subjective or internal point of view.

In fact, the new generation would feel very much that way. They would rather consider
Their own thoughts and opinions when deciding on certain matters and less on what others might

Say about what they think is right or wrong. They are freer and more independent. Or, perhaps they

Would give importance to their feelings and emotions if they have to decide on something. That is

Their natural way and they are quite known for that – the millennials. Whereas before when

Traditions had strong influence on people, everybody was quite concerned about one’s reputation

In the community. People would always consider what others around them might say about their

Decisions or about what they are going to do or are actually doing.

We look now into three theories about ethics that focus on the self: subjectivism,

Psychological egoism and ethical egoism.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify the different subjective standards as frame of reference for moral valuation; and

2. Analyze each of these subjective standards.

Activating Prior Learning

In a small group, share your personal references or bases when making a decision? Are
There personal guides that help you come up with a stance or a decision?

Presentation of Contents

Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) discuss the three moral standards based on the self. They are

Presented below.

1. Subjectivism

It suggests that the individual thinking person is at the heart of all moral valuations. The

Person is the one confronted with the situation and is burdened with the need to make decision or

Judgment. From this point of view, subjectivism leaps to the more radical claim that the individual

Is the sole determining agent of what is morally good or bad, right or wrong. Bulaong Jr. et al.

Suggest some clichés expressive of this mentality:

 “No one can tell me what is right and wrong.”

 “No one knows my situation better than myself.”

 “I am entitled to my own opinion.”

 “It is good, if I say that it is good.”

Criticism: There is something appealing about these statements because they seem to
Express personal independence. But a closer look at these statements reveals real problems of

Subjectivism. It is probable that out of extreme situation and profound disappointment, people may

Possibly console themselves with these clichés. But objectively; however, we may ask ourselves

How many times we made decisions based solely on personal perception of the problem and found

Out that we were wrong. Or, we failed to recognize that our experience is practically just a spec in

Comparison to the profoundness of the experience of others which we have completely rejected.

Or, if only we can be honest and humble enough, then we would admit that our opinions are not

As profound as the opinions of more mature people and less wiser than the opinion of the most

Foolish among us. And that finally, we realize that the good decision we thought is not as good as

We thought it was.

1. Psychological Egoism

It is a theory that describes the underlying dynamic behind all human actions. As a

Descriptive theory, it does not direct one to act in a particular way. Instead, it points out that by

Nature, humans are self-interested and are after their own satisfaction and therefore in all their
Undertakings they are ultimately looking for self-fulfilment and satisfaction, aware or unaware. As

Such, the ego or self has its desires and interests and all actions are geared toward the satisfaction

Of these interests. It would seem that there is no problem with this position if we consider actions

Done on a daily basis: watch a movie, read books, entertain visitors, etc. It is acknowledged that

We do things in pursuit of some interests all the time. The question; however, is do we try to

Consider actions that normally are directed toward others?

Consider for instance the act of generosity. The position of the psychological egoist is that

He or she would maintain that underlying such apparently other-oriented behavior is a self-

Interested desire, even when it is not being acknowledged or that the doer is not conscious of it.

Helping another might seem an act of altruism. But the psychological egoist has inherent self-

Interest in expressing an act of service. In the end, the act no matter how it appears to be other-

Oriented, it is by nature an act that is self-serving.

3. Ethical Egoism

Ethical egoism differs from psychological egoism where the latter does not suppose that

All actions undertaken are self-serving. But ethical egoism is a position that self-interest and
Personal ends are the single overriding concern. Ethical egoism is totally driven by selfish motive

With no interest or concern for another. Actions are taken with the sole concern that the ultimate

Benefit will be for the self. One considers oneself as the sole priority and does not allow any other

Concern benefiting another. Ethical egoism is totally motivated by self-satisfaction and nothing

More.

Summary

There are certainly individuals who are influenced or work with the three senses of the self

– Subjectivism, psychological egoism and ethical egoism. They work from the perspective of the

Self. The self is their only point of reference in terms of their logic, choices, and decisions. There

Can be no problem with this since it is normal that individuals think and plan according to their

Needs, desires, their feelings or emotions and according to what they think is the right thing to do.

They plan according to what is pleasurable or what makes sense for them. However, the problem

With this is when people absolutize the self as their sole point of reference preventing them to see

Things from others’ point of views.

The world is not only about our world. The world is also a “we-world” according to the
Existentialist philosopher, Heidegger. He further explains that this “we-world” is to be understood

In the sense of “being-with-others-in-the-world.” It means that we are not alone in this world but

That we share the world with others. By so doing we transform it and as a consequence of that

Collaboration, I am also transformed as well as the other. Mutual recognition and sharing makes

Our existence more meaningful. More so, we include others now in our moral valuations, that

Is, we become more considerate of the situation and more generous of the advantages and interests

Of others.

The challenge therefore for people who view things only from their own perspective would

Be to learn to accept others in their life and view things from this new perspective shared with

Others. It would be something totally different if one could see and feel the world from another’s

Point of view. Psychologists call this empathy, the ability of an individual to feel what others

Subjectively feel. When one is capable of this, we become more understanding of the person

Because we have understood him or her the way one understands oneself. With this, our judging

Will no longer only be based from the perspective of the self but it will include the other’s
Perspective.