WEEK 12 questions are being asked
process of ethical deliberation.
REASON AND IMPARTIALITY AS
REQUIREMENTS FOR ETHICS
One of the reasons Ethical Subjectivism
and Emotivism are not viable theories in ethics
is that they miss to make a distinction between
moral judgments and mere expressions of
personal preference. Genuine moral or value
judgments ought to be backed up by pertinent
reasons. Moreover, they must possess the
quality of impartiality, which means among
their things that personal feelings or
inclinations should be suppressed if necessary.
REASON
 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
interest and point of view are equally
important. It also called
evenhandedness or fair-mindedness.
Impartially 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.
 To sufficiently address the ethical
dilemmas that people encounter
regularly, Scot B. Rae offers a model
which can be uses to insure that all
needed bases are covered. He admits
that the model is not a formula that will
automatically generate the “right”
answer to an ethical problem but a
guideline in ascertaining that all the right
in the
THE 7-STEP MORAL REASONING
MODEL
1. Gather the Facts - The simplest
way of clarifying an ethical dilemma
is to make sure the facts are clear.
Ask:
Do you have all the facts that are
necessary to make a good
decision?
What do we know?
What do we need to know?
In this light it might become clear
that dilemma is not ethical but about
communication or strategy.
2. Determine the ethical issues -
Ethical interests are stated in terms
of legitimate competing interests or
goods. The competing interests are
what creates the dilemma. Moral
values and virtues must support the
competing interest in order for an
ethical dilemma to exist. If you
cannot identify the underlying
values/virtues then you di not have
an ethical dilemma. Often people
hold these positions strongly and
with passion because of the value/
virtue beneath them.
3. Determine what values/ principles
have a bearing on the case –
The right of the patient to give
informed consent – chemotherapy is
a very invasive treatment. This is
recognized by the law, the person
has a right to control what happens
to their body. Such dignity comes
from being made in the image of
God.
4. List the alternatives
 - Attempt to convince the family best interest compromised, is her
of the seriousness of treatment and why dignity as an individual respected.
she needs to know/
- Call an ethics committee Rae suggests, “Here it seems the
conference to discus the case and try to alternative that involves asking
convince the family to tell her. the patient if she wants to know
the details of her situation
These two options should be discussed
satisfies most of the virtues and
prior to any further treatment.
values at sake and produces and
- Override the family’s wishes and tell best balance of consequences
the patient of her conditions and the too.”
treatment
WEEK 13
5. Compare the alternatives with the
FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND
virtues/principles - This step
OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
eliminates alternatives as they are
weighted by the moral principles
BASIC THEORIES AS FRAMEWORKS IN
which have a bearing on the case.
ETHICS
Potentially the issue will resolved
here as all alternatives except one
Framework
are eliminated. Here you must satisfy
 Can be defined as a basic structure
all the relevant virtues and values –
underlying a system or concept.
so at least some of the alternatives
 It refers to a set of assumptions,
will be eliminated (even of you still
concept, values, and practices that
have to go to on to Step 6) Often
constitutes way of viewing life.
here you have to weight the
principles and virtues – make sure
Three General Subject areas in the Study of
you have good reason for each
Morality
weighting.
1. Meta-ethics
2. Normative ethics
6. Consider the consequences - If
3. Applied Ethics
principles have not yielded a clear
decisions consider the
META-ETHICS
consequences of you alternatives.
 It is a branch of ethics that studies the
Take the alternatives and work out
nature of morality. It talk about the
the positive and negative
meaning, reference, and truth values of
consequences of each. Estimate
moral judgment. It also explains what
how beneficial each +ve and –ve
goodness and wickedness mean and
consequence is some might have
how we know about them.
greater weight than others.
Meta-ethical Theories
7. Make a decision
1.1 Cognitivism vs. Non-cognitivism
- We have had to think through our
A. Cognitivism
ideas of respect for family and
a. Moral realism
culture.
b. Ethical Subjectivism
- How far should we go in respecting
this cultural approach, is the patients
B. Non-Cognitivsm
 Emotivism – It is the most popular
form of non-moral cognitivist theory.
It submits that moral judgments are
mere expressions of our emotions
and feelings.
1.2 Universalism vs. Relativism
A. Moral Universalism – moral facts
and principles apply to everybody in
all places.
B. Moral Relativism – submits that
different moral facts and principles
apply to different persons or group of
individuals.
1.3 Empiricism vs. Rationalism vs.
Intuitionism
A. Moral Empiricism – is a meta-
ethical stance which states that
moral facts are known through
observation and experience.
B. Moral Rationalism – contends
that moral facts and principles
are knowable, a priori, that is, by
reason alone and without
reference to any evidence.
C. Moral Intuitionism – submits
that moral truths are knowable by
institution, that is, by immediate
instinctive knowledge without
reference to any evidence.
NORMATIVE ETHICS
 It is a branch of ethics that studies how
man ought to act. It examines ethical
norms, those guidelines about what is
right, worthwhile, virtuous, or just.
Three Kinds of Normative Ethical Theories
2.1 Deontology – It is an ethical system that
bases morality an independent moral rules and
duties.
 Coming from “Greek word” Dean which
means duty/
 Duty based-focusing on the result.
A. The Golden Rule
B. Religion (the ten
Commandments)
Teleology – It refers to moral systems that
determines the moral value of actions by their
outcomes or results. From the Greek word
“telos” which means “end”.
2.3 Virtue Ethics – places emphasis on
developing good habits of character like
kindness and generosity, and avoiding bad
character traits, or vices, such as greed or
hatred.
APPLIED ETHICS
 Philosophically examines specific,
controversial moral issues.
Various Subfields of Applied Ethical Issues
3.1 Bioethics – This concerns ethical issues
pertaining to life, biomedical researches,
medicines health care, and medical profession.
As such it deals with some controversies like
those surrogate mothering, stem cells research
etc.
3.2 Environmental Ethics – It deals with
moral issues concerning nature, ecosystem,
and its non-human contents.
3.3 Business Ethics – It examines moral
principles concerning business environment
which involves issues about corporate
practices, policies, business behavior, and the
conduct and relationship of individuals in the
organization.
3.4 Sexual Ethics – It studies moral issues
about sexuality and human sexual behavior.
3.5 Social Ethics – It deals with what is right
for a society to do and how it should act as a
whole. It focus in on what, may be deemed as
proper behavior for people as a whole.

Week 14
VIRTUE ETHICS
Virtue
 A virtue is a moral characteristics that
individual needs to live well.
 An excellence of moral or intellectual
 Virtues are the freely chosen character
traits that people praise in others.
People praise them because:
1. They are difficult to develop;
2. They are corrective of natural
deficiencies; and
3. They are beneficial both to self
and society.
 Virtue is a good habit bearing on activity
or a good faculty habit (Thomas
Aquinas)
THOMAS AQUINAS’ ETHICS
 Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) – the
“Angelic Doctor and the Prince of
Scholastics”.
 Italian philosopher and theologian who
ranks among the most important
thinkers of the medieval time period.
 He believes that all actions are directed
towards ends and that happiness is the
final end.
Four Kinds/types of Laws
1. Eternal Law – Divine reason and
wisdom comprise an eternal law – a law
governing the whole creation, a law not
made but eternally existing and
therefore unknowable to humans
entirely, yet the source of all true law on
earth.
(Eternal law comes from God and is
unchanging)
2. Natural Law – The practical reflection
or sharing an “eternal reason” that
provides humans with objective,
changeless, universal rules or general
principles ofaction for ethical and
political life.
(Natural Law is eternal law that can
be known to humans)
3. Human Law – True law that derived
from natural law. A rule of state that is at
odds with natural law is no law at all.
(Human Positive law is the laws made
by the state)
4. Divine Positive Law – The revealed
truth such as the Ten Commandments
and the Sermon in the Mounts that
supplement and corrects human
fallibility and frailty.
(Divine Positive law is the part of
eternal law revealed through
scriptures)
By the virtue of a faculty of moral insight or
conscience that Thomas called synderesis, he
enumerates three sets of natural inclinations:
(1) to survive;
(2)To reproduce and educate offspring;
and
(3) to know the truth about God and to
live peacefully in society
FEATURES OF HUMAN ACTIONS
1. Species - Species of an action refers to
its kind. It is also called the object of the
action. Aquinas holds that for an action
to be moral, it must be good or at least
not bad in species.
2. Accidents - Accidents simply refers to
the circumstances surrounding the
action. In ethically evaluating an action,
the context in which the action takes
place is also considered because an act
 might be flawed through its
circumstances.
3. End - Ends stands for the agent’s
intention. An act might be unjust through
its intention.
Aquinas ethical theory states that for an
action to be moral, the kind it belongs to
must not be bad, the circumstances must
be appropriate, and the intention must be
virtuous.
HAPPINESS, MORAL VIRTUES, AND
THEOLOGICAL VIRTUES
 Aquinas thinks that happiness is not
equated with pleasure, material
possessions, honor, or any sensual
good, but consists in activities in
accordance with virtue.
 Aquinas differentiates between
acquired and infused habits. The
autonomous will of a person plays a
major role in acquired habits as they
involve consistent deliberate effort to do
an act time and time again and despite
obstructions. The infused virtues, on the
other hand, are independent of this
process as they are directly instilled by
God in our faculties.
In conclusion, Aquinas believes that what
matters in morality is not only what one
actually does but also his intention in doing the
act. He holds that the goodness or badness of
an action lies in the interior act of will, in the
external bodily act, in the very nature of the
act, and even in its consequences.
WEEK 15
KANT AND RIGHTS THEORY
Biography
 Immanuel Kant was born on April 22,
1724, in Kaliningrad, Russia.
 In 740 Kant entered the University of
Konigsberg.
 He published science papers, including
“General Natural History and Theory of
Heavens” in 1755.
 He spent 15 years as a metaphysics
lecturer. In 1781, he published the first
part of Critique of Pure Reason.
 He died on February 12, 1804. In
Konigsberg, Russia.
KANTIAN ETHICS Kant categorically
rejects the ethical judgments are based on
feelings. For him, feelings even serve as
obstructions to our discernment of right and
wrong. His ethical theory instead bases moral
judgment on reasons alone. Reason, for him, is
what deems an action ethical or otherwise.
GOOD WILL
 Kant believes that one of the functions
and capacities of our reason is to
produce a will which is good not as a
means to some further end, but good in
itself.
 Kant does not agree with many ethicist
that happiness is the summum bonum
or the highest good. Happiness, for him,
can be corrupting and may be worthless
or even positively evil when not
combined with a good will
MAXIM
A general rule or principle which serves
as a guide to action. Examples are “Be honest
always”; Don’t shoot the ball when you get it”,
Don’t wear the wedding gown before the
wedding”.
Not all maxims are moral ones. In
ethics, Kant is concerned with maxim that are
moral dictated by reason and thus have
imperative force.
THE NOTION OF DUTY
 Distinction between ‘I want” and “I
ought”
  Moral actions are not spontaneous, if I
see someone in need of help, I may be
inclined to look the other way, but I will
recognize that my duty is to help.
 Considering only those actions that are
seemingly good according to Kant are
actions that seem good to by duty, that
are good to my common sense of duty,
and for that they are right.
THE NATURE OF IMPERATIVES
Imperatives are commands, for Kant there
exist two:
1. Hypothetical Imperatives
- If you want you ought. The ought or
the duty is conditions by your desires,
wants and goals.
- Our goals are grounded in SELF-
INTEREST.
2. Categorical Imperatives
- The general from DO.
(Unconditioned)
- For Kant there is only one
imperative command and it is the Moral
Law.
- Divided in 2 formulations
First Formulation – Universalizability
 “Act as if the maxim of your action were
to secure through your will a universal
law of nature.”
 Meaning act as if in in your will you were
defining a maximum rule for all to follow.
Second Formulation – End-In-Itself
 “Act so that you treat humanity, whether
in your own person or that of another,
always as an end and never as a
mean.”
 See if your actions are using others or
affecting others, in the meaning of never
using them as a mean to achieve but
always as an end.
Conclusion
 For Kant, a moral act involves being
contrary to somebody’s feelings, natural
inclinations, and wishes.
RIGHTS THEORY
In law, Immanuel Kant proposed the
principle of right.
 The principle of Rights Theory is the
notion that in order for a society to be
efficacious, “government must approach
the making and enforcement of laws
with the right intentions in respect to the
end goals of the society that it governs.
 Kant’s principle of rights theory teaches
that it us not merely the outcome of
actions that is significant but also the
reasoning behind them, because if the
intent is evil, then the outcome, in all
likelihood, is bad as well
RIGHTS BASED ETHICS
There are some rights, both positive and
negative, that all humans have based only on
the fact that they are human. These rights can
be natural or conventional.
 Natural rights - moral
 Conventional rights - created by
humans and reflect society’s values
LEGAL VS. MORAL RIGHTS
Legal Rights
 Denote all the rights found within
existing legal codes.
 Refers to rights according to law. It
exists under the rules of some
particular legal system.
  Are liberties or protections individuals
have because some law says they do.
Moral Rights
 Exist prior to and independently from
their legal counterparts.
 Personal rights.
 Are not limited to the citizens of a
particular nation, at a particular
time. Moral rights (for example,
our rights to life, liberty, and bodily
integrity) are universal and timeless.
WEEK 16
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS
 John Rawls (1921-2002) – the most
important American political philosopher
of the 20th century.
 Rawls rejects utilitarianism and offers a
number of arguments against such a
theory.
 Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and
Stuart Mill (1808-73) are considered the
main proponents of the moral theory
called Utilitarianism.
 Utilitarianism – derived from the Latin
term utilis which means “useful”.
Utilitarianism basically states that what
is useful is good, and that the moral
value of actions are determined by the
utility of its consequences.
 Utilitarianism - It is known as
consequentialist theory.
 Consequentialist Ethics proposes that
actions, rules, policies should be
ethically measured and evaluated by
their consequences, not by the
intentions or motives of the agent.
JEREMY BENTHAM’S UTILITARIANISM
The Principle of Utility
 States that an action is right in so far as
it tends to produce the greatest
happiness for the greatest number.
 For Bentham, nothing else but pleasure
is intrinsically good.
 Bentham created a detailed method, the
“hedonic calculus” to calculate the
quantitative worth of pleasures.
Hedonic Calculus Has Seven Criteria or
Ingredients To Quantify The Amount Of
Pleasure
1. Intensity
2. Duration
3. Certainty
4. Propinquity (or remoteness)
5. Fecundity (or fruitfulness)
6. Purity
7. Extent to which pleasure and pain are
shared among the greatest number of
people.
In general, utilitarianism determines the
moral value of an act by calculating the sum of
pleasure it caused, and the amount of pain
generated.
STUART MILL’S UTILITARIANISM
Mill differs fundamentally from Bentham on
two central aspects:
1. Mill rejects the purely quantitative
treatment of the principle of utility;
2. He introduces “secondary principles”
which set the tone for a contemporary
variant form of the theory called rule
utilitarianism.
In ethics, Mill purports that “happiness” and
“unhappiness” are the basis for good and evil.
While “pleasure” and “pain” are significant
matters, they are only the basic minimum.
AN ANALYSIS OF UTILITARIANISM
  Utilitarianism appears to be a direct
negative reaction against Kantian
ethics.
 While Kant proposes that an act is
justified by the person’s motive to
perform his duty, Bentham and Mill
counteract this by submitting that
actions are evaluated through their
consequences.
1. RAWLS’ ‘JUSTICE AS FAIRNESS’
 He called his concept of social justice
“Justice as fairness’ which consists of
two principles.
 "Justice as Fairness: Political not
Metaphysical" is an essay by John
Rawls, published in 1985. In it he
describes his conception of justice. It
comprises two main principles of liberty
and equality; the second is subdivided
into Fair Equality of Opportunity and the
Difference Principle.
1.1 Rawls’ Two Principles. Rawls’ first
principle of social justice – often called “the
Liberty Principle” – concerns political
institutions.
“Each person has the same and
indefeasible (permanent) claim to a fully
adequate scheme of equal basic liberties,
which scheme is compatible with the same
scheme of liberties for all.”
1. RAWLS’ ‘LIBERTY PRINCIPLE
 This means that everybody has the
same liberties which can never be taken
away.
 This first principle is very Kantian in that
it provides for basic and universal
respect for individuals as a minimum
standard for all just institutions.
2. RAWLS’ ‘SECOND PRINCIPLE’.
CONSISTED OF ‘FAIR EQUALITY OF
OPPORTUNITY’ AND THE ‘DIFFERENCE
PRINCIPLE’
 “Social and economic inequalities are to
satisfy two conditions (1) first, they are
to be attached to offices and positions
open to all under conditions of fair
equality of opportunity; and (2) second,
they are to be to the greatest benefit of
the least-advantaged members of
society (the ‘Difference Principle).”
 “The Second Principle recognizes that a
society could not avoid inequalities
among its people.
1.2 THE ‘THOUGHT EXPERIMENT”
 Thought experiment – hypothetical
version of the social contract.
 Social Contract – The contract
encompassed that people would obey
their leader, typically a king, and he
would assure their natural rights.
 The ‘Thought experiment’ was not a
real assembly of real people negotiating
over a contract. Instead, it was just an
imagined gathering held under strict
conditions that allowed persons to
deliberate, only by employing their
reason and logic.
 The individuals in this mental exercise
had to pick their justice principles under
a “veil of ignorance”. Meaning, these
persons would know nothing about their
specific positions in society even their
own sex, age, race, social class,
abilities, religion, life goals, or anything
else about themselves
 Utilizing reason and logic, the fictional
individuals would first have to resolve
what most persons in most societies
want.
4 PRIMARY GOODS
1. Wealth and income
2. Rights and liberties
3. Opportunities for advancement
4. Self-respect
An Evaluation of Rawls’ Principles
  For instance, if individuals belong to a
religion that teaches men and women
are unequal in some aspects and parts
of life, those beliefs will contradict
Rawls’ principles about equality of basic
liberties and equal opportunity.

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE
 Rawls’ “Justice as Fairness” principles is
an example of a social justice concept
called distributive justice.
 This concept basically concerns the
nature of a socially just allocation of
goods in a society.
 In social Psychology, distributive justice
is defined as perceived fairness of how
rewards and costs are shared by, or
distributed across, group members
 Distributive justice includes the available
quantities of goods, the process by
which goods are distributed, and the
subsequent allocation of the goods to
society members.
 Norm – is the standard of behavior that
is required, desired, or designated as
normal within a specific group.
COMMON TYPES OF DISTRIBUTIVE NORM
a. Equity. Members’ outcomes should be
based upon their inputs. An individual
who has invested a large amount of
input should receive more from the
group than someone who has
contributed very little.
b. Equality. Regardless of their inputs, all
group members should be given an
equal share of the rewards/costs.
c. Power. Those with more authority,
status, or control over the group should
receive more than those in lower
positions.
d. Need. Those in greatest needs should
be provided with resources needed to
meet those needs. These individuals
should be given more resources than
those who already possess them,
regardless of their input
e. Responsibility. Group members who
have the most should share their
resources with those who have less

ANALYSIS OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

 The concern of distributive justice is to
compensate persons for misfortune.
 For Rawls, distributive justice demands
that the lucky ought to allocate some or
all of their gains due to luck to the
unlucky.

VIEW OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

1. Egalitarian.
 Egalitarianism is a set of closely related
socio-economic-political theories that
without exemption promote the
proposition that all society members
ought to have exactly equal amount of
resources.
  Rawls’ ‘Justice as Fairness” principle is
often called “Rawlsian egalitarianism”.

2. Capitalist
 Laissez – faire capitalist distributive
justice is when people, businesses, and
corporations perform based on their
individual self-interest for their own
benefit.

3. Socialist
 State socialist distributive justice is a
system where the government or a
central authority controls the production
of goods and services.
 Democratic socialism – a better version
of a socialist distributive justice also
called “welfare democracy. It has a
system of social insurance to help
disadvantaged persons.

STATE AND CITIZENS RESPONSIBILTY

Taxation and Inclusive Growth.
 Taxation is a means by which the state
and its citizens accomplish their
responsibilities to each other.
 It is a means by which states or
governments finance their expenditure,
basically and ideally for constituents, by
imposing charges on them and
corporate entities.
 Inclusive growth is economic growth
that creates opportunity for all segments
of the population and distributes the
dividends of increased prosperity both in
monetary and non-monetary terms,
fairly across society.