LESSON 1

ETHICS AND ITS TENETS

“There is no formula that can resolve a moral dilemma”

-Jean Paul Sartre

LESSON OUTCOMES:

At the end of the discussion, the learners can:

1. Recognize what is moral and non-moral
2. Distinguish moral standards between non-moral standards
3. Identify the concept of Moral Dilemmas
4. Analyze samples of Moral Dilemmas and the effect on how people
behave and make decision for their lives
5. Associate foundation of morality to moral and non-moral, and moral
dilemmas

LESSON CONTENT:

Definition of Moral Standards

An idea of quality that gets out all the non-moral facts as relevant to the
moral status to particular acts and specify that these considerations explain
or justify why those acts are right, wrong, etc. (De Guzman, 2017).

Whether products are good or bad, working conditions safe or danger,

personal procedure fair or biased, such things seriously affect wellbeing. The
standards that govern our conduct in these matters are moral standard.

Standards are own establishment of criteria. However, when we talk about

moral, it depends on knowledge, impartiality, not being bias and observable
reasons, facts, or data. Moral act entails notion of freedom to decide yet
being responsible for his/ her actions. We can say that one is non-moral
when there is negligence of reason, no freedom, and no responsibility for all
of his/her actions(De Guzman, 2017).

Nature of Moral Standards

“No set of consistent and coherent moral standards can fully codify or
systematize the whole of what we ought to do, they think, and when moral
principles do guide our moral decision-making, such things tend to distort

Page 1 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
moral judgment by leading us to ignore or misconstrue morally relevant
features of particular situations” (Schroeder, 2007).

Definition of Non-Moral Standards

Non-moral standards are standards by which we judge what is good or bad

and right or wrong in a non-moral way (San, 2017). It results to actions which
don’t involve the consideration of moral principles.

A non-moral standard is different with “immorality” because these are two

different concepts. Immorality results to unacceptable acts while non-moral
standards are acceptable and still contributes to the betterment of the
society; it’s just that in non-moral standards, we base the goodness or the
badness of our decisions by matters of our own taste or preference, not by
morals that we have or universally set. Just like the decisions we make on
principles of etiquette, rules of behavior set by parents, teachers, other
authorities, the law, standards of grammar or language, standards of art,
and standards of sports. This includes examples such as: do not eat when
your mouth is full, do not text in class, do not wear socks that don’t match.

Moral vs. Non Moral Standards

According to (De Guzman, 2017) the following characteristics of moral

standards further differentiates them from non-moral standards:

1. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits.

Moral Standards deal with matters which can seriously impact, that is,
injure or benefit human beings. It is not the case with many non-
moral standards.

For instance, following or violating some basketball rules may matter

in basketball games but does not necessarily affect one’s life or
wellbeing. Another example would be, a drug company does not tell
its clients the side effects of some of its medications.

2. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values. Moral

standards have overriding character or hegemonic authority. If a
moral standard states that a person has the moral obligation to do
something, then he/she is supposed to do that even if it conflicts with
other non-moral standards, and even with self-interest.

3. Moral standards are not established by authority figures. Moral

standards are not invented, formed or generated by authoritative
bodies or persons such as nations’ legislative bodies. Its validity lies on
the soundness or adequacy of the reasons that are considered to
support and justify them.

Page 2 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
 4. Moral standards have the trait of universality. It entails that moral
principles must apply to all who are in the relevantly similar situation.

5. Moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Moral

standard does not evaluate standards on the basis of the interests of
a certain person or group, but one that goes beyond personal
interests to a universal standpoint in which each person’s interests are
impartiality counted as equal.

Example: A judge should not judge on the basis of friendship. He does,

and then his judgment will be partial, not impartial.

6. Moral standards are associated with special emotions and

vocabulary. If a person violates a moral standard by telling a lie even
to fulfill a special purpose, it is not surprising if he/she starts feeling
guilty or being ashamed of his/her behavior afterwards. On the
contrary, no much guilt is felt if one goes against the current fashion
trend (e.g. refusing to wear tattered jeans)

Definition of Moral Dilemma

A moral dilemma may be described as a situation where one seems morally

obliged to do two different acts but for some reason or other he cannot do
both (Hein, 2010). The person is between two strong obligations where
doing one directly opposes the other. It must be noted, however, that if a
person is in a difficult situation but is not forced to choose between two or
more options, then that person is not in a dilemma. The least that we can
say is that that person is just experiencing a problematic or distressful
situation. The fundamental moral principle is derived from 'practical reason'.
Therefore, the existence of moral dilemmas would amount to internal
incoherence within reason and this would go against his own
doctrine(Hudson & Acton, 2015). Thus, the most logical thing to do for that
person is to look for alternatives or solutions to address the problem. When
dilemmas involve human actions which have moral implications, they are
called ethical or moral dilemmas. Moral dilemmas, therefore, are situations
where persons, who are called “moral agents” in ethics, are forced to choose
between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the
situation in a morally acceptable manner(Sartre, 1946).

TYPES OF MORAL DILEMMAS according to John Lemmon (Schagrin, 2007).

1. Epistemic and ontological dilemmas. It is distinction between duty

and obligation. Duties issue forth by virtue of the position or status
one holds in a society, whereas obligations are incurred by actions
committed previously. A man can be under an obligation to do
something, though it is not his duty to do it, or a man's duty may be

Page 3 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
 to do something though he is under no obligation to do it. He tries to
solve the dilemma by saying that duty-situations are status situations
while obligation-situations are contracted situations. "Both duties and
obligations may be sources of 'ought’s', but they are logically
independent sources

2. Self-imposed and world imposed dilemmas. A second type of

dilemma as Lemmon suggests, consists of an ethical situation where
one may know what one ought to do but in various ways be tempted
not to do it. This is. a dilemma where one is torn between 'duty and
pleasure' or between 'obligations and our interests'. Lemmon does
not consider this as a moral dilemma ' because in such, case one
knows owns 'duty' or 'obligation' but due to some non-moral reason
backslides from morality.

3. Obligation dilemmas and prohibition dilemmas. A third type of

dilemma consists of a situation where a man 'both ought to do
something and ought not to do that thing'. Plato's typical case of a
dilemma in which the return of a gun has been promised to a man
who intent on killing his wife (who has been unfaithful to him) comes
to claim it. Here the conflict is between two opposing principles of
promise-keeping and benevolence. Lemmon suggests that the above
example "would not be a dilemma at all unless it was true that the
man both ought to return the gun and. ought not to return it. It is a
nasty fact about human life that we sometimes both ought and ought
not to do things, but it is not a logical contradiction"

4. Single agent and multi-person dilemmas. The fourth kind of moral

dilemma, Lemmon describes as "one's uncertainty as to one's actual
moral situation, one’s situation with respect to duties, obligation and
principles." Sartre a dilemma of a young man who is in a conflict,
whether to perform his duty towards the country by joining the
Resistance or to fulfil his filial obligation by staying back to care his old
and 130 helpless mother, is classed under the fourth kind of dilemma.
Lemmon, in trying to resolve this dilemma, observes that either
decision in result requires the adoption of a 'new moral attitude' on
the part of the agent

Case discussion based on different scenarios of moral dilemma

1. Student context. Jenie asked a former professor to write her a

recommendation for law school. It was particularly important to her
that this professor write the letter, as one of her top-choice law school
specifically asks for a letter from a former professor, and she is the
teacher who knew her best. She said she was too busy, but if Jenie
would write it, she would gladly “edit as needed” and submit it under
her own name. She felt uncomfortable writing her own letter, but she

Page 4 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
 did not wish to jeopardize any chances of being accepted into her
top-choice school by being overly conscientious. May she do so?

Sure you may. If the professor had asked you to come discuss your
strengths, would that trouble you? What if she asked you to discuss
them and then leave your notes with her? What if she asked you to
just e-mail her some notes? In effect that’s what she has done.
Writing about yourself in that way can be uncomfortable, but it’s not
unethical. Perhaps you are worried that the professor will not follow
through on her promise to “edit as needed.” She could, theoretically,
send your words on to the school as her own, but that would not be
your fault, any more than if you handed her a blank page and she filled
it with a bunch of made-up platitudes. So go ahead, sing your praises.
And don’t forget to include “ethically conscientious.” It never hurts,
not even in law school.

2. Relationships. Lindsay is a deeply religious person; hence, she

considers killing humans absolutely wrong. Unfortunately, it is found
out that Lindsay is having an ectopic pregnancy. As is well known, an
ectopic pregnancy is a type of pregnancy that occurs outside the
uterus, most commonly in the fallopian tubes. In other words, in
ectopic pregnancy, the fetus does not develop in the uterus. Now, if
this happens, the development of the fetus will definitely endanger
the mother. Thus, if Lindsay continues with her pregnancy, then there
is a big possibility that she will die. According to experts, the best way
to save Lindsay’s life is to abort the fetus, which necessarily implies
killing the fetus. If we do not abort the fetus, then Lindsay, as well as
the fetus, will die.In the above example of a moral dilemma, Lindsay
is faced with two conflicting options, namely, either she resorts to
abortion, which will save her life but at the same time jeopardizes her
moral integrity or does not resort to abortion but endangers her life
as well as the fetus. Indeed, Lindsay is faced with a huge moral
dilemma.

Three conditions presented in moral dilemmas.

1. The moral agent must choose the best option and act accordingly.
2. There must be two or more conflicting options to choose from for
moral dilemmas to occur.
3. No matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are
always compromised.

Moral dilemmas can be categorized according to three levels (a) personal,

(b) organizational, and (c) structural.

A. Personal Level of Dilemma. Personal Dilemmas are those

experienced and resolved on the personal level. Since many ethical
decisions are personally made, many, if not most of, moral dilemmas fall

Page 5 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
under, or boil down to, personal level (De Guzman, 2017). This is the most
common dilemma that an individual is facing. However, whenever an
individual is torn between two circumstances it doesn’t mean that
he/she already facing personal moral dilemma.

Before whenever I can’t decide between doing my school works earlier

the deadline or spending my free time going out with my family. I always
think that I’m already facing personal moral dilemma. Until I realize that
personal moral dilemma occurs when someone is torn in deciding
between two life-death situations.

There are many other personal moral dilemmas. If a person makes

conflicting promises, he faces a moral conflict. When an individual has to
choose between the life of a child who is about to be delivered and the
child’s mother, he faces an ethical dilemma (De Guzman, 2017).

Example: Lito walking side-to-side outside the delivering area to abolish

his nervousness and fear for his wife whose about to deliver their child. A
minute pass the doctor goes out and talk to him. The doctor said that he
needs to choose between the life of his wife and child. If his wife
continues giving birth to their child, there’s a big possibility that his wife
may die. On other hand, if they will agree to get the child from the womb
of his wife through the medical process, the child will not be born but his
wife will be saved. Lito was torn between the life of his wife and unborn
child.

B. Organizational Level of Dilemma. Organizational moral dilemmas

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

In medical association, they always talk about the mercy killing or the
withdrawal of life support among the critical patients, in accordance that
human life should not be intentionally killed also that unavoidable pain
or suffering of the individual because of sickness should not be abided.
Then, this becomes the moral dilemma faced by the health
association(De Guzman, 2017).

Deciding, whether to pull-out the life support of your dying love one is
not easy. Patient’s family is not only the one who experiences the
dilemma. The medical staff is also concerned with the life of the patient,
it is their job description to save and heal sick or dying person.
Withdrawal of patient’s life support, concern a lot of area before doing it.

Example: The doctor talked to Sarah, for her lola’s condition. She brings
her Lola Selya to the hospital because of her poor health condition. But
unfortunately, the doctor says that her lola is in not in good condition and

Page 6 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
 the only things that makes her alive is the apparatus connected in her
body. Sarah after hearing what the doctors said she is torn between
approving to pull out her Lola’s life support or continue her medication
through the life support without 100% chance of saving her Lola from ill’s
health.

C. Structural Level of Dilemma. Structural moral dilemmas refer to

cases involving network of institutions and operative theoretical
paradigms. As they usually encompass multi-sectoral institutions and
organizations, they may be larger in scope and extent than
organizational dilemma (De Guzman, 2017).

Example: Technically speaking, prices of medicine in our country are

higher compared the other Asian countries and other country with
parallel economic status. To solve this case the government mandates a
program which will give every Filipino an affordable and quality health
care. To make it possible the government should give bigger budget for
health sector. On the other hand, the government needs to cut budget
allocation among other sector such as education, public infrastructure,
etc.

Foundations of Morality

The foundations of morality are based on the Moral Foundation Theory

(MTF) by (Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009). In brief history, it was created by
Haidt and Joseph (2002, as cited in Graham, 2002) that was derived in a
bridge of evolutionary and anthropological approach in moral psychology.
These idea presents itself to explain the common grounds of different moral
judgments from across cultures all over the globe despite of their variations.
It presents different continuums that serves as the building blocks of the
different moral standards and judgments that are present today. This theory
also admits and suggests that it should be further studied and improved for
more accuracy to explain the moral psychology, however, it is still
unarguable that it is still the best idea in the field of studies so far (Graham
et al., 2009).

Five Foundations of Morality (also known as Five Moral Receptors):

1. The Care/Harm foundation. This moral foundation is a matter of

kindness and cruelty. It entails the ability of a person/s to like or dislike
the feeling of others.

Examples: Helping a struggling classmate doing his/her assignments

(Care). Ignoring a senior citizen that cannot cross to the pedestrian
lane (Harm).

Page 7 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
 2. The Fairness/Cheating foundation. This moral foundation is a
matter of justice or equality. It is about handing an equal treatment
of a person/s according to the rules of a particular social group.

Examples: Giving equal shares of food to your siblings (Fairness).

Stealing answer from your classmates’ answer sheets (Cheating).

3. The Loyalty/Betrayal foundation. This moral foundation is a

matter of commitment. It is the staying or opposing of a person/s
to a particular person or group.

Examples: Staying to a fandom (Loyalty). Transferring to a social group

that gives you more benefits (Betrayal).

4. The Authority/Subversion foundation. This moral foundation is a

matter of submission. It contains the leadership and followership and
also present in the respect of customs and traditions.

Examples: Conforming to everything the President will say

(Authority). Starting a rebellion by bombing the President’s palace
(Subversion).

5. The Sanctity/Degradation foundation. This moral foundation is a

matter of one’s nobility of life. It was based in the psychology to
disgust to contamination of carnality and the religious conceptions of
striving a more elevated and nobler life.

Examples: Going to church every Sunday, as a Christian (Sanctity).

Going to bar while smoking and drinking, as a Christian
(Degradation).

DEFINITION OF TERMS

• Etiquette is the customary code of polite behavior in society or among

members of a particular profession or group.
• Epistemic moral dilemmas involve situations wherein two or more
moral requirements conflict with each other and that the moral agent
hardly knows which of the conflicting moral requirements takes
precedence over the other (SCHAGRIN, 2007).
• Impartiality is usually depicted as being free of bias or prejudice,
impartiality in morality requires that we give equal and/or adequate
consideration to the interests of all concerned parties (De Guzman, 2017).

Page 8 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice
• Ontological moral dilemmas, situations wherein two or more moral
requirements conflict with each other, yet neither of these conflicting
moral requirements overrides each other (SCHAGRIN, 2007).
• Self-imposed moral dilemma is caused by the moral agent’s
wrongdoings (SCHAGRIN, 2007).
• Obligation dilemmas are situations in which more than one feasible
action is obligatory, while prohibition dilemmas involve cases in which
all feasible actions are forbidden (SCHAGRIN, 2007).
• Single agent dilemma, the moral agent is compelled to act on two or
more equally the same moral options, but she cannot choose both
(SCHAGRIN, 2007).
• Moral dilemma. A moral dilemma may be described as a situation where
one seems morally obliged to do different acts but for some reason or
other, he cannot do both (Hein, 2010).

REFERENCES

De Guzman, E. a. (2017). ETHICS. In Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society (pp. 6–8).

F. W. T. (1893). Code of Ethics. Journal of the American Medical Association.

https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1893.02420480016008

Gantman, A. P., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2015). Moral Perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.004

Graham, J. (2012). Pubid1619260736_1016[1].Pdf.

Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141

Hein, G. E. (2010). John Dewey and Museum Education. Curator: The Museum Journal.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.2004.tb00136.x

https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/lxxii.288.584

Hudson, W. D., & Acton, H. B. (2015). Kant’s Moral Philosophy. In New Studies in Ethics.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-02396-7_5

Kvalnes, Ø. (2016). Moral reasoning at work: Rethinking ethics in organizations. Moral Reasoning at Work:
Rethinking Ethics in Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137532619

McConnell, T. C. (1978). Moral Dilemmas and Consistency in Ethics. Canadian Journal of Philosophy.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.1978.10717051

Sartre, J.-P. (1946). Existentialism is a Humanism. In Existentialism is a Humanism.

SCHAGRIN, M. (2007). A Dilemma for Lemmon. Mind.

Schroeder, D. (2007). Benefit sharing: It’s time for a definition. Journal of Medical Ethics.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.016790

Walker, L. J. (2006). Sex Differences in the Development of Moral Reasoning: A Critical Review. Child Development.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1984.tb03807.x

Page 9 of 9
Ethical Standards for Real Estate Practice