MODULE 4 - GETHICS Short Term 2022-2023

MODULE 4: The Act
Module 4 is devoted for the elaboration of the importance of reason in making moral
decisions. While recognizing the significance of feelings or emotions in making
decisions, it must be kept in mind that the proper use of reason and our ability to
analyze moral situations are given more priority than our feelings and emotions.
The module specifically aims to:

(1) point out the obstacles in making the right decisions;
(2) suggest ways to come up with the right decision;
(3) show the role of reason and emotion in moral decisions;
(4) present steps in making moral decisions; and
(5) argue for the importance of having moral courage and will.
Learning Outcomes:
At the end of Module 4, you should be able to:

1. elaborate the significance of emotions and reason in making moral decisions;
2. outline the 7 steps of Scott Rae’s Moral Reasoning Model;
3. apply Scott Rae’s 7-step Moral Reasoning Model in certain moral dilemmas;
4. appraise the significance of having moral courage and will; and
5. evaluate moral situations with impartial eyes.
ENGAGE
Assess yourself: what do you usually rely on when making decisions: your “heart” (feelings) or
your “mind” (reason)? In your opinion, could one be more reliable than the other when
making moral decisions? Identify which, and elaborate your answer by drawing from your
own experience.
Property of and for the exclusive use of SLU. Reproduction, storing in a retrieval system, distributing, uploading or posting online, or transmitting in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise of any part of this document, without the prior written permission of SLU, is strictly prohibited. 1
EXPLORE
Watch the Video Talk regarding Scott Rae’s Moral Reasoning.
Watch Alex Gendler’s presentation of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RWOpQXTltA
A presentation and discussion of the Allegory of the Cave in Filipino version can be seen
here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6hok2YmrIk
EXPLAIN
 4. The act
4.1. Feeling and Moral Decision-Making
There is always a way to determine what is right from what is not right, to distinguish what is
just from what is unjust, what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, and what
is ethical from what is unethical.
In the corporate world, the appropriateness of one’s action can
Through this interactive be decided vis-a-vis the organization’s vision-mission together with its
lesson, we are to: a) core values. In religion, what is right is judged based on the members’
identify the role and code, creed, and professed conduct. In legal matters, we can know
function of feelings and the truth based on what the law and jurisprudence say. In culture,
reason responding to what is right is adjudged based on good customs, beliefs, and
moral dilemmas; b) practices that members of the said culture claim as acceptable.
manifests the functions These claims are debatable since everything in philosophy may
of feelings and functions be questioned, and these critiques are meant to clarify our proximity
in responding to the to what is right. We must remember, ethics is not just a matter of words
demands of moral or theories (i.e., it is academic in nature). While it includes our
responsibility thoughts, it also looks into how we translate the things we think and
say into actions.
4.1.a. Feelings as Instinctive and Trained Response to Moral Dilemmas

Feelings are important. It is an evidence of our humanity. To put it into perspective, we are
hopeful that humans may later on have the capacity to design a machine that can convert
all human garbage to other useful materials. We feel sad upon learning that there are about
50-200 species of plants, insects, birds, and mammals becoming extinct every day. That is
about 350-1,400 species in a week, or 1,500-6,000 in a month, or 18,000-73,000 in a year. We
feel happy when modern medicine can separate conjoined twins and allow them to have
separate lives to live. We are amazed to know that the longest name of a city is Krung Thep
Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin MahintharaYuthaya Mahadilok Phop
Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman. While that
name is a mouthful, we feel relieved, and we chuckle, laugh, and find ourselves feeling a bit
foolish when we are finally informed that this place is also the famous Bangkok, Thailand.
Conversely, if we feel nothing upon being informed of the number of animal and plant
species going extinct every day; if we have no reaction to the news of conjoined twins being
separated, if we have no amazement over human innovations, inventions, or achievements,
then we might as well put into doubt our humanity. This is because the capacity to feel all
these and more is part of what makes our species truly unique.
Emotions result in feelings, and this human ability to feel is wonderful. Feeling gives
color to our lives. It comes as a natural reaction to our encounter with ourselves, others, and
anything around us. When we receive high grades as a result of hard work, we are elated
and we are joyful. When our grades are low because we take for granted our academics,
we feel down and we regret our shortcomings.
When we see pictures of crimes, violence, of bloody massacres, tortures, abuses, and
so on, we are horrified. We may relevantly recall the “overkill” of the 44 members of the
Special Action Force (SAF) in Tukanalipao Mamasapano, Maguindanao on January 25,
2015. We may also mention the worst violence conducted upon members of the reporting
public (media): the Maguindanao Massacre. On November 23, 2009, 58 people were
mercilessly killed, among them are 32 journalists, as well as members of the Mangudadatu
family and other people. With these events, we cannot help but feel sorry for the victims,
and feel rage and anger in our hearts towards the perpetrators.
In the same manner, we are moved to act when we see environmental destructions,
such as the act of some mining companies dumping their chemical wastes and by-products
into land and bodies of water, thereby polluting these and threatening the lives of those who
depend upon these resources. Furthermore, when we learn that there were about 350,000
children getting paralyzed yearly in the 1980’s because of polio, we may find ourselves
shocked and alarmed at such a statistic. We might thus be truly grateful that due to medical
breakthroughs, we find out that in 2017, there were only about 19 serious polio cases
reported. These kinds of development fills us with hope that human genius will be able to
carry us through tough times and situations, and will let us prevail over diseases, pestilence,
health pandemics, and other such phenomena.
To drive other instances or examples, we would be happy to know that more and
more nations the world over are finally recognizing and coming to respect the rights of
women, children, minorities, and those in the fringes of society. With this recognition comes
the admittance that nations and societies need to be more accountable to these
marginalized sectors. As recent examples, Saudi Arabia allowed women to drive cars; Egypt
came up with laws giving equal rights to inheritance for both men and women heirs. In
Jordan and Lebanon, the law that stipulated freedom for rapists who marry their rape victims
was reviewed and repealed. As well, gender equality is now gaining support worldwide.
4.1.b. Feelings as obstacles to making the Right Decisions
We should also look at when has been often regarded as the “other side” of feelings. In
previous discussions, we mentioned that “reason” or “rationality” is the basis of decision-
making. This means that there is a certain logic to life-situations; and that, in logical
interpretation, we should avoid fallacies or errors in thinking. This includes being mindful of
wishful thinking, being careful of invalid claims, and being wary of possible errors in
judgments and assumption. Not heeding the prompts of reason deters us from truly
distinguishing between rightful and wrongful actions. With logical thinking, ethics prioritizes
rational and good judgments, and actions should not be based merely and solely on intuitive
knowledge, or on unverified hypotheses or assumptions. In sum, when taking to task the
practical impact of reasoning/logical thinking to the practice of ethics itself, we find that
truly ethical conclusions are warranted by careful analysis and by processes that respect
reason and coherence.
Having mentioned, on the one hand, feelings, and on the other hand, reason, we
should note that philosophers, throughout human history, have debated on issues and
concerns relative to emotions/feelings and reason/rationality. Traditional understanding
emphasized that emotion is inferior to reason. Emotion is said to be fleeting and can be
dangerous while reason is superior and reliable. Conventional thinking states that emotion
must be controlled and tamed, while reason must be improved and perfected. But in spite
of these long-going discussions, no consensus has yet been made regarding the real or apt
connection between the two.
4.1.c. Helping to Come Up with the Right Decision

These philosophical debates seem legitimate, and we might as well leave them with their
mental skirmishes. To note, more practical thinkers would see these exchanges as exercises
in futility, and they may never end nor get resolved. To practical eyes, trying to capture or
grasp the connections between emotion and reason may not be the best use of our time,
and they suggest possibly approaching the problem on the level of the concrete. Here, our
attention to our day-to-day experiences may address our needs better than engaging in
theoretical debates.
The point is that we should focus on what both emotions and reason can do to us in
our everyday living. We will see that emotions/feelings and reason work together in real life.
With this qualification, we might get to recognize the impacts of both emotion and reason
in our everyday encounters with our fellow human beings. Further, this would lead us to base
our ethical decisions not only on our theories, but also on what confronts us in the world – the
on-going events and phenomena that define, categorize, and mold each day.
4.2. Role of Reason and Emotion in Moral Decisions

Experience tells us that feelings lead to thought, and thinking will push us to reflect further
and deeper with regards to our actions. Conversely, it is the case that our thoughts are
contributory to our feelings, such that our strongest convictions are also those that motivate
and fuel (overtly or covertly) our feelings, and push us into actions and responses.
We thus qualify that emotions/feelings and thinking are interconnected. Those who
insist that the two are entirely different and independent also have their justifications, and
the position taken here does not contradict that. We simply maintain that there is a
connection between the two. Again, the emotions and feelings we exhibit contribute to the
thoughts we have. When we learn, for example, that our sickly brother is bullied in school,
we react and feel bad about it. We may experience anger or cry in frustration and pity for
our brother. But more than than, our emotive reactions may push us to think more about the
situation, and how to mitigate it. We may think of confronting the bullies; or of making formal
complaints to be directed to the school authorities, or we may decide to let the situation go
for fear of its repercussions, and so on.
Here is another example to illustrate the point we are making. When a gentleman
sees someone attractive, he is naturally filled with admiration. This feeling of admiration and
obviously, of attraction, would motivate him into action, with his aim being to get into
the other person’s good graces. He thus might start asking, “How can I now introduce
myself?”, “Should I complement my intention with a gift or something that might help
convey my intention?”, “Do I need to ask the assistance of someone who would be able
to vouch for me or should I communicate by myself?”, etc.
Now, what we think can conversely also contribute to what we feel. When we think
of going to college, and further on, to pursue medicine, we may feel depressed upon
realizing that the tuition and the other fees asked for in medical school are too high for us.
Being proactive about the situation, however, our motivation to become a medical doctor
might push us to seek out people, organizations, or foundations willing to help with our goal.
Thus, instead of depression, we might feel hope that our ambition might come to fruition.
4.3. Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirements of Ethics

Plato told a story about Socrates who encounters a young
Through this interactive man named Euthyphro outside the court of Athens.
lesson, we are to: a) Socrates was amazed upon learning that Euthyphro is
define what reason and there in court because he will prosecute his own
impartiality are in relation father for murder. Everybody during those times thought
to ethics; b) recall that blood relationship will override any conflict that
immediate positive involves a family member. But the contrast is true in the
responses to moral case of Euthyphro. For this young man, a crime is a crime
dilemmas; and, c) and so with murder. Anyone who commits murder must
manifest well rounded be prosecuted even if the perpetrator is one’s own father.
responses to moral The narrative tells us that an impartial ethical stance is one
dilemmas through which is not personal in nature since it only pursues what is true
healthy interplay between and just. Impartiality neither plays favorites nor caters to some
reason and feelings people’s needs by giving in to their demands while denying
others from enjoying the same because of personal
preferences. Impartiality tells us never to manipulate rules, power, and to use or offer favors
to achieve unjust advantages for ourselves or to those whom we favor.
The concern about impartiality arises because of our human predilection for self-
preservation. Human beings want to protect their own life, liberty, and property together
with the interest of those who are dear to them. With this premise, judges, elders, and leaders
acting as decision makers over the populace must remain impartial at all times. Impartiality
is often understood as fair-mindedness or being objective. It rules against rendering decisions
based on bias, prejudice, and self-serving interests.
Ethical decisions must be just, and any decision is just if it is impartial. Impartiality is thus
often equated with fair-mindedness. One who is impartial is not biased, free from prejudice,
and allows objectivity to rule at all times. Impartiality is a necessary element in any judicial
system. Judges made a sworn statement prior to their assumption to office to observe
impartiality in the performance of their duty. This, however, is easier said than done, based
on what we observe or hear about some judges.
Our day-to-day experiences tell us that impartiality is not a simple concept to observe.
In the celebrated quo warranto case filed against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, the
eight (8) justices who voted for her removal claim impartiality in their decision. In fact, they
invoked the Philippine Constitution as their objective basis in arriving at their decision. On the
other hand, those who question the removal of the Chief Justice claim that the 8 justices are
biased and were never impartial. They also invoked the Constitution as their basis to point
out the error and partiality of the 8 Supreme Court Justices.
4.3.a Reason and Impartiality Defined

Due to the difficulties encountered in the actual application of impartiality, several
philosophical schools and thinkers have either complementary and conflicting ideas on
what impartiality is. We need then to clarify the same for purposes of relating it with sound
ethical decision making.
*Mohism
Mohism is an influential
philosophical, social, and religious
movement which flourished in the
Warring States of ancient China
around 479–221 B.C.E. It promoted
“impartial care.” Mohists emphasize
that every person should equally
care for everyone. It is only when a
person does not discriminate on
anyone that he/she becomes truly righteous. A benevolent person must promote what is
universally good for all and refrain from committing any societal evil action.
*Adam Smith (1723-1790)

He was a Scottish philosopher in the 18th century who came up with a moral point of view
popularly known as the “Impartial Spectator.” He arrived at this point of view to highlight
how a person can objectively make a judgment on person’s behavior and actions. To be
an “impartial spectator” is to empathize with
the person whose behaviors and actions are
subject to our judgment. We must imagine
ourselves in the circumstance of the person
whom we should judge. Our approval or non-
approval of a person’s behavior depends on
the decision we make if we were the ones
involved in his/her situation. If we were in the
person’s situation and we performed the
same action just like what the person did, the
same is acceptable. If we did otherwise
because we claim that this behavior or action is wrong, then, the behavior or action is not
acceptable.
We have the tendency to sustain and defend our ideas when they conflict with that
of other people. Adam Smith proposes a solution by saying that “we need to move beyond
the “literal impartial spectator” to reach some ideal by which we can judge both our actions
and that of others. His work is an honest attempt to lead people to become impartial and
objective in dealing with ethical concerns.
4.4. Scott Rae’s 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model

The previous sections dealt with the significance of being impartial and striking a balance
between, on the one hand, using one’s feelings and, on the other hand, reasoning, when it
comes to moral decision-making. One does not make a decision in a moral dilemma (or in
any situation for that matter) by simply relying on one’s gut-feeling; nor should one be
constantly logical, devoid of any emotional consideration in making moral decisions.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to exercise careful thinking when it comes to moral analysis,
evaluation, and decision-making. This means being mindful of the persons involved, the act
itself, the applicable principles, and the overall context of the situation in which any moral
decision is to be made. Scott Rae, in his book, Moral Choices (2018), proposed a moral
reasoning model that could be used as a guide in making moral decisions. Rae’s moral
reasoning model does not guide one to an absolutely correct or “right” answer or decision
to a moral dilemma; rather, his model may guide an individual to ask the right questions in
ethical deliberations (Rae, 2018).
Scott Rae’s model for moral reasoning presents a 7-step approach to moral analyses
and evaluations. It is oriented towards virtues and principles with consideration of
consequences as a supporting role (Rae 2018). The 7-step model is as follows:
1. Gather the Facts

 It is essential that in moral decision-making, one has to know the general facts of the
moral situation before coming up with a moral analysis, or, more so, with a decision
or an evaluation.
 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 what type
of dilemma we are faced with. It might be that the dilemma is not ethical in nature
but is rather something that is relevant to communication, to strategy, or something
else (Rae, 2018).
2. Determine the ethical issues

 After having identified the facts and overall context of the moral situation, the
ethical issue/s involved in the situation must be clearly stated in order to specify
what issue one has to make a decision for. This section must likewise clearly state the
major moral dilemma involved in the case.
 Ethical interests are stated in terms of legitimate competing interests or goods.
The competing interests are what create the dilemma. Moral values and virtues
must support the competing interests in order for an ethical dilemma to exist. If you
cannot identify the underlying values/virtues then you do not have an ethical
dilemma. Often people hold these positions strongly and with passion because of
the value/virtue beneath them (Rae 2018).
3. Determine what virtues / principles have a bearing on the case

 Applicable ethical values and principles relevant to the case must be identified
and briefly explained in order to justify how such principles could be used in
coming up with a decision concerning the moral dilemma later on. In addition,
the sources of these principles must be likewise acknowledged. These values or
principles could come from: (1) established philosophical ethical principles; (2)
socio-cultural norms;
(3) socio-political norms and laws; (4) religious traditions; among others.
 In an ethical dilemma certain values and principles are central to the
competing positions. Identify these. Determine if some should be given more weight
than others. Ask what the source for the principle is - constitution, culture, natural
law, religious tradition... These supplement biblical principles (Rae 2018).
4. List the alternatives

 After having identified relevant values, virtues, and principles involved in the moral
situation, possible alternative courses of actions must then be proposed and briefly
explained. These suggested courses of actions must be evaluated based on its
applicability, sensibility, and practicality before selecting one as the course of
action or decision to be made regarding the moral situation.
 Creatively determine possible courses of action for your dilemma. Some will almost
immediately be discarded but generally the more you list the greater potential
for coming up with a really good one. It will also help you come up with a
broader selection of ideas (Rae 2018).
5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues / principles

 The initial list of suggested courses of actions must then be evaluated from
the vantage point of the identified ethical values and principles.
 This step eliminates alternatives as they are weighed by the moral principles
which have a bearing on the case. Potentially the issue will be resolved
here as all alternatives except one are eliminated. Here you must satisfy all the
relevant virtues and values --- so at least some of the alternatives will be eliminated
(even if you still have to go on to step 6). Often, here, you have to weigh principles
and virtues – so make sure you have good reasons for each weight you assign (Rae
2018).
6. Consider the consequences
 If principles have not yielded a clear decision, consider the consequences of your
alternatives. Take the alternatives and work out the positive and negative
consequences of each. Estimate how beneﬁcial each positive and negative
consequence is – some might have greater weight than others (Rae 2018).
7. Make a decision (including one’s justification for the decision)

 After having analyzed the moral dilemma’s situation (from steps 1 thru 6), one must
now make a decision based on what has been previously discussed and must clearly
justify the decision that has been made.
 Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might be that you have to choose
the solution with the least number of problems/painful consequences (Rae 2018).
 In understanding the
4.5. Moral Courage
4.5.a. Impediments to Ethical Decision Making
difference between reason and
There are instances when our reason runs counter with will, we are to a) point out
what we do. There are also instances when our will the significance of knowing
does not jibe with what we know as proper. As a and actually executing good
result, there are times we end up consciously doing moral decisions; and b)
what we know as wrong and refrain from doing evaluate actual and
what we know as right. hypothetical ethical behavior
relative to planning and
Here are some known hindrances why we fail to
execution of important
execute what is ethical and consciously do what is
ethical decisions; and c) state
unethical. This enumeration is not exclusive. There are
the significance of
other hindrances out there that we encounter in our
everyday life. (You are hereby asked to enumerate maintaining a healthy balance
more based on your daily experiences). and interaction between
reason and will.
*Egocentrism
Every person generally focuses on his/her own thinking and feeling. We experience the world
vis-a-vis our feelings, what we long for, and even what we dislike. Our experiences are heavily
influenced by how we think and feel and this thinking and feeling influences a lot of
our decision-making.
If I am a teacher, it’s very easy to be engrossed with my tasks and needs and I may
not see things from the parents’, students’, and/or administrators’ points of view. Ethical
decision-making requires attention to viewpoints or perspectives aside from or even
opposed to our own. We observe that when we focus solely on our reasoning and
feeling, our capacity to notice what others are saying and doing is diminished. Thus, when
too much focus is given to the self, we fail to see objectively what surrounds us. If we fall
into this trap, we lose our objectivity and we become markedly biased towards our own
personal concerns/welfare.
*Failure to go with our developmental Maturity

Ideally, our thinking and decision-making capabilities grow side-by-side with our age. In the
words of Dr. Carlos Medina (1998), “We keep on defining and re-defining our plausibility
context.” This means that we undergo different stages in our lives. As children, we think, act,
and speak like children. Our world is focused on being a child, and we are embroiled in a
world characterized by toys, kiddie fun activities, and food. When we become adolescents,
we leave this ‘children’s world’ behind and we start to get involved in a world inhabited by
young, energetic people. We start to outgrow our love for toys and kid’s stuffs. We start to
see the world using the lens of young people. And then, when we turn into adults, we leave
the adolescent life behind and we begin to locate ourselves within a more serious world.
A serious problem arises relevant to ethical decision-making when and if we fail to
grow. If we deal with an adolescent concern using a child’s reasoning; or an adult concern
using a child or adolescent perspective, we will encounter problems. When we stubbornly
continue using the models and structures of our ‘younger worlds’ in deciding and dealing
with concerns that require the models and strategies of adulthood, we will inevitably
contribute to ethical inconsistencies.
*Refusal to let go of our wrongful thinking in order to see things more objectively
One who says he/she does not believe in hell because he or she has “never been there” is
a very difficult person to convince. One who says that there can be no global warming
because nobody proved that the earth is getting
warmer on a global scope (and through scientific The most distinctive mark of a
instruments) is a person who might not be worthy of our cultured mind is the ability to take
time, as well as our efforts to rally or convince people to, another’s point of view; to put
say for example, mitigate the burgeoning climate crisis. one’s self in another’s place, and
see life and its problems from a
The discussion will go nowhere if a person refuses to
point of view different from one’s
believe, or would not even entertain the possibility of
own. To be willing to test a new
having a change of opinion. idea; to be able to live on the
If we only base our ethical decisions on what we edge of difference in all matters
have experienced, our decisions would not be intellectually; to examine without
representative of a “cultured mind”. Our own heat the burning question of the
experiences count for a very small part of the whole day; to have imaginative
picture. Indeed, there are those who create a picture sympathy, openness and flexibility
of what the world is mainly through what they hear and of mind, steadiness and poise of
see personally, and they use these as metrics of what feeling, cool calmness of
judgment, is to have culture.
they claim as true. Again, this seems to be a very limiting
(Arthur H.R. Fairchild)
perspective to take, especially given the increasing
difficulty of judging reliable from unreliable information.
If personal opinions are not complemented by truly reliable (more-or-less objective)
viewpoints, then a person’s ethical decisions are susceptible to shortcomings.

4.6. Moral Courage and Will
Even while a person is very intelligent and has lots of ideas, if he or she lacks the will and
power to implement his/her ideas, then these ideas cannot but remain abstract and
unrealized. The topic of the will is important to affirming that a person is truly knowledgeable.
How is this so? When we go back to the three-fold elements of human actions (knowledge,
freedom, and voluntariness), we recall that knowledge pertains to the conscious element of
human acts. Thus, knowledge involves the deliberate and willful execution of actions, and,
concomitant to this, it also includes awareness of an actions possible consequences.
Thereby, the conduct of a human act is linked to that of a subject or a “knower”, one who
wills that the act be done. Given the above, it is not enough for
an individual to know what is good. What really counts are the "Virtue is knowledge"
good acts that spring forth from this knowledge of what is good. (Meno 87c)
"Virtue is knowledge" (Meno 87c).
As a recapitulation, an insane person and a three-year old child are not liable for their
actions since they are not capable of acting with proper knowledge. Their actions can never
be considered as moral nor immoral. On the other hand, college students, professionals, and
other individuals who are normal by most standards are expected to be possessors of
knowledge. They cannot thereby claim excuses for their immoral actions; and they are liable
for the consequences of their actions.
According to Aristotle, knowledge is the first element of ethical practice. This
knowledge provides a framework for deliberating about the most appropriate technique(s)
by which the good can be attained. It should be noted, however, that although, knowledge
is a requirement for considering an act to be a human act, being knowledgeable or being
aware of what is ethical or moral is not a guarantee that the person is already considered
as an ethical or moral person.
According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the Freedom of the Will is the power wielded by
human beings in trying to translate their judgments/reasons into actions. To recall, this always
involves a choice or an option of whether to do or not to do a certain action. Without this
freedom of choice, responsibility and/or liability on the part of the individual would be
meaningless.
To develop the will, voluntariness is required, which is an act of consenting or
accepting a certain action whether it is done whole-heartedly, half-heartedly, or none
at all. According to Aristotle, the moral evaluation of an action presupposes the
attribution of responsibility to a human agent; thus, responsible action must be undertaken
voluntarily (Nicomachean Ethics III). It is then important to sharpen the “will” so that that
we can become consistent in doing the right and the good.
ELABORATE
Refer to this video as a supplement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6hok2YmrIk.

(Filipino video discussing Plato’s Allegory of the Cave).
• How were the Impediments to Ethical Decision-making portrayed in Plato’s Allegory
of the Cave?
• What specific character or objects in the allegory correspond to the specific
impediments to ethical decision-making?
EVALUATE
Please refer to the Google Form uploaded to the Google classroom for the graded activity
of this module. Please answer the Google form quiz diligently. Do your Best!
References
Aquinas, Thomas (1966). On law, eternal law and natural law. Summa Theologiae, vol. 28,
Blackfriars in conjunction with McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, pp. 5-97
Aristotle, (1983) Book I-III. Nicomachean ethics. Trans. Martin Oswald. Indianapolis: Bobbs-
Merrill Education Publishing.
Baybay, A. (2011). Rape cases prevalent: ‘Shameful crimes’ against children up in Mt
Province.
Boyle, Joseph M. Jr., "Toward Understanding the Principle of Double Effect," Ethics, 90
(1980), 527-538
Cahill, L.S. "Teleology, Utilitarianism, and Christian Ethics," Theological Studies 42:4 (Dec.
1981) 601–629.
Grisez, Germain. (1983). Christian Moral Principles, 1, Franciscan Herald Press
Gualdo, R.S., Placido, D and Dagwasi, C. (2012). Ethics: Basic Concepts and Contemporary
Moral Issues. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House, Inc.
Gula, Richard M., S.S., (1989). Reason Informed by Faith Foundations of Catholic Morality,
New York, Paulist Press.
Pasco, M.O.D, Suarez, V.F and Rodriguez, A.M.G. (2018). Ethics. Quezon City: C & E
Publishing, Inc.
Rachels, J. (2013). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. New York: McGraw Hill.
Rae, Scott B. (2018). Moral choices: An introduction to Ethics. 4th Zondervan.
Smith, Janet E. Humane Vitae: A Generation Later. Catholic University of America Press.
1991
______"Veritatis Splendor," Proportionalism, and Contraception," Irish Theological
Quarterly 63: 4 (1998) 307-26.
______ "Moral Terminology and Proportionalism," in Recovering Nature: Essays in Natural
Philosophy, Ethics, and Metaphysics in Honor of Ralph McInerny ed. by Thomas Hibbs
and John O'Callaghan (Notre Dame Press, 1999) 127-46
Electronic Sources:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-
maps/proportionality-principle
http://www.spectacle.org/0806/proportionality.html
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51759938_The_principle_of_proportionality_revis
ited_Interpretations_and_applications
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/proportionality
http://icucourses.com/pages/002-05-proportionalism-and-biologism
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/zim/zim_195proportionalism.html

MODULE 4 - GETHICS Short Term 2022-2023

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MODULE 4 - GETHICS Short Term 2022-2023

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MODULE 4: The Act

The module specifically aims to:

At the end of Module 4, you should be able to:

Watch the Video Talk regarding Scott Rae’s Moral Reasoning.

Watch Alex Gendler’s presentation of Plato’s Allegory of the Cave here:

4.1.a. Feelings as Instinctive and Trained Response to Moral Dilemmas

4.1.c. Helping to Come Up with the Right Decision

4.2. Role of Reason and Emotion in Moral Decisions

4.3. Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirements of Ethics

4.3.a Reason and Impartiality Defined

*Adam Smith (1723-1790)

4.4. Scott Rae’s 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model

1. Gather the Facts

2. Determine the ethical issues

3. Determine what virtues / principles have a bearing on the case

4. List the alternatives

5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues / principles

7. Make a decision (including one’s justification for the decision)

*Failure to go with our developmental Maturity

Refer to this video as a supplement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6hok2YmrIk.

You might also like