SAN JOSE COMMUNITY COLLEGE

San Jose, Malilipot, Albay

COURSE/S and Block: BCAED 1A, BCAED 1B, BCAED 1C, BCAED 1D, BCAED 1E,
BCAED 1F, BSED FIL 1C
Instructor: SHARON G. BALAGUER Semester: 2nd Semester
Course Code: GE 8 AY: 2022-2023
Course Title: ETHICS Time/Duration: 3 hrs
Credit Units: 3 Modality: Modular/Face to Face

I – COURSE INTRODUCTION/DESCRIPTION

Ethics deals with principles of ethical behaviour in modern society

at the level of the person, society and in interaction with the
environment and other shared resources.
Morality pertains to the standards of right and wrong that an
individual originally pics up from the community. The course discusses
the context and principles of ethical behaviour in modern society at the
level of individual, society and in interaction with the environment and
other shared resources. The course also teaches students to make moral
decisions by using dominant moral frameworks and by applying a seven-step
moral reasoning model to analyze and solve moral dilemmas.

II – LEARNING OBJECTIVES/LEARNING OUTCOMES:

After the discussion, you are expected to:
 Understand the important of rules
 Differentiate moral and non-moral standards
 Define and analyze moral dilemmas
 Identify the elements of moral dilemma
 Apply divine and natural laws as bases of solving moral
dilemmas

III. DEFINITION OF TERMS

Dilemma a situation in which a difficult choice has to

be made between two or more alternatives,
especially equally desirable ones
Rules One set of explicit or understood regulations or
principles governing conduct within a particular
activity or sphere.
Norms A principle of right action binding upon the
members of a group and serving to guide, control
or regulate proper and acceptable behaviour

Morality Conformity to ideals of right human conduct

IV. COURSE LEARNING ACTIVITY / CONTENT: LESSON / TOPIC
TIME TOPIC LEARNING EVALUATION OF
DURATION OBJECTIVES LEARNING
 Understand
the
Moral and Non-Moral importance of
Standards rules
 Differentiate
Dilemma moral and
non-moral
standards
 Define and
analyze moral
dilemmas

MAN AS SOCIAL BEING: HIS PERCEPTIONOF THE IMPORTANCE OF RULES

To live in isolation is the worst experience that any sane man can
do against himself. Even to Think of evading the reality of being part of
humanity does not guarantee that he is already capable of living without
sense of being with others in society. It only shows that he cannot
escape his nature as a social being.
Each of us has reasons why at some point we want to be alone or
secluded from others. There are some who preferred to live away from the
city and some would love to live within the noise of it. There are some
who are introvert and wants to live with very few friends and some that
cannot live with them. All of us has unique reasons for that.
The cross-dimension of human relationship are intrapersonal,
interpersonal, societal and relationship with God. In all of our
relationships, our actions are considered either right or wrong, good or
bad, proper or improper. And the perception of all these may primarily
start from the concept of rules.

IMPORTANCE OF RULES
How if there are no rules in society, what should be the result?
When rules exist, order is achieved. Rules are meant to ensure
order in every organization, either in a small or big community of
people. When rules exist, to get things done is easy. In an organization,
job descriptions are defined. Every member acts according to his or her
role. When each performs job accurately, the vision and the goals of the
organization is realizable. Sometimes rules are not written yet people
behave properly, because of NORMS. We do not think about rules in the
fast food restaurant, but if you look around, you will see people acting
as if they were trained for the role of fast food customer. They stand in
line, pick items from the servers paying trays of food. After a quick
meal, customers wipe their mouth with table napkins or wash at the
fountain or wash room.
When rules exist, we acquire social values that strengthen our
relationship with others. Being –with-others-in-society requires values
and skills necessary to sustain harmony among members of society. Because
of rules, our actions are tamed which eventually lead towards positive
relationship with others.

USUAL RULES IN OUR LIVES

1. Etiquette - standards by which we judge manners to be good or
bad normally dictated by socio-economic elite.
2. Legal - standards by which we judge legal right and wrong in a
democracy, formulated by representative of people.
3. Language - standards by which we judge what is grammatically right
or wrong evolved through use
4. Aesthetics - standards by which we judge good and bad art
usually dictated by a small circle of art specialists.
5. Athletic- standards by which we judge how good or bad a game is
played usually formulated by governing bodies.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MORAL AND NON-MORAL STANDARDS

What distinguishes moral standards from non-moral standards? The
following characteristics of moral standards provide a clear distinction
of these 2 concepts:
 First, moral standards deal with matters that can seriously inquire
or benefit human beings. These refer to good or bad actions that
may bring help or harm to others. Example of good acts are
charitable programs that may help others who are in need; while
example of bad acts are theft, rape, fraud slander and murder.
 Second, the validity of moral standards rests on the adequacy of
reasons to support and justify them, not on decisions of majority
or authoritative bodies. Example, if someone is ought to tell the
truth, his or her decision does not depend on how many people will
agree or disagree to him or her. It holds the truth remains though
nobody accepts it, while falsity does not turn into truth tough
everybody accepts it. One indication of justification is consensus
of participants in communication.
 Third, moral standards are to be preferred than other values
including self-interest. Ex. Honesty is to be preferred than
cheating although cheating can make me graduate. It holds even if
an act is rewarding it cannot justify a wrong deed.
 Fourth, moral standards are based on impartial considerations.
  Fifth, moral standards are associated with special emotions such as
guild, shame, remorse, praise, indignation. Aside from reason,
another consideration is person’s feelings. Most of the time, we
include our feelings involved in the process.

 The challenge of moral standards is that in violating them, effect

is not always immediate and visible.

MORAL DILEMMAS

Moral dilemmas are displayed by being “bothered” – nababagabag. Why

am I bothered? Confronted with choices whose ends result to one
positive and another negative; or two negatives, one less and another
lesser, we naturally have this bothered feeling. We find it difficult
to make decisions because of moral considerations.
How should we handle a moral dilemma? Certainly not through
feelings. Upsurge of feelings cannot be prevented. What we do with
them separates the mature from the immature agent.
The English Oxford Dictionary defines moral dilemma as a situation
in which a difficult choice has to be made between two courses of
action, either of which entails transgressing a moral principle.

3 LEVELS OF MORAL DILEMMAS

1. INDIVIDUAL LEVEL (individual dilemmas) – it is a situational
problem for an individual who is experiencing a difficulty in
choosing between two or more options. Factors like peer pressure,
perspective, and any other personal cultural beliefs may vary and
make a difference on the individual’s decision.
2. ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL (organizational dilemmas) – this level usually
occurs when a dilemma is made and the standards of the person’s
standards are already attached or being affected by policies or
procedures of an organization.
 To be ethical requires pause:
a. To get hold of emotions before they do damage and
b. Distance from what everyone else is saying
 To be ethical also requires critical thinking:
a. To analyse the situation, consider stakeholder’s interest,
make the right choices and
b. To see the bigger picture and align the choice with the
values important to me.
3. SYSTEMIC LEVEL OR MACRO LEVEL (structural dilemma) - defined ethics
and is influenced by the wider environmental operation where the
company exist.

IMPORTANT ELEMENTS IN MORAL DECISION – MAKING

The New Catholic Encyclopaedia lists the principal conditions of
the principle of double effect:
1. The act itself must be morally good or at least indifferent.
 2. The agent may not positively will the bad effect but may permit it.
If he or she could attain the good effect without the bad effect,
he or she should do so. The bad effect is sometimes said to be
indirectly voluntary.
3. The good effect must flow from the action at least as immediately
as the bad effect. In other words, the good effect must be produces
directly by the action, not by the bad effect. Otherwise, the agent
would be using a bad means to good end, which is never allowed
4. The good effect must be sufficiently desirable to compensate for
the allowing of the bad effect.

STEPS IN SOLVING A MORAL DILEMMA

Making moral decisions is a rational, step-by-step process that
requires the careful analysis of alternatives and their consequences.
Using the principles that govern moral decisions, the ff steps are
suggested:
1. Examine the acts in relation to the agent.
 The immorality of human acts is determined by examining the
acts in themselves in their relation to the agent (person,
doer) who performs them. The agent and the facts surrounding
the act must be assessed.
2. Determine the consequences of the acts.
 The second step of testing eh morality or immorality of a
human act is called consequentialism. The principle of
consequentialism suggests that one must weigh the consequences
of a human act to determine whether it is moral or immoral.
3. Identify the intention of the acts.
 For St. Thomas, the morality or immorality of the act resides
in the intention of the person. If the agent intends to cause
harmful consequences, then the act is immoral.
4. Decide in accordance to divine and natural laws which govern moral
life.
 St. Thomas holds that not all aspects of the human person are
either moral or immoral. Nonetheless, he suggests that divine
and natural laws are the criteria by which people can judge
the morality or immorality of their oral decisions especially
when they refaced with moral dilemmas. In pursuit of moral
decisions, the human person must discern and make all the
right choices by relating them to divine law and the ultimate
of hood of humanity.

ACTIVITY
I.
In late 1983 there was a public controversy over an infant known
tot eh public as only Baby Jane Doe. This unfortunate baby, born in New
York State, suffered from multiple defects including spina bifida (a
broken and protracting spine) hydrocephaly (excess fluid on the spina
bifida); however, the doctors who examined the baby disagreed about
whether the operation should be performed. Dr. George Newman believed
that surgery would be pointless because the baby could never have a
meaningful human life. Another physician, Dr. Arjen Keuskamp did not
think the baby’s condition was hopeless and advocated immediate surgery.
Both of them are pediatric neurologists. The parents decided to accept
Dr. Newman’s recommendation, and refused permission for surgery. Dr.
Keuskamp then withdrew from the case. Because such cases have become
common, the plight of baby Jane Doe would not have received much
attention had it not been for the intervention of third parties. Shortly
after the parents made their decisions, Lawrence Washburn, a lawyer
associated with some conservative right –to- life groups, petitioned the
courts to set aside the parents’ wishes and order that surgery be
performed, The New York State Supreme Court granted that request, nut a
higher court quickly overturned the order, calling Washburn’s suit
“offensive”
The court was impressed by Dr. Newman’s Testimony: he told the
court “The decision made by the parents is that it would be unkind to
have the surgery performed on this child… on the basis of the combination
that are present in this child, she is not likely to ever achieve any
meaningful interaction with her environment, nor ever achieve any
interpersonal relationships, the very qualities which consider human.”
After Mr. Washburn’s suit was dismissed, with the judge declaring that
the parents’ decision was a reasonable one based on due consideration of
the medical opinions available and on a genuine concern for the best
interest of the child. The parents did eventually agree to the use of a
shunt to remove the excess fluid from the child’s brain. But the major
surgery, for the spina bifida. Was nor performed.

Answer the ff questions:

1. In your opinion, was the parents’ decision correct?
2. What are the facts of the Baby Jane Doe case?
3. If you were the parents (the moral agents), what was your dilemma)
4. Who are the two other stakeholders contesting the parents’
decision? What was the value of their position?

II. Watch the movie ANAK which is a family drama film directed by Rory
Quintos and starring Vilma Santos. The Movie is a depiction of the
ethical dilemma that OFW parents face and endure to provide for their
family. Write a reflection on and insights drawn from the movie.

****** End of module2 *****