ETHICS Csu Modulepdf

Unit I
Moral and Non-Moral Problems

Unit
1
Introduction
People encounter various problems every day, some are simple, some are complex. In
all aspects of life, things are not always simple. From the time one wakes up in the morning
until practically bedtime, one may be preoccupied with something to be done or about things
that are undone. Not everything is foreseeable. There are always things that are missing; some
others need immediate fixing, someone else getting a flat tire just before leaving for work and
many more situations of the same type. We are not always ready and we cannot foresee
everything. Something, somewhere, somehow is not alright. There are problems or situations
that call for moral or ethical valuation or judgment. It may be about contemplating whether or
not to tell a teacher about a cheating incident during an examination. As a student, a problem
may be about what to do having known that she is pregnant. Should she reveal to her parents
about it? What could her parents’ reaction be?
Should a student lie to his/her professors for not having been in class very often for no
reason at all? Must one spread rumors using the social media about someone he/she hates since
his/her identity can remain unknown and can inflict more pain and moral damage on the
person? Is suicide a better solution to end all the troubles? There can be other serious problems
that anyone is going through and the question is what to do in these difficult circumstances.
Distinguishing between a moral problem and non- moral problem is the aim of this
topic. When do you say a problem pertains to what is right or wrong or when it is simply a
matter of fact?
Learning Outcomes
1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems

2. Describe what a moral experience is as it happens in different levels of human
experience.
1 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Activating Prior Learning
In a group of 5, list down rules in your school, at home, in your community or

organization. Evaluate the rules by responding to the following questions:
a. Which of the rules do you find constricting (in the sense of restricting)? Why?
b. Why are rules important to social beings.
Try these:
In school, you may come up with the rules in the school relative to the wearing of school
uniforms, ID’s and many more which you believe are constricting or restricting.
At home, you may come up with rules which you believe curtail your freedom. These rules
may include curfew time imposed by your parents, table manners, requiring evening prayers,
telling the truth, respect for each member of the family, eating together or that the last one to
finish eating will have to fix the table, etc.
In the community, you may discuss rules that may involve anti-littering, segregation of
garbage, leashing pets, curfew time, rules restricting public disturbance and gambling, rules
prohibiting driving without license, etc.
Presentation of Contents
Distinction between Moral and Non-Moral Problems
In the context of the discussion about constricting rules, there are rules that are
formulated by authorities for the common good or for improvement but are not moral precepts.
As such, they are clearer when they are expressed in the imperative mood. They are constricting
rules but are not moral concerns and hence, are classified as non-moral rules.
When does a rule become a moral problem or enter the domain of morality? It can be
stated that a rule becomes a moral rule if it violates certain standards. For instance, a rule may
be stated in the following terms: HIV infected individuals will be treated with disdain and are
not allowed to join any public forum. Such rule violates the inherent human dignity and the
right of an individual to be part of the larger society. This type of rule implies moral valuation.
The rightness or the wrongness of the rule is put into question. Should people who are victims
of the curse of the virus be treated in such a manner? Is isolating them the appropriate way of
dealing with them. Do human dignity and the right of the human person end when one gets
contaminated with the virus? Your response to this can be further clarified by knowing
the different kinds of valuations.

Kinds of Valuations that do not imply Moral Judgment or are not part of Ethics
1. Aesthetic Valuation. Some things are considered good or bad because of their
appeal to the senses. It is possible that one finds the food served by the waiter as
good or bad depending on whether the taste buds approve or disapprove them. Or,
one might consider a painting good because it is pleasing to the eyes when looking
at it. Or, someone could not appreciate a piece of music because it disturbs and is
irritating to one’s tympanic membrane and is therefore judged to be bad. These
valuations or judgments require the sense of approval or disapproval depending on
whether or not they have good appeal to the senses. But they are not valuations in
the realm of ethics. These are known as aesthetic valuations.
Quite a number of times people use this type of valuation in different situations.
People make judgments but they have nothing to do with morality or ethics. It is
important that people know that they are not making a judgment that has moral
implication but simply a manner of making an appreciation relative to their senses.
Technical Valuations. Some things are considered right or wrong depending on

whether or not the proper manner of doing them has been respected. This type of
valuation is within the realm of technical valuation. When baking a cake, one must
see to it that the right procedure and right amount of ingredients are respected. If
they have been respected, chances are the result of the effort in baking will be good.
If not respected, the cake might taste bad. In the same manner, as a driver, most
likely, passengers will be anxious if the driver does not execute the proper rules of
driving. Driving too fast or sudden stops will make passengers uncomfortable and
fear an eminent danger. We say that the driver is either a good or a bad driver. These
examples are not; however, properly considered within the realm of ethics but are
proper to technical knowledge and skills.
2. Etiquette. People approve or may disapprove about certain ways of doing. For
example, inside a library, I see to it that I do not make noise because people inside
need to concentrate on their studies. Or, I greet my teachers when I happen to meet
them along the school corridor. Knocking at the door before entering an office is
perceived to be the proper manner. These ways of doing are judged to be the proper
observation of certain standards or etiquette but are not judged according to ethical
standards. Individuals who demonstrate the proper etiquettes are appreciated and
those who lack them are not. However, there is a need to properly distinguish what
is in the realm of etiquette and one which is beyond this realm. It is a good
demonstration of a good etiquette when offering a seat to an elderly inside a bus for
the person to feel more comfortable and safer but it would be utterly deplorable if
you push an elderly out of the bus while it is in motion (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018).
3. Acts of Man versus Human Acts. The distinction between acts of man versus
human acts will further help to consider certain activities that absolutely imply no
coloration of ethical concern and one which is clearly within the domain of
morality. The acts of man refers to the involuntary activities that are necessary to
sustain human life, like in the case of breathing, the continuous beating of the heart

and involuntary movements of the intestines and lungs. They are crucial activities
that sustain life and without them, life ceases to exist. Other than that, other natural
acts like speaking, hearing, eating and walking are also natural acts but have no
moral implication as such.
On the other hand, helping someone in need and other gestures that relieve people
from their uncomfortable or disadvantaged experience or from their sufferings,
making people suffer and placing them in difficult situation are human acts.
Understandably, the activities categorized as acts of man carry no ethical valuation.
But those that fall under the category of human acts call for moral or ethical
considerations.
After the discussion on the different categories and situations that do not enter the
category of moral valuation, let us now consider situations and issues which call
for moral valuation or fall under the realm of morality or ethics. Below are two
situations in which moral valuations are called upon.
Valuations that Involve Moral or Ethical Valuations
1. Moral problems according to Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) “involve valuations that belong
to the sphere of human actions characterized by certain gravity and concern the
wellbeing or human life itself.” Pre-meditating or making a plan how to kill another is
an act that qualifies under moral problems. Or, deciding whether to allow passive
euthanasia to happen is a decision with gravity and concerns the well-being or human
life itself. These and other acts relative to one’s well-being and the well-being of others
involve ethical or moral valuations. Furthermore, an act may not directly be an affront
to human life but its consequences are clearly indicative of serious threat. Open pit
mining is certainly an activity that is intended to benefit people involved in it. However,
it is a system that seriously damage nature resulting to environmental catastrophe
beyond imagination affecting the lives of people living in the vicinity. In fact, it might
even result to more damages resulting to natural imbalance with greater impact
affecting an entire region and beyond.
2. Something is about moral problem when it violates certain standards. Example,

cultural practices and values are perceived as standards of behaviour. Unrespectful
attitudes are judged as wrong. Among Filipinos, a very strong cultural element is
respect to the elderly. Anyone who treats the elderly with respect is considered a person
of excellent moral upbringing. However, anyone who treats the elderly with disdain is
unethical. It is ethically right to respect the elderly and ethically wrong to disrespect
them.
A religious belief may also qualify as a standard of this nature. The religious conviction
that it is a call to assist someone in need is a moral demand and maybe a moral imperative.
Thousands of people and maybe more are deeply motivated by such conviction that it is an
ethical obligation to help others who are in need. People do not hesitate to give their all-out
support and donate whatever they can to victims of devastating natural calamities. Imagine

what happened to Tacloban and other events that triggered so much anguish and loss of lives.
People moved by their compassion and religious commitment offered whatever they could
without a second thought to save lives and ease the effect of almost annihilating circumstances.
In the same vein of ideas, an act is a moral problem if it violates certain moral standards.
The examples below of moral standards will clarify this perspective.
a. “That we should not use people.”

b. “That we should not kill one person to save another.”
c. “That every life is sacred.”
d. “That it is wrong to discriminate against the handicapped” (Rachels, 2003)
These moral rules or standards imply that these help us live a morally acceptable
fashion. Their violation would be judged as morally or ethically wrong or incorrect. There are
other standards and principles of these kind. They are considered standards by which we pattern
our life and tell us whether we are morally upright or unethical in the way we live. These
standards are particularly valuable and make sense when we experience extreme difficulty and
the easier way out is their violation.
In any culture and as a way of life, most of us agree that honesty is the best policy. It is
expected that in any situation one should always be honest. One’s value of honesty is especially
challenged when one is in a difficult situation like that of deprivation. At this moment, a person
is tempted to give up honesty if it would become a way out of the situation of deprivation. I
might consider stealing as an option knowing that it will relieve me from my discomfort and
respond to certain needs. Before acting however on such alternative, the individual makes a
thorough consideration how the act can possibly affect the people who would be victim or
victims of the act and what it implies to the individual himself or herself. Is the act worth
considering? Are there other alternatives that are better than stealing and will not negatively
affect others or make them suffer? Doing acts that violate moral rules and in broader sense
principles are not easily acted upon because they call for moral judgment and people know
they are violating important principles.
Activity
In the same group, discuss why only human beings can be ethical.
Why only human beings can be ethical?
From St. Thomas Aquinas point of view, the human being is ethical because the human
person has the rational soul. If plants according to him have the vegetative soul and animals
have sentient soul, only human beings have the rational soul, the highest form of soul. Plants
may have the capacity to feel but they are incapable of responding being unable to move and
express their feelings. Animals may have more than what plants possess and are capable of
movements but possess no capacity for understanding. They have limited capacity and cannot
exercise judgement. Rationality which individuals or human beings possess allows them to be

aware of their situation and their environment. Their consciousness and their ability to think
make them capable of making judgment. These capacities allow them to foresee the
consequences of their actions and make a judgment about the rightness or wrongness of their
actions. Only human beings have this capacity. Hence, according to St. Thomas, we can ascribe
morality only to human beings.
Also, the ethical assumptions; namely, free will and reason are important bases that
determine why only human beings can be ethical. Reason or rationality and freedom are
important elements to determine whether actions are within the realm of morality or not. For
without such assumptions no amount or degree of ethical valuation can be ascribed to an act.
Only human beings have them, which make them the only ethical beings. (This will be further
discussed in the topic dealing specifically with the moral assumptions.) We also add the
element of conscience or the inner voice that tells one about the rightness or wrongness of an
act. It is an aspect only true to human beings. Conscience tells us whether or not we did what
we ought to do and whether we have done the right thing or the opposite. It makes one happy
or comfortable when he or she knows the right thing was done and feels guilty or suffers from
deep sense of remorse knowing that what was wrong has been committed. The three; reason,
freedom and conscience altogether determine therefore why only human beings can be ethical.
Another authority explains that human beings have rules, principles, desires (the desire
to do what is good), consciousness, sensitivity to higher order (ability to recognize God) and
AKRASIA (Greek word for courage). AKRASIA or courage is ability. As ability it has a
double meaning. Someone can have the ability to do something unacceptable or otherwise it
also signifies ability to do something acceptable. Doing something moral or ethical, or immoral
or unethical depends on one’s courage to do it. Whether acceptable or unacceptable, it requires
the persistence of doing it. When one insists on doing something, it requires the courage to do
it.
What is moral experience and how moral rule is born?
Professor Bitanga explains how moral rule is born. For instance, you found a wallet that
contains 5,000 pesos and an ATM card with the pin number as well! Something inside
tells you to get it but at the same time you remember the prohibition; “Thou shall not steal.”
That is a moral experience and where moral rule is born. It calls for judgment.
Summary
Moral rule constitutes a moral situation that calls for or requires moral judgment to do
good or the opposite. This knowledge of what constitute moral problems as well as the
parameters to identify them is significant so that individuals are guided when they make
decisions. By that, one considers with seriousness their plans before acting, considering their
consequences and the principles that can possibly be violated by the acts. It is important
because individuals whose actions imply moral valuations also imply moral responsibilities.
Therefore, one cannot just ignore actions that carry with them important ethical implications.

It is probably the mistake of many who confuse moral actions with those without. If
people think that whatever actions they do are just any other action, there is a danger of ignoring
their actual responsibility over the action. Without having to make distinction between those
morally loaded and those that carry no moral significance, people make instant decisions and
act instinctively knowing that they have no responsibility over them. If we think in this manner,
we lose the chance to be better individuals and become a “neighbor” to others. With such
thinking, we permit ourselves to make promises without the intention of fulfilling them.
Deceiving others will make no difference at all.
Assessment
Identify the items below as non-moral (NM) (has nothing to do with morality) or moral
(M). Write your answer on the space before the item.
_______ 1. Changing landmark position in the evening.

_______2. No children below ten years old are allowed.
_______3. Abort fetuses with severe deformation.
_______4. Quarreling children.
_______5. Throwing of garbage in the river.
_______6. Criticizing someone in the social media.
_______7. No leashing of animals.
_______8. Telling someone jokingly that her parents had a serious accident.
_______9. Receiving gifts from your clients.
_______10. Not observing silence inside the library.
Reflection
Do I make decisions and do certain acts without assuming responsibility over them? Do
I make decisions without reflecting first on their possible consequences? Am I not impulsive
in my actions?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Moral Dilemma
Introduction
It is expected that you have a clear grasp now of what is moral and non-
moral valuation. Also the differences of human acts and acts of man.
Now, the topic on moral dilemma is of significance. People especially the youth are
easily perturbed when they are confronted to make choices in their life. They do not know how
to deal with their problems and make choices to solve them. Their reaction is maybe to ignore
a pressing problem for lack of knowledge or skill to solve it, or that they just allow the problem
to persist which at the end of the day becomes more complicated and therefore more difficult
to solve.
Technology has made life very easy. Our life has been taken over by the invention of
instant technology. You name it; instant food, instant clothing, instant domicile, instant
information and people are getting married instantly without having to know much about their
future partner. This instant thing has psychologically made a deep imprint in the mind and
attitudes of people. People avoid what is complicated and those that demand significant effort
and anything that takes time. In fact, people avoid reading that takes time and thinking requiring
patience and energy on their part. Everybody prefers whatever is easily available and in unison
with the Frenchman they can say: Voila! Or, in Spain, Presto! People want to be like the
magician who makes things appear even in the most unusual and unexpected ways.
The problem; however, with this system is that it doesn’t work all the time. There are
more complicated matters that require deliberation and hard work to deal with them. At this
time, the instant choices or solutions do not apply anymore. The too easy life we live do not
prepare us to face the more complex situations. Too often, we live with unresolved problems
and undetermined solutions. Hence, the topic on moral dilemmas can help people decipher and
make choices.

Learning Outcome
1. Explain moral dilemma;
2. Demonstrate decision making in moral dilemma;
3. Perform the series of making choices in moral dilemma; and
A student gets a warning from parents that getting into a relationship and getting
pregnant while studying will mean discontinuance of all support to continue her studies.
Despite such warnings and admonitions, the student disobeyed and is now two months
pregnant. What is she going to do? She is afraid to tell her parents about her situation otherwise
her parents will tell her to stop studying. But she wants to finish her studies.
The predicament is, what to do in such a case? Will she resort to abortion and continue
her studies, or, tell her parents about her present status seeing the evil of abortion and continue
her pregnancy but stop schooling? What is a good alternative to her problem?
Instructions. You are given 10 to 15 minutes to be able to come up with a solution to the
question of what should be the right thing to do. Continue the pregnancy and stop schooling
or, abort the baby and continue her studies? You may choose your partner or do it with a T-
chart for your guide.
Moral dilemmas are not rare. We often experience making choices in the face of
conflicting situations. Others are courageous to make up their mind and face their problems.
Many; however, are stuck and cannot make proper decisions. Or, they remain undecided and
allow others to make decisions for them. Let us face it, quite a number of students are not ready
to decide. Decision making is an everyday challenge that people make in their life but there are
no classes to teach about making decisions.
What is a moral dilemma? Moral dilemma is a situation of conflict. This occurs when
two moral points are in conflict and are confused. Or, it is a “more complicated situation
wherein one is torn between choosing one of two goods and choosing between the lesser of
two evils… We have a moral dilemma when there are a number of possible actions and there
are compelling ethical reasons for the various choices” but only one can be given preference
and set aside all the rest (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018). In the first case where one has to choose
between two goods, let us study the case of Miss X who is offered a good paying job locally.
However, she has always dreamt of working abroad. She fears however that working abroad
would separate her from her family and the idea of separation makes her sad. She cannot divide
herself and choose the two possibilities. What would be a better choice for Miss X? In the

second case, let us consider the situation of a poor mother whose daughter is hungry but her
situation does not permit her to buy her daughter the food she needs. But she can steal food so
that her daughter can eat. What would be her choice? Allow her daughter to go hungry or steal
food for her to be able to eat? A situation of dilemma is complicated or difficult because out of
two or several choices, there is only one choice to make. What makes it more complicated is
that there are cases when both choices are evil. Which is the lesser of the two evils?
3 Different Levels of Moral Dilemma
Moral dilemmas are categorized into three levels: personal, organizational and
structural.
Personal Dilemma. It pertains to choices affecting the individual himself or herself.

The example mentioned above relating to the problem of schooling and pregnancy is a personal
dilemma that an individual has to resolve. Personal dilemma may also involve problems
between individuals. For instance, in a company, two very efficient employees who are both
married get involved in a relationship. Company regulations sanction married individuals who
are involved in illegitimate relationships. Having known about such relationship, what should
the other employees do about it? Suppose they tell the administration about this illicit
relationship. According to the rules, both of them would face termination from their
employment. But the people are aware about their importance for the company because of their
qualifications. Terminating these employees would be unfavorable for the company. If they
don’t, they condone illicit and immoral relationship within the company. The moral dilemma
here is clearly whether or not for the other employees to tell the administration about the
existing illicit relationship of the two employees of the company.
Organizational Dilemma. Examples of this type of dilemma would refer to business,

medical and public sector/company situation. Organizational dilemma has a broader scope and
would tend to affect every member of the organization. Solutions arrived at also have an impact
on the life of each member.
Structural Dilemma. This dilemma would include an entire network of an institution

and operative theoretical paradigm. The approval of the Bangsa Moro Law would fall under
this category of dilemma. It has the broadest scope of influence and impact of the three levels.
In the example given, the impact and effect of the approval would not only affect the people
where the law would be applied, but the entire archipelago. It is said that Mindanao desires to
have its autonomy. If you were to decide on this, would you approve the proposed law or not.
Approval of the law could mean peace and order in the region. But the move might result
finally to complete separation of the region. If the proposed law should not be approved,

chances are; the peace and order in the region will continue to be a major problem and will
continue to drain the national budget, the maintenance of strong army presence and conflict
being heavily taxed on it. What is a good alternative to follow?
Activity
Buzz Session. Group yourselves into five. Recall or think of a moral situation
where a moral dilemma is involved. Present the conflicting moral rules. Apply the steps for
moral analysis to resolve the dilemma.
ACTS WITH DOUBLE EFFECTS
In cases, an act performed produces two different consequences, one good and
the other evil, the act is said to have double effect.
In complete ignorance - the wrongful consequence is completely unexpected and

unintended.
In double effect- the wrongful consequence is expected and it can either be

unintended or intended.
So: A person whose act results in an evil effect, has diminished moral responsibility
over the wrongful consequence of his action if: 1. The act that brings about the double
effect is in itself good or morally different. The attainment of the good effect is the
intended effect. The evil effect is not perceived as a means to bring about the good
effect.
For acts with double effects, the extent of moral responsibility is determined
by two general rules according to Duka, 2000.
1. The moral responsibility is perfect or aggravated if the person

intends the evil effect and the act performed bring the evil effect is in
itself wrongful.
2. It is exempted or diminished if the person intends the good effect and the
act performed to bring it about is in itself good.( Credit to the author
from which these notes were taken)
Summary

Moral dilemmas are situations when people face difficulties in making choices
or choosing an alternative from at least two or several possibilities that may be bad or evil.
Making a choice is not always easy especially when alternatives are either disadvantageous or
evil.
Exposure to the three levels of moral dilemma is important for you as students It is a
necessity to be aware that becoming a part of a larger community or institution will require
participation in a more complex moral situation or dilemma.
Getting involved in some complicated situations does not come from nowhere. These
originate from something. Your knowledge on moral dilemma and moral analysis can now
make you a wiser and better decision maker. You think twice before engaging in any gray
area. Somehow, it will help you avoid to be in complicated moral situations. It is important to
remember that deliberation is worthy of consideration prior to any decision or action.
Assessment
Identification. Identify whether the level of moral dilemma is personal,
organizational or structural for each of the moral dilemmas below. Write your answer on
the space provided before the item. (10 points)
_______________1. Getting married with a long boyfriend or with a foreigner who is offering
a good life in America.
_______________2. Changing the form of government from the presidential type to
federalism.
_______________3. Taking turns in the parish assignment of all the priests in the diocese every
three or five years.
_______________4. Maintaining State College and University tuition and miscellaneous fees
or opting for free tuition and miscellaneous scheme but with mandatory
return of service.
_______________5. Charging criminal offense starting 15 year of age or at 18.
_______________6. Choosing between father or mother custody in case of legal separation of
parents for older children.
_______________7. For a transgender to undergo sex transplant or not.
_______________8. Mandatory or random drug testing for all university students.
_______________9. No uniform or with uniform policy for university students.
_______________10. Adoption of national identity card or not.
Reflection
I am deeply aware that I face situations involving moral dilemma. Do I have the
courage to face them? Have I not been too coward that I deny the presence of a problem and I

cannot face it squarely? Had there been situations that my human actions were with double
effects. How did these taught me lessons and what did I resolve?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Moral Assumptions (Foundation of Morality)
Introduction
Certain assumptions are essential in ethics. Acts are considered moral or immoral,
ethical or unethical, acceptable or unacceptable because of these assumptions. These
assumptions are necessary because without them, no moral valuation can be passed on to
certain acts. Here, we speak of reason and freedom as necessary assumption of moral
valuation. Acts can only be judged to be moral or immoral, ethical or unethical when these
assumptions are present. Their absence makes these acts morally or ethically valueless. In some
references, moral assumptions are referred to as the elements of morality. This means that
without reason, freedom and voluntariness an act is not moral or ethical.
What are assumptions and what makes them so important? To illustrate their meaning
and significance, let us take the example of my duty to do my work. It is assumed that when I
report to work that I will be doing my job. The company or organization that hired me assumes
that I will perform the tasks for which I was hired. For that reason, the company pays me for
the services I render to it. The company assumes that I am doing my job. If it does not, there is
no reason for it to keep me and pay me. Assumption is therefore based on the belief that I am
doing my job whether or not it is true that I am doing it. The significance of that assumption is
that the company pays my salary. Because if it does not, it has ceased to believe that I am doing
my task or the assumption no longer stands to be true. Let us see why assumptions are necessary
components of morality or ethics.
Learning Outcomes
1. Define moral assumption;
2. Identify the assumptions of ethics or morality; and

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

Decide whether the situation below suggests moral implication.
Suppose, the children in the neighborhood are playing one morning. As is the case when
children play, they end up quarrelling. Suppose a boy pushes a playmate who falls down and
starts to bleed immediately. With this scenario, consider whether the boy who pushed the
playmate is morally responsible or not. Articulate your reaction.
One crucial assumption in making moral valuation of certain acts and ascribing moral
responsibility to a moral agent is reason. Reason is the first element of a human act. We
assume that any person is a thinking being. By that, he or she is aware of the purpose of his or
her action. Furthermore, this assumption is also true about the consequences of such action.
Meaning, the person is also aware of the effects of the act. In other words, the person can make
judgment whether an action is right or wrong. Through reason, one can assess the rightness or
the wrongness of an act.
By this, we understand that it is not possible to ascribe moral responsibility to a child

who is way below the age of reason. The child cannot make a judgment whether his or her act
is right or wrong. By the same token, we cannot judge the action of an insane person as right
or wrong because the person has no way of evaluating the rightness or the wrongness of his or
her act. Reason, therefore, is essential before we can ascribe moral valuation to any act or any
moral responsibility to the doer of the act. Hence, only acts performed with deliberation or
performed by anyone who knows the consequences of the act are moral or ethical acts.
When reason cannot be ascribed to such acts, absolutely no moral implication is

applicable. One can get so mad over an act performed by 3-year old child but we are in no
position to ascribe to the child any form of moral or ethical guilt or responsibility. Reason
therefore is absolutely required or is assumed to be a basis for declaring the rightness or
wrongness of an act.
Second element or assumption is freedom. It is considered an important element in

making moral valuation and without which, no amount of reasoning can justify the ethical
value of an act. We say, moral action can only emanate from individuals who act according to
their choice or free will to do good. Moral valuation and moral responsibility cannot therefore
be ascribed to actions devoid of the freedom to act and as such they are not qualified as moral

action. Forcing someone to do an act will not make the person morally responsible for the
action taken. For instance, forcing someone to contract marriage, this individual may later
separate from the partner. Should the person act on that possibility, his action is without moral
implication and is free to act on it because there was no marriage at all that took place since
the person was forced under the threat of being killed or for any other reason.
An act is considered human act with moral responsibility when it is undertaken on

the basis of free choice or with a sense of freedom. Without the element of freedom, no amount
of explanation can declare someone morally responsible over the act.
Summary
Filipinos easily blame others for certain actions committed. We have the commonly
used expression: “Kasalanan mo ang nangyari.” (What happened was your fault.) Analyzing
such accusation, we realize that it has some tone of moral valuation or judgment. Kasalanan is
sin and in the Filipino context, the utilization of the word is ethically loaded with strong
religious connotation. A person who commits sin has a moral responsibility and has also
offended God not only another person to whom the moral agent has done something wrong. A
person who is accused in these terms, may finally end up accepting not only that he or she is
at fault but more significantly, accepts that he or she, is a bad person if he/she will use the
catholic equivalent of moral significance and does not conform to God’s law or
commandments.
Based on the discussion above, there is a need to be extra cautious about accusing
someone to have committed a sin or is morally guilty even when evidences favor it. To ascertain
the full implication of any accusation, there is a need to clarify it vis-a-vis the two moral
assumptions of reason and freedom. Too often, Filipinos make others suffer from moral and
religious perspectives when it should not be the case because the act is not grounded on the
assumptions of reason and freedom.
One who acts with complete or deliberate reason and freedom or voluntariness
has the full moral responsibility of the consequences of his actions.
Assessment
Short Answer Question. Answer briefly the following.

1. Without freedom can someone be considered morally responsible to his moral
actions and decisions? Explain why or why not?
2. Mr. X is a young lad but has proven medically to be mentally ill. Due to
hardship in life, his parents could not afford to bring him to the mental hospital
for further treatment. One day, Mr. X was standing at their front yard and Miss Y, a
young beautiful student passed by. Mr. X suddenly grabbed the lady on her long
hair causing the lady to stumble and had her knees injured. Is Mr. X. morally
responsible for his action towards Miss Y? Explain.
3. Boy X is a three year old naughty boy. He happened to break an expensive

jar in the National Museum considered to be a precious artefact by the curators/
museum authorities. Now, people are confuse about the situation. Is the boy
morally accountable for his action? Why? How about the parents? Why?
4. Mr. X is found guilty of committing murder. After he was placed under

psychological evaluation, as part of the standard investigation, the psychologist
found out that Mr. X was suffering from acute psychological disorder called
paranoia. If you were to analyze his case, is Mr. X morally responsible for his
action? Why?
Reflection
Has it not been often the case that I am unforgiving to others and try not to understand
their situation? Am I not too judgmental especially to people who cannot defend themselves?
Have I given the full “ benefit of the doubt” to actions of others before making the
judgment on their actions?

The Minimum Requirement (Elements) of Morality: Reason
and Impartiality
Introduction
Under certain situations, most people would almost always try to get most if not all the
benefits that they could possibly derive. When decisions are to be undertaken, they grab all
advantages for themselves and leave nothing to other people concerned because they claim it
is their right. Oftentimes decisions are one-sided by obstinately believing that we have all the
rights and others do not have. This is a biased or subjective way of looking for solutions to
conflicts or problems. People decide which is more favorable for them taking all the possible
advantages and never consider the interest of others who might be affected by the solutions
arrived at.
The topic on the minimum requirement or conception of morality aims at helping

people to be objective in their decisions. This perspective requires the consideration of the
interests of the people who would be affected by any decision. Very often, an acceptable
decision to all parties that may be involved is difficult to reach because decisions only favor
one party and not the others. For instance, when siblings will have to divide their inheritance,
the eldest desires always to get the larger or the best of it. When dividing a property like land
inheritance, the eldest among the siblings would always want to apportion what is to his or her
advantage and never to consider the interests of the younger siblings. Alternatives in such a
case are never fair and do not represent a good solution. Fairness is difficult to achieve. Let us
give it a try by considering reason and impartiality.
Learning Outcomes
1. Express objectivity in decision making;
2. Analyze moral situations; and
3. Resolve conflicts or problems on the basis of moral obligation.
Give examples of conflict where people are not able to arrive at an equitable solution
to a problem or so called difficult situation that people do not know how to resolve it.
Definitions do not make one instantly moral but it is by trying to be. To help us continue
in our journey to appropriate what is morally right and avoid what can possibly lead us to be
just the opposite; let us consider the “minimum conception of morality” by James Rachels
(2003). He says: “Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason –
that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing – while giving equal weight to the
interests of each individual who will be affected by what one does.”
Rachels(2003) mentions two important things; reason and impartiality. When deciding,
he suggests that one should have a good reason or reasons for deciding so. A good reason is
not one that is one-sided or looks only at the interest of the one making the decision. “When I
decide and I look only at the advantages I get from my decision; it does not make me a better
moral agent.” He describes what it takes to be a better moral agent. He describes an enlightened
moral agent as a conscientious moral agent.
A conscientious moral agent according to him is the one who is concerned impartially.
That means someone who considers the interests of everyone affected by what one does or
decides. The conscientious moral agent takes every effort to carefully analyze every fact and
examines their implications and consequences if they will be acted upon; accepts principles of
conducts only after having scrutinized them to be sure that they are acceptable not only for the
one deciding but including everyone who will be affected by the decision later on. Further,
Rachels insists that a conscientious moral agent is the one who is willing “to listen to reason”
which means that the moral agent is willing to make changes or revise earlier conviction.
Finally, the conscientious moral agent is willing to act on the bases of such deliberations.
Summary
Learning to be impartial is too often difficult and painful because it implies the
willingness to give up some of our interests in favor of others’ interests. People cannot simply
give up certain advantages because they have been so used to it that losing them is unacceptable
and would require sometimes a radical change in their life.
For example, giving up a business enterprise which one has been managing for a long
time but legally does not belong to him or to her would not be easy. It would demand radical
shift in one’s life – habits, lifestyle, economic status, associations, security and even one’s
identity.
To be impartial means “free from biases”. It is the readiness to re-examine facts and
data and willingness to re-consider past decisions and adopt new ones. To be able to achieve
this, it would necessitate appealing to reason. Only a rational person would be willing to
change, challenge traditions, consider one’s real duties and obligations and to be selfless in
one’s perspective and in making decisions. Like Rachels’s reflection, it would take a
conscientious moral agent who is willing to “listen to reason” and act accordingly.

Assessment
Answer the following questions shortly by starting with Yes, because

…. and No, because….
1. Is reason indispensable for an informed for moral decision?

__________________________________________________________________
2. Impartiality necessary to resolve conflicts?

__________________________________________________________________
3. And you apply impartiality when you are involved in a case?

________________________________________________________________ if
__________________________________________________________________
4. Mr. X and Mrs. Y are both illegal drug users. They both snatched from
victims in the public crowded places, transport and other possible avenues.
Are they morally accountable or not?
__________________________________________________________________
Reflection
Am I overwhelmed by my emotion too often and make decisions that are

unreasonable? Did I not put aside my education and make relentless pursuit even of the
innocent just to satisfy my desire to avenge or take advantage? Are not my decisions
too often inconsiderate and prejudicial or so bias of others? How can I be more
reasonable and fair in my own actions and of judging others’ actions.
Standards of Moral Valuation Based on the Self

Introduction
In the preceding discussions, it was clear that the standards we refer to when making
moral judgments originate from external sources – culture, rules, practices, authority, and the
like. It came out that outside references have been considered too strongly influence people’s
decisions and choices.
In this topic, the concern is to point out that not only external references do exist in
making moral valuations but also, there are moral valuations inspired by personal choices
therefore originating from a more subjective or internal point of view.

In fact, the new generation would feel very much that way. They would rather consider
their own thoughts and opinions when deciding on certain matters and less on what others
might say about what they think is right or wrong. They are freer and more independent. Or,
perhaps they would give importance to their feelings and emotions if they have to decide on
something. That is their natural way and they are quite known for that – the millennials.
Whereas before when traditions had strong influence on people, everybody was quite
concerned about one’s reputation in the community. People would always consider what people
around them might say about their decisions or about what they are going to do or are actually
doing. Therefore, it is not impossible to say that one should not rely on any external authority
to tell oneself what standards of moral valuations to follow, but we should instead turn inwards.
We look now into three theories about ethics that focus on the self: subjectivism,
psychological egoism and ethical egoism.
Learning Outcomes:
1. Identify the different subjective standards as frame of reference for
moral valuation;
2. Analyze each of these subjective standards; and 3. Use these frame of
references in decision making.
In a small group, share your personal references or bases when making a decision? Are
there personal guides that help you come up with a stance or a decision?
Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) discussed the three senses of the self as these are presented
below.
1. Subjectivism
It suggests that the individual thinking person is at the heart of all moral valuations. The
person is the one confronted with the situation and is burdened with the need to make decision
or judgment. From this point of view, subjectivism leaps to the more radical claim that the
individual is the sole determinant of what is morally good or bad, right or wrong. Bulaong Jr.
et al. suggest some clichés expressive of this mentality:
• “No one can tell me what is right and wrong.”
• “No one knows my situation better than myself.”
• “I am entitled to my own opinion.”
• “It is good, if I say that it is good.”
2. Criticism: There is something appealing about these statements because they seem to
express personal independence. But a closer look at these statements, reveal real problems of
subjectivism. It is probable that out of extreme situation and profound disappointment, people
may possibly console themselves with these clichés. But objectively; however, we may ask
ourselves how many times did we make decisions and found out that we were wrong. Or, we
failed to recognize that our experience is practically just a speck in comparison to the
profoundness of the experience of others. Or, if only we can be honest and humble enough,
then we would admit that our opinions are not as founded as the opinions of more mature
people and less wiser than the opinion of the most foolish among us. And that finally, we realize
that the initial good/decision is not as good as we thought it was.
3. Psychological Egoism
It is a theory that describes the underlying dynamic behind all human actions. As a
descriptive theory, it does not direct one to act in a particular way. Instead, it points out that by
nature, humans are self-interested and are after their own satisfaction and therefore in all their
undertakings they are ultimately looking for self-fulfillment and satisfaction, aware or
unaware. As such, the ego or self has its desires and interests and all actions are geared toward
the satisfaction of these interests. It would seem that there is no problem with this position if
we consider actions done on a daily basis: watch a movie, read books, entertain visitors, etc. It
is acknowledged that we do things in pursuit of some interests all the time. The question;
however, is do we try to consider actions that normally are directed toward others?
Consider for instance the act of generosity. The position of the psychological egoist is that
he or she would maintain that underlying such apparently other-oriented behavior is a
selfinterested desire, even when it is not being acknowledged or that the doer is not conscious
of it. Helping another might seem an act of altruism. But the psychological egoist has inherent
self-interest in expressing an act of service. In the end, the act no matter how it appears to be
other-oriented, it is by nature an act that is self-serving.
4. Ethical Egoism
Ethical egoism differs from psychological egoism in that the latter does not suppose
that all actions undertaken are self-serving. But ethical egoism is a position that self-interest
and personal ends are the single overriding concern. Ethical egoism is totally driven by selfish
motive with no interest or concern for another. Actions are taken with the sole concern that the
ultimate benefit will be for the self. One considers oneself as the sole priority and does not
allow any other concern benefiting another. Ethical egoism is totally motivated by
selfsatisfaction and nothing more.
Summary
There are certainly individuals who are influenced or work with the three senses of the
self – subjectivism, psychological egoism and ethical egoism. They work from the perspective
of the self. The self is their only point of reference in terms of their logic, choices, and decisions.

There can be no problem with this since it is normal that individuals think and plan according
to their needs, desires, their feelings or emotions and according to what they think is the right
thing to do. They plan according to what is pleasurable or what makes sense for them. However,
the problem with this is when people absolutize the self as their sole point of reference
preventing them to see things from others’ point of views.
The world is not only about our world. The world is also a “we-world” according to the
existentialist philosopher, Heidegger. He further explains that this “we-world” is to be
understood in the sense of “being-with-others-in-the-world.” It means that we are not alone in
this world but that we share the world with others. By so doing we transform it and as a
consequence of that collaboration, I am also transformed as well as the other. Mutual
recognition and sharing makes our existence more meaningful. More so, we include others
now in our moral valuations, that is, we become more considerate of the situation and more
generous of the advantages and interests of others.
The challenge therefore for people who view things only from their own perspective
would be to learn to accept others in their life and view things from this new perspective shared
with others. It would be something totally different if one could see and feel the world from
another’s point of view. Psychologists call this empathy, the ability of an individual to feel what
others subjectively feel. When one is capable of this, we become more understanding of the
person because we have understood him or her the way one understands oneself. With this, our
judging will no longer only be based from the perspective of the self but it will include the
other’s perspective.
Assessment
Categorize the following situations among the different senses of the self or
subjective standards. Choose the letter of your answer based on the following choices
and write it on the space before each item.
A. Subjectivism B. Psychological Egoism C. Ethical Egoism
_________1. I know I am right at this one, no one else.

_________2. It is alright, I will lend you that much but you have to grant favor to my
requests.
_________3. People want always something in return to the service they render.
_________4. I will never get involved in politics. There is nothing I can get from it.
_________5. Nobody can really grasp the depth of the problem I am going through.
_________6. You are wasting your time and money; I will never join your organization for it
has nothing to offer me.
_________7. Those people pretending to be philanthropist want prestige, honor and glory.

_________8. Trust no one, trust only yourself!
_________9. No matter how you convince that they are good and sincere Christians, deep in
their hearts, they are afraid of going to hell that is why they give alms to the
poor.
_________10. Nobody could convince her. She had the absolute idea that what she did was the
right one.
Reflection
Have I outgrown my childish perspective? Have I learned to see things from the
perspective of others? Am I ready and willing to accept others as they are and start a dialogue
with them? Have I been so self- centered, egoistic and selfish? What actions prove that
I am such. What must I begin to do now to improve myself. Am I ready to ask others’
opinion and conduct self- introspection? Sing the Song Who Am I popularized by Gary
Valenciano. Sing it. Then reflect and write your answer to every line asking Who am
I?
The Moral Agent

Unit
2
Culture and its Roles in Moral Behavior
Introduction
What is culture? Culture has been defined in many ways. Jomil C. Baring, CSSR
(www.academia.edu) citing Sir Edward Taylor defines culture as the “integrated pattern of
human knowledge, beliefs and behaviors. This consists of language, ideas, customs. morals,
laws, taboos, institutions, tools, techniques, and works of art, rituals and other capacities and
habits acquired by a person as a member of society.” By this definition, one realizes the
importance and the crucial influence culture has for an individual.
“I am what I am because of my culture. I am an embodiment of my culture. I am not

the perfect embodiment of my culture, no one is, but somehow, as I am, I represent my culture.”
Such proves how cultures shapes the morality of a person.

Every person born in a particular culture is an embodiment of his or her particular
culture. From this, we can confidently say that culture is the basis of one’s behavior, on which
the moral fabric of an individual is patterned. People act, think and live according to the culture
in which they are part of. And nobody is culture-free as we are always part of a society as
succinctly expressed by the definition.
What is the role of culture in moral behavior? Culture as fundamentally the basis of
people’s moral behavior is the short and precise answer to the question. Culture becomes the
basis of our moral valuation as we evaluate the rightness or wrongness of our decision and
action according to the values and codes of our culture.
Learning Outcomes
1. Describe how culture serves as bases of morality;
2. Identify the relationship of culture and morality; and
3. Relate the aspects of moral development to real life situations.

1. In the small group, answer the question: What is culture?
2. What are those that we consider elements of our culture? Give examples.
In a seminar in which culture was a subtopic, one participant, a former member of the
Society of Jesus, described what culture is in the following terms: Culture is equal PERSIA,
where:
P = Political
E = Economic
R = Religion
S = Social (Society)
I = Intellectual and A = Artistic
Therefore, C (culture) = P+ E + R + S + I +A (PERSIA)
The participant made an interesting explanation about PERSIA. He explained that all
these elements are part of culture. They all interact to make a culture; each cultural element
having a particular role but having the same importance. He said that all that we are, all that
we say, all that we think, all that we produce including our point of references in life are part
of our culture. Culture penetrates each fabric of our personal and social life.
Cultural Elements

The following are the elements of culture:
Time. Something that is part of culture must endure time. If it does not last, it might just be a
fad.
Place. A culture is limited in its coverage. It is limited in a particular place. It cannot be a

practice in all places, otherwise it is a universal phenomenon and it does not reflect the culture
of a particular place.
Player (persons). In the same manner as the place, culture is also limited to particular persons
living the particular culture. There has to be a people practicing the culture. If nobody practices
something, it is not culture. Culture gives an identity to a particular people. It is what makes
such a people unique.
Dynamism. A culture is not dead. It is alive. Cultures continue to develop or evolve to become
another culture.
The Role of Culture in Moral Development
Baring (www.academia.edu) discusses the elements of moral development in the

context of the society as distinguished from the Stages of Moral Development by Lawrence
Kohlberg. The following elements relative to culture influence moral development:
First, culture is always social and communal. Culture is learned in the context of the
society in which the person lives and expands his or her horizon. One’s relationship allows one
to learn and be influenced by the specific culture in which the person lives and mature. In such
condition, morality is promoted through the relationship in the community. Individuals learn
the moral codes of the right behavior and their opposites within that context of social
interaction. The people around the individual transmit those codes which the individual
acquires as he matures and develops intellectually, psychologically and socially. The pattern of
the person’s life is conditioned by the moral standards present in his or her culture.
Second, culture defines the normative principles and behavior of the society. Within the
culture are sets of principles that are encouraged to guide the manner in which people will have
to live. As such, there are behaviors that are recommended by the culture and the society that
practice them. This includes the moral norms that the society nurtures allowing the members
live and define what is right and wrong.
Third, culture, sets the restrictions and boundaries in the lives of people as they relate
and live in their community. In any society, not everything is tolerable as there are restrictions
in order to maintain a certain order to guarantee that each member is protected in the same
manner that the same member can protect others. Restrictions and boundaries are important to
any society because delinquent manners may always be present. As such, they serve as guide
to people’s behavior.

Fourth, culture helps generate the character and identity of its people and that includes
their moral character. The manners in which people live together give them their identity as a
unique group. The way people dress up, the way they greet each other, their food and even the
type of houses symbolize their uniqueness which outsiders notice with ease. Visitors and
tourists always make a way that before leaving a place they have visited to buy souvenir items
unique in the place. The uniqueness of a people is not only manifested in some form of souvenir
items, but the contact with them makes one aware that their true uniqueness and identity is
exemplified in their moral character.
It is well known in the Philippines that it exists in Batanes what is known as “honesty
stores.” These stores do not only represent the peculiar system the people of Batanes have
adapted but demonstrate more deeply a unique type of moral character expressed in their strong
sense of honesty.
Finally, culture identifies the authorities. They are the symbol of guidance and control.
During the earlier times, the elders had this great honor of having been looked up to because
of their experience. As such they were considered to be the “talisman” of their community who
offered wise and appropriate decisions to resolve conflicts and issues.
According to Baring (www.academia.edu), as the previous society was patriarchal by

nature, the elders were composed of the old men in communities. They were respected and
their decisions were upheld by the members of their communities. Their authority did not only
include the rules that govern their life – how they dealt with each other, family, work, social
interactions but they also considered the behavior of the members of the community. As such,
community moral code was determined by the council of elders. Sanctions were also decided
by them when rules and decisions were violated. It was important that there should be overseers
in the community to safeguard the peace and order whether it is internal or outside threat that
menaces their communal life.
Summary
People are what they are because of their culture. It gives them their identity, sense of
uniqueness and defines to a great extent their moral character. People behave in the way they
are according to the dictates of their cultural background and practices. It is difficult to imagine
how people would be without this great frame of reference for their life.
In the words of Jean Paul Sartre, “how can one get rid of bad faith and live freely
according to one’s free will and choices?” This may be a reaction similar to the reaction of
other existentialists. They were trying to point out the restrictions and limitations that culture
and traditions impose upon individuals. Culture has deep impact in molding people’s thoughts,
feelings and moral valuation and consequently in their behavior.
Same idea is confirmed by Lev Vygotsky, a prominent Russian psychologist who

believes that self-regulation or independent learning can only be achieved when a child has

learned the signs and symbols of one’s culture. It is an important indicator according to him of
the child’s ability to solve problems on his or her own.
Also, Gestalt psychology believes that to be able to understand a person, there is a need
to understand his or her environment. Individuals are part of their environment and we cannot
treat them apart from it. Hence, we can say that to understand ourselves, others and our
community, including the understanding of our moral behavior, it would be necessary that we
should know and understand our culture.
Assessment/ Evaluation
Complete the frame by identifying the strength and weaknesses of the following
Filipino traditions or practices. (20 points)
Weaknesses Practice/Tradition Strengths

_______________________ Family Orientednes ________________________
_______________________ Kadakilaan ________________________
_______________________ Pagkamatiisin ________________________
________________________ Bahala na ________________________
________________________ Pangangatuwiran ________________________
________________________ Bukas-loob ________________________
________________________ Kanyao ________________________
________________________ Pakikipagdalamhati ________________________
________________________Bayanihan ________________________
________________________ Katapangan ________________________
Reflection
Have I not been discriminating others because of their cultural background? Do I not
insist that my upbringing is better than those of others? Am I considerate of people not of my
own culture?

Cultural Relativism
Introduction
Are there universal truth and absolute objective reality? It would seem that such is not
the case because our exposure and knowledge about the different cultural realities tend to
provide us with ample evidences that there are other ways of thinking, believing and manners
of living. This implies that there is not one single existing culture but different cultures existing
side by side. Cultures of different people each having its own origin, practicing its own codes
and standards and having its own traditions are proofs of such co-existence.
Is there such a thing as universal culture? What is evident is cultural diversity. Cultural
relativism is undeniably present and the best people can do of their differences to mutually
respect one another. People coming from different origins and traditions will have to treat each
other as equals and co-exist in mutual respect and understanding. If such is the case, we need
to understand the implication of living our culture in the midst of other cultures.
In this topic, we will elucidate cultural relativism, its weaknesses and criticisms. The
enlightenment we can derive from the discussion might help us develop a critical attitude not
only toward other cultures but also toward our own culture.
Learning Outcomes
1. Define cultural relativism;
2. Analyze the criticisms and limitations of cultural relativism; and 3. Discover
the alternative ways of treating our own culture and others’.
Students may be grouped or individualized in their responses. Define culture in

differentiated tasks /activities. Rubrics answer the question: What is culture through
differentiated activities.

What is cultural relativism?
Nowadays, exchanges with and exposures to various cultural practices are not rare.
Modern technology allows people to travel faster and more conveniently that attract more
people to do just that and consequently experience living in another culture. Technology has
made possible what was unimaginable a few decades ago – information explosion. Information
has been made readily available through the internet connection. In terms of exposure,
communication technology has done more than what is needed and essential as we can be
connected to access information about different societies and cultures which make us all the
more deeply aware of the various ways of thinking and valuing different from our own. The
contacts people have with others and exposures to different ways of life have significant
consequences in the way they understand others and themselves. On this basis , people easily
conclude that it is acceptable to be different; it is the same with ethics. This means to say that
what is ethically or morally acceptable or unacceptable is dependent on a particular culture.
This manner of considering what is right or wrong based on cultural standard is known as
cultural relativism (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018).
Culture has now become the sole basis or morality; what is right or wrong is judged on
the basis of culture and its standards or codes. This implies that what is moral or ethical in one
culture may not be necessarily reflected in another. The rightness and wrongness of an act or
decision is entirely a cultural affair. Hence, something that is morally accepted in one culture
may not be in the case of another culture or what is wrong in another might be acceptable in
another. This is cultural relativism. Morality or ethics depends on the valuations of each
specific culture.
If this is the way how morality should be understood, authorities question whether this
is sound. Rachels (2003) asks whether it is alright that each culture makes its own judgment of
what is right or wrong. But what about if cultural practices in one culture allows genocide to
take place? Should we be silent about the genocide committed by the Nazi Germans to the Jews
during the Second World War? Or, should the excision of women in a particular African culture
which is extremely painful with certain irreversible biological and psychological changes in
the life of the African women be allowed to continue without criticizing the practice? Is there
not one right concept of how should things be? What is the answer?
If it would seem that the mother Eskimos of the north did not feel remorse killing their
baby girls and did it as if it were the most natural thing to do when there were too many girls
in the family, it would be the most shocking discovery in the life of an outsider. It is total
disrespect of human life and dignity and absolutely aberrant manner of treatment for the
innocent and helpless beings. However, much to our amazement, what these Eskimo mothers
were doing was exactly the protection the life of the entire family and their clan. Their natural
and physical environment was such that it was too harsh and unfriendly that people cannot
afford to have more liabilities or more mouth to feed as there was almost nothing to live on.
Should everyone be allowed to live, paradoxically; everyone disappears from the face of the
earth. Baby boys were favoured because they were potential hunters when they grow up but
the girls were definitely liabilities in such kind of extremely unfavourable geographical
conditions.

Why Cultural Relativism is Appealing
1. It gives us the freedom to act in the way we want to act. It means that we need not
adjust in a given situation knowing that there is diversity of valuation.
2. Cultural standards give us a basis for judging the rightness or wrongness of our own
action.
3. Cultural relativism allows us to be tolerant of others from other cultures.
Consequences of Cultural Relativism
1. We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to
our own.
2. We could decide the rightness or wrongness of our actions by consulting the
standards of our society.
3. The idea of moral progress is called onto doubt.
Difficulties of Cultural Relativism
Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) citing James Rachels presents some of the difficulties of
cultural relativism in the following terms:
1. We cannot say that any one moral valuation is the right one?
2. It is no longer possible to render any kind of judgment on the practice of
another society. But what if their practices strongly suggest and call for
criticism. Example, in the case of racism, genocide, etc.
3. It means also that under cultural relativism, we cannot question even our
own culture and the prevailing practices. This means that as if moral
perfection is achieved.
4. Cultural relativism as noted by Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) can only be
maintained by assuming that there is only a single and fixed culture while it
is increasingly becoming evident that it is difficult to determine what
exactly determines one’s culture.
Why we cannot absolutize Cultural Relativism
1. It is a contradiction in itself. When we insist on cultural relativism, we have made

it absolute, there, it ceases to be.
2. The differences are in our belief system, not in our values. If we look closely at our
values, there are more similarities than differences.
3. Other values tend to be more or less universal, e.g., telling the truth.
4. There are some moral rules that all societies must have in common.

Summary
Cultural relativism is happening. The evidences of cultural diversity are undeniable as
evidenced by the multitude of cultures around the world. People live in many different ways
and that these differences range from being almost similar to being radically different. The
purpose of the study of cultural relativism is not to point out that peoples around the world are
different and as such they will remain different and should be treated differently. And that
means also that other people have nothing to say about others’ ethical standards being different.
That the only way we can deal with each other is by mutual respect which is respecting the
differences that there are in each culture including the existing moral valuations honoured by
each culture.
Rachels (2003) obviously wants more than simply mutual respect. He believes that
there is something that binds different people better than mere accepting or allowing other
cultural practices without questioning them or that others would do the same. He suggests that
more than mutual respect for the differences he proposes that we should go farther and
recognize that there are more commonalities that bind the people of the world. He believes that
the values behind the practices of different cultures are more important to consider as they are
basically the same.
When he points out that the Callatians practiced the eating of the dead bodies of their
fathers while the Greeks burned them, he actually meant to point that despite the utter
differences in their practices, both were meant to express the same value in quite amazing
differences – that of respect for the dead fathers. If we know more of the values behind our
practices, we can establish the highest form of respect that is based on the inherent similarity
of values found in each of the cultures. Cultural relativism is not the promotion of antagonism
between and among cultures but to seek for the elements that can unite and tie up harmoniously
what seems to be different and separated. This is the best alternative because deep down the
different practices are common universal values. People of different cultures may have
different practices, but remain the same because of the inherent common values behind and
beyond their practices.
Assessment
Short Answer Questions. Answer the questions thoroughly:
1. Explain why cultural relativism is self-contradictory.

2. What makes cultural relativism appealing?
3. Expound: Different practices and traditions from different cultures are closer than
they appear.
4. What is the effect of cultural relativism to moral valuation?
5. Is the idea of cultural identity possible within the context of globalization?

Reflection
What are the universal values found in every culture that can unite the people of
different cultures? Consider honesty or care for the needy. What are the values that you care
about and those that you don’t but you believe people can’t live without?
Is there a Filipino Culture?
Introduction
Filipinos themselves doubt about their proper answer to the question “What is the
Filipino culture?” Writers about the Filipino culture are unanimous in their opinion that this
difficulty originates from the history of the Philippines. The country has been successively
colonized by Spain and by the United States and both brought cultural influences that until now
are practiced by the Filipinos. Filipinos do not find it difficult to identify which practices are
of Spanish influence in the same manner that Filipinos will be able to identify easily which is
a practice that is American. However, the difficulty is to which of these two influences a
Filipino would identify himself or herself more. The confusion is so deep that it would be
difficult for many to say what is the Filipino culture.
Things are so dynamically intertwined that it is difficult to determine what is finally the
Filipino culture or who is a Filipino? However, this dynamic intertwining is a Filipino ingenuity
that makes it in a sense Filipino. Some say it is Spanish-Filipino or FilipinoAmerican. What
matters probably is that it is practiced by a Filipino who identifies himself to be a Filipino and
not otherwise.
Would it be important to delve into the question: Is there a Filipino understanding of

right or wrong? From the point of view of what has been previously discussed about cultural
relativism, it would seem that we have our sense of what is right or wrong, first, from our
cultural point of view. In this succeeding discussion, we analyze cultural and traditional
practices of our own.
Learning Outcomes
1. Identify common Filipino practices and traditions;
2. Express appreciation to these practices and traditions;
3. Criticize some of the present Filipino traditions and practices.

1. For fifteen minutes, in small groups, they will identify some Filipino practices and
traditions and;
2. Criticize these practices by pointing out their advantages and disadvantages.
A. Difficulties of Identifying the Filipino culture
First, when we talk about the Filipino culture, we have a difficulty. Filipinos do not
know exactly which of the cultures they will talk about. Why, because there is not a single
Filipino culture. The Filipino culture is a combination or blend of the east and west cultures.
Basically the western influence would include Spanish and American cultures as part of the
colonial past of the Philippines. Asian influences can also be added to the list as there are
Japanese, Indonesian and even Arabic traces in the Philippine culture. Hence, the problem
arises when we want to assert that there is only one Filipino culture. Obviously, it will be a
mistake to insist on the idea. From the point of view alone of the number of languages and
dialects spoken in the entire archipelago, the more or less 170 languages and dialects spoken
of which eight are considered major languages, are signs of cultural diversity in the country.
Second, having been born in a subculture of a major culture raises a problem about to
which culture will someone identify with exactly? What is going to be his or her cultural
identity? The question has also been raised by Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) in relation to cultural
relativism. Since cultural relativism can only work within the context of a very well defined
and determined culture, it implies the necessity of a single, definite and clear cultural identity.
However, in an increasingly open and globalized world, the notion of cultural relativism is
being put into question. But whether or not cultural relativism is tenable, for the Filipino in
quest for his or her cultural identity, will always have the problem of identifying with a specific
culture.
B. Source of Cultural Identity
Cultural identity may remain evasive because of the Filipino historical and
sociocultural cross-points, but certain practices do give the Filipino his or her own cultural
identity. Some of the Filipino traditional practices from multi-cultural origin are:

- Asking the elders’ approval before getting married, concern, pagmamano or
“Mano po Culture”. Asking God’s blessing through kissing of hands. Use
of the polite expressions “Po and Opo”, hospitality, adaptability and
resiliency.
Cultural identity for the Filipino is not to be found in the manner that we define what
the Filipino culture is nor in trying to identify ourselves with a specific culture whether Tagalog,
Iloko, Ybanag, Itawes, Cebuano, Bicolano or another, but it is to be found in the practices and
traditions with which we are accustomed to. As Filipinos we are identified with and through
how we identify ourselves with one another. Not even with the color of the skin and the
language that we speak, but in the manner that we live and deal with one another that we are
able to identify who is a Filipino and what is the Filipino culture. This manner of making sense
of the Filipino culture from the point of view of the existing practices and traditions makes the
Filipino culture boundless. Whether American, European or Spanish, if you feel like a Filipino,
think like one and eat with them, for them you are a Filipino and you share in the Filipino
culture. The Filipino cultural identity is a lived identity. The practices that one practices will
be the measure by which your being a Filipino will be measured and identified.
C. Being critical about our practices
Filipinos should not remain unperturbed about their traditions and practices. It is not
because they are traditions that they are forever true and remain unquestionable. The
significance and meaning of traditions might have changed positively or negatively overtime.
For instance, a very important Filipino tradition, is the one related to strong family ties.
It symbolizes the unity and strong bond in the family. The tradition gives a sense of support
and security for all the members of the family or even for the entire clan. In times of crisis and
difficult moments, one can always rely on this tradition and family members will not hesitate
to rescue someone in trouble. However, the same tradition can be abused by any member of
the family and it may lead to perpetual dependence of a family member. Someone from the
family might have his or her own family, but remains dependent on the parents for every need
like finances, in terms of decision making and for every other need that arises.
Another trait we easily associate to us as Filipinos is that of being religious. The

Filipino reliance on divine providence is extraordinary. It is expressive of the Filipino faith in
the power of the Omnipotent and All powerful God. Our deep sense of religiosity can give us
hope and from which we draw strength and courage and it can redefine our direction and sense
of fulfilment. However, it is sometimes misconstrued to mean that everything will have to come
from God and that God will always intervene on our behalf. We have forgotten that we have to
do our part to make things come true. We tend to forget that God helps those who help
themselves. Faith does not justify laziness, indecisiveness and lack of initiative. Religiosity
cannot be taken also as a substitute for good work.

Summary
We have learned from our exposure to the different cultures that much of what we have
considered uniquely Filipino cultures are in fact shared with other people of other cultures. We
have so often considered, for instance, hospitality as a strongly and uniquely Filipino trait only
to find out that the same attitude is very much alive in others and perhaps more alive in them.
People for instance are always welcome to come at any time of the day and can dine with the
family. Filipinos have no problem at all with that and that is very Filipino. When your hosts
know that you have come from afar they will always offer you something to eat. That is
hospitality for the Filipino.
The whiteman might not entertain you immediately and asks you to wait until he or she
is finished or done with something she is busy about or won’t invite you to dine with him or
her. And we say, the whiteman is not at all hospitable. “We were not entertained immediately
and we were made to wait.” This is the usual reaction that Filipinos have when not given
attention as soon as possible by their hosts.
Filipinos have no sense of formality. They are gatecrashers, they may come at anytime.
The whiteman needs to be informed and an appointment is very important for him or for her.
He or she doesn’t want to be caught unaware. However, if you are invited or made an
appointment with the whiteman, you need to consider that very seriously. If you get invited for
a meal at home, you are there for half a day or maybe during the whole day. When Europeans
invite you, they really mean it. They will try to foresee every need to the last detail to make
you most comfortable during the entire duration of your stay. A meal can mean all the nice
words upon arrival that naturally continues with an aperitif with more stories and continues at
table for the “plat de resistance” that goes on and on at least for the next two or more hours.
Next you have the dessert and later the post cafe and another cup of coffee. That is the
whiteman’s hospitality. It is a serious thing which means that when you are invited, you have
to take it seriously as well and must really give time for it and nothing else. Their hospitality
is unbelievable. After you have left you remember the event long after the invitation. But for
Filipinos, you might have encountered so often, but have no idea exactly why you had to see
each other.
“Palabra de honor” or being a person of one word reveals that it is also not only Filipino
but is shared with others. The terms themselves reveal that they are of Spanish origin. Filipinos
have their own version of “Palabra de honor.” We can be proud to note that in history. It is a
known fact that the early Filipinos have always respected their promises to Chinese traders
transacting with them. The Chinese trader goes back to China and comes back after many
months and the Filipino costumer waits for his return. No written contracts, only promises were
at stake. But that shows at the same time the Chinese “palabra de honor” indicating that is not
uniquely Filipino. The point is, if certain values are shared by different nationalities, it is in the
manner that these values are practiced where differences are found.
Rachels (2003) explained that Eskimos also practiced hospitality but in the manner
unique to them expressed by offering their wives to their male visitors at night. In the same
manner, the way we practice the same values as Filipinos gives form to them and makes them

unique. There is a uniquely Filipino culture in terms of the practices through which we express
the same values shared with other people of other nationalities.
Assessment
Write an article that could be published in an international magazine
promoting the unique Filipino Culture and identity and discouraging the not so
pleasant or acceptable Filipino culture or practices /traditions to you. Back up your
arguments with authorities. (Use at least 250 words)
Reflection
Have I not been complacent with my own culture. Have I always been defending my
own culture even when it is sometimes obviously unreasonable? Do I take the initiative to
encourage
The Moral Development Stages of the Moral Agent
Introduction
We have discussed how we can be more ethical or moral in our actions and decisions.
Morality or ethics constitute a fundamental guide to people’s existence that without which, it
would be impossible for people to co-exist harmoniously. Furthermore, the topic about ethics
is not just a guide about co-existence but it has an important role to play for people to live
more meaningful and positive relationships that bring about transformative changes to the
quality of life.
In this topic, we will underscore moral development. The understanding of moral

development can help us gain insights about our role in providing avenues for its development.
Morality might have its own course of natural development, but we might just have the
responsibility to choose to allow or impede its full maturation in us or in other people. For
children, they need assistance from more mature individuals to reach the full development of
their moral or ethical reasoning and judgment. It will always be to their advantage if they are
guided and given the chance to be empowered by such wise and experienced individuals.
The different stages of moral development have been the focus of the study of the
American moral psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg. He theorized that moral development
involves three levels which are discussed in this chapter:

Learning Outcomes
1. Identify the different levels of moral development;
2. Characterize one’s present stage of moral development; and
3. Evaluate the roles of more mature people in the moral development of younger people.
Recall that event when you started to have knowledge about having done something
good or bad. Share it to class. (15 minutes)
The Levels and Stages of Moral Development by Lawrence Kohlberg
Level I. Pre-conventional
The pre-conventional level corresponds to how infants and children think. The type of
reasoning at this level is centered on the consequences of one’s action and the level is divided
into two stages.
Stage I. The first stage of reasoning focuses on obedience and the avoidance of
punishment. At this stage, a child reasons out that actions are “good” if they are able to
avoid punishment and actions are “bad” if they result to punishment. By that, we
understand that children’s action as thought of is not that they have found what the best
thing to do is, rather, they have found what to do in order to evade getting scolded or
punished.
Stage II. At this point, entering the second stage of reasoning, children act according
to what will satisfy their interests. The good at this stage of development is what brings
pleasure to them. Children’s activities at this stage are focused on those in line with
their interests. Characteristically, at this stage, children still have difficulties making a

distinction between them and others. Others are considered extensions of who they are
and deals with them to the extent that they can bring them pleasure or some kind of
advantage.
The pre-conventional stage symbolizes the stage when children have not yet
understood the importance of rules in their life. The consequences of their acts are most
important as they may lead to either punishment or to their satisfaction or pleasure their
interests having been served. What is right or wrong is not determined by following
rules but by what their actions bring them
Level II Conventional
At this stage, older children, adolescents and young adults learn to conform to societal
expectations. Conventions acquire significance for the individual and learn to follow them.
They now understand the importance of conventions in their life. Level II is subdivided into
two stages.
Stage III. Group approval at this stage is very important for the child. The desire to
belong is a strong motivation for the child in order to act according to what the group
expect from her or him. The more common tendency for the individual is to conform
specially to the values of the immediate group like the family, playmates and later on
to those of the peer group because by doing so it will best serve his or her interests.
Adolescents would therefore seek for the approval of others since they are instrumental
to the satisfaction of their new needs. They are also more open and give more
importance to the expectations of larger groups in their community or in school.
Stage IV. The fourth stage is an important development. It is the deepening of the
acceptance of the importance of societal conventions. The individual learns by now
that conventions are not only good for him or for her but the individual realizes that
conventions are necessary for the existence of the society itself. Hence, at this stage,
the individual is better ready in order to accept and value most of the laws, rules and
regulations of one’s community or society. Dutifulness toward the standards of the
society embodied in its rules and laws shape the moral reasoning of the stage.
Adolescents of this stage very importantly uphold laws and regulations that when
others disobey them like when laws are not properly or wrongly implemented, they are
capable of rebelling against a system that does not respect the laws.
Kohlberg explains that people who merely follow the rules and regulations of
their society or of their organizations or the doctrines of their religion is the best they
can do are trapped in this second stage of the conventional level. Many of them reach
only this far in their moral development. Unable to understand the reasons behind why
there are rules and laws to follow, they tend to develop a kind of legalistic mentality in
which rightness or wrongness of an act is based on whether or not one follows rules
and regulations. It must be noted that Kohlberg’s theory is not about the definition of
the goodness or rightness of an act. He does not propose a kind of ethical theory but

describes the stage of the growth in moral thinking in the different stages of
development.
Level III. Post-Conventional
In the post-conventional level, people realize that what matters is no longer the simple
following of rules in the society that takes precedence. The moral agent by now knows that
what is at stake is more on doing or acting upon the personally acquired beliefs or principles.
What one does is what one ought to do is now the new challenge for the individual moral agent.
Stage V. In the fifth stage, the moral agent realizes the value of social contract
which is about the agreements. Rational agents realize that to serve the common good
which he or she ought to respect and live by. The idea of the common good is
postconventional because it is theoretically the mature and conscientious moral agents
who are identified to be morally upright. The moral agent binds himself or herself with
the common good whether or not it produces consequences that are beneficial or not.
For clarity, the notion of the common good is upheld higher or given more importance
than existing communal agreements, traditions and rules because these must be
examined using rational discourse. Hence, what is moral is what honors the social
contract.
Stage VI. Kohlberg argues that this stage is the highest stage of moral
development. The stage goes beyond social contract. It is about choosing to do acts
based on universal ethical principles acquired by the moral agent himself or herself.
This stage goes beyond the societal conventions, rules and agreements and that actions
are morally correct only if they are based on the universal ethical principles. The actions
must be respected only if these reflect the universal ethical principles.
Summary
The different stages of moral development according to Lawrence Kohlberg are not to be
confused with determining what is morally right or wrong. But the stages describe only the
characteristics of each of the developmental stages. Hence, one must be careful not to pass on
moral judgment to an act based on the stages of moral development developed by Kohlberg.
Kohlberg argues that in the stages of moral development, most people are locked up in
the fourth stage. Only very few are able to go beyond it. This means that most people relate
their moral judgment to communal or societal conventions, rules, laws and regulations.
Therefore, the rightness and wrongness of an act depends on whether one follows them or not;
implying therefore a kind of legalistic mentality.

Assessment
Identify the stage of moral development (first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth).
Write your answer on the space provided before the item.
_____1. It is characterized by following the rules and regulations knowing that these are
significant for the society’s existence.
_____2. It is the stage when acts are performed in order to avoid pain.
_____3. Andres wants that his playmates play only games he wants to play.
_____4. Concerned that the government is not serious about what it should implement as laws
of the land like recognition of the rights of its citizens, Marco decided to join the rebels.
_____5. Miss X defied the tradition of lavish wedding celebration believing that it does
not help anymore the family and the new couple.
______6. It refers to the stage when the child desires to be always number one.
______7. It is characterized by the belief that what rational people have realized as good
is the right thing to do.
______8. Consequences of the act are the bases of the rightness or wrongness of
the act.
______9. It is the stage during which Boy Y thinks that his playmates are there to
serve his interest or the inability to make distinction between him and others.
______10. It is the stage when individuals are convinced that laws and communal
traditions should be honored only when they serve universal principles
but should be rejected when they don’t.
Reflection
If we were to ask ourselves, where are we situated in our personal moral judgment? Do
we base our moral decision and choices on conventions or from universal ethical principles
that we have acquired? Have we arrived at acquiring certain universal ethical principles
personally? Are we afraid to honor ethical principles because their consequences might not be
beneficial for us personally?
The Moral Agent and Contexts

Introduction
Individual choices, decisions, plans and needs even when initiated and originated from
the individual himself or herself may seem not to be products of purely individual nature. Many
variables of external origins may be at play.
Ramon Reyes as suggested by Bulaong Jr. et al. 2008 (pp. 102-104), strongly pointed
out that multifarious influences play important roles to arrive at a decision. Four significant
cross-points influence people’s ideas, motivations, reactions, thoughts and emotions, including
and especially moral judgments and decisions.
People live not in isolation but are well situated in a given environment and particular
context influencing their behaviors and mentality. Parental influences cannot be undermined
as confirmed by well-known psychologists among those of psychodynamic orientation.
Behaviorists would certainly agree that the environment play an important role to people’s
reaction while denying any cognitive materials to explain human behavior.
Furthermore, the socio-cultural and social contexts are undeniably important elements
to consider that explain the way people are molded and therefore are real sources of influence
to people’s worldview and behavior. The discussion below provides ample situations and
events to explain the critical assumptions that influence people’s daily life.
Learning Outcome
1. Explain human behavior in making moral judgment and decision;
2. Articulate the crucial influences in one’s personal life; and
3. Analyze situations and actions of moral agents.

Share it! 15 minutes. Share in the class who has influenced you most in making up
your mind to take the course of your life now. Was it a significant individual, a situation, a
personal ambition? Listen to what others have to say about their own experiences.

Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) argues that the one who is tasked to make the moral decision
is a human individual. This person when making moral valuation is not doing it out of nowhere
or from a purely personal stance. The moral agent is, according to Ramon C. Reyes as cited by
Bulaong Jr. et al (2018) is a cross-point. This means that any moral agent is a product of many
forces and events outside of one’s choosing. Reyes mentions 4 cross-points namely: the
physical, the interpersonal, the social and the historical cross-points.
First, the physical cross-point include the genetic endowments, characteristics endemic
to the species Homo sapiens with its limitations and strengths, the geographical realities in
which the individual is born and lives, the kind of natural environment with all resources and
challenges that impact growth and development. All these physical cross-points are influences
not from the individual own choosing.
An important aspect when making a decision which is clearly a physical cross-point

based is intelligence. Intelligent people may for instance make crucial decision to solve a
situation or concern definitively, while others might simply go for a tentative solution unsure
about the veracity of their chosen option. Or, it is possible that someone decides making a
career in sports having special talents that gives assurance of success in a certain field. Usually
special talents are best when it is a product not only of training but also and especially when it
is inherent in the person. These factors based on physical cross-point influence individual
decisions, motivation and judgment which are not one’s own choices but simply something
given.
Second, is social cross point. No person is born outside human contact. Every
individual is a product of interpersonal cross-points. The first and the most influential of them
are those established with the parents. The first human contact of every individual is with
parents who nourish, protect, give care and attention and provide security at the very first stages
of life. How individuals are brought up in the family influence an individuals’ character,
manners and his or her thinking and mindset. One’s personality is shaped by the people around
especially by those who influence the person during the early years of existence. Again, these
influences are not the individual’s own choice. The person is born of parents who dispose their
time making sure that every need of the newborn is addressed and taken care of resulting to a
compassionate interpersonal cross-point. Other interpersonal cross-points come in as the
individual’s relational horizon expands with friends, colleagues, clients, schoolmates, etc.
Third, as individuals grow and discover their way in the outside world, they come into
contact with the broader social context. From now on, the shaping of individual personality
accommodates those brought about by the larger society. The culture and the values inherent
in it are inevitably forces that impact the way individuals perceive the world and judge it .
Again, the social and cultural influences as with the other cross-points are not according to the
choices of any individual but realities in which one is born in and is molded by it to become
partly the person that one is. People see things and make choices based on their training and
are influenced by the kind of association they have forged in life. Unconsciously, they serve as

important influences coming from outside when they make options or choose solutions from
available alternatives.
Finally, the historical and cultural cross-point. It means that events especially those with
crucial importance shape an entire nation and every individual living in that particular society.
Significant events like wars, devastating natural calamities, and important societal changes are
powerful forces that lead to new awareness leaving incredible impact on people’s attitude and
thinking. Thereby, people’s lives are shaped by the crucial events of their lives manifested in
their day to day attitude and manner of perceiving new experiences.
Similarly, Filipinos have been shaped by its own unique history. The centuries of
Spanish’s colonization have brought a new consciousness that was different before they landed
in the archipelago. Christianity made critical and permanent changes in the lives of Filipinos.
Even if they chased away the colonizers they kept their Christian faith which they embraced
profoundly. Filipino traditions and lifestyle have been the result of the influences of its
historical journey. History has molded the Filipino people resulting to what we Filipinos are
now. The historical and cultural influences are external influences, but they may have crucial
impact on individuals’ moral valuations and decisions.
So far, history is yet another cross-point interacting with the other ones – the four of
them making impact on the Filipino consciousness, his or her perspective including but
especially his or her type of moral valuation.
However, Reyes believes that the Filipino is not only the product of the cross-points of
his life but is also a product of his or her free will and intention in life. The freedom that every
Filipino enjoys allows one to make choices of his or her own, giving the capacity to direct or
invent one’s own life toward the realization of an ideal self. Reyes describes this point in the
following manner:
The Filipino, “who one is” is a cross-point, but in an existential level. Whose meaning
of existence is the interaction between the fact that one’s being is a product of may forces
outside her/his choosing and his/her ideal future for herself or himself.”
Summary
No individual born is free from all possible influences in this world. Everyone
experiences the natural life cycle of being born, gaining knowledge, going through life and
growing up until death. The moment one is born, one receives all-at-once the trademark of the
physical cross-point. No one escapes everything that is given about being born in a particular
family, community, country and all that is circumstantial about a certain context. Many things
are given without our permission but they all count and influence our being human and all that
every human being does. But one can choose what one can be. Despite the different possibilities
that personal cross-points indicate, one can and therefore have the ability to break away from
all cross points and possess freedom from the cross-points of one’s existence and invent what
one desires in life.
Assessment
Identify the following items as Physical, Interpersonal, Social, Historical

Crosspoints and Existential Perspective: Write your answer on the space provided before
the number.
_______________1. Endowments received by parents.
_______________2. March 16, 1521.
_______________3. Belief in the” Engkanto” or “maligno.”
_______________4. Ways of doing things, basic personality traits, eating behavior.
_______________5. Elements one shares with others in the society.
_______________6. The belief in personal achievements that gives meaning to life.
_______________7. The Christian values and beliefs upheld by an individual.
_______________8. Creating one’s destiny and belief that every individual is free.
_______________9. The beliefs I share with others and cultural practices like being hospitable.
_______________10. The recognition that I am similar to others endowed with the ability to
deliberate, think logically, with emotional needs and the need to share
life with others.
Reflection
Which of your cross-points has the greatest impact in your life? Had you followed your
freedom, would you be different now? How honest have you been to yourself?


ETHICS Csu Modulepdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

ETHICS Csu Modulepdf

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

ETHICS Csu Modulepdf

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Unit I

Moral and Non-Moral Problems

1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems

1 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

In a group of 5, list down rules in your school, at home, in your community or

2 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

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

3 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Valuations that Involve Moral or Ethical Valuations

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

4 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

a. “That we should not use people.”

Why only human beings can be ethical?

5 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

What is moral experience and how moral rule is born?

6 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

_______ 1. Changing landmark position in the evening.

8 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Activating Prior Learning

9 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

3 Different Levels of Moral Dilemma

Personal Dilemma. It pertains to choices affecting the individual himself or herself.

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

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

10 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

ACTS WITH DOUBLE EFFECTS

In complete ignorance - the wrongful consequence is completely unexpected and

In double effect- the wrongful consequence is expected and it can either be

1. The moral responsibility is perfect or aggravated if the person

11 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

12 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

13 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Activating Prior Learning

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

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

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

14 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

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

Short Answer Question. Answer briefly the following.

15 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

3. Boy X is a three year old naughty boy. He happened to break an expensive

4. Mr. X is found guilty of committing murder. After he was placed under

16 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

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

Activating Prior Learning

18 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Answer the following questions shortly by starting with Yes, because

1. Is reason indispensable for an informed for moral decision?

2. Impartiality necessary to resolve conflicts?

3. And you apply impartiality when you are involved in a case?

Am I overwhelmed by my emotion too often and make decisions that are

Standards of Moral Valuation Based on the Self

19 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

Activating Prior Learning

21 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

A. Subjectivism B. Psychological Egoism C. Ethical Egoism

_________1. I know I am right at this one, no one else.

22 | Self Learning Module in ETHICS

The Moral Agent