Julian Rosch C.

Dolor Ethics
ABELS 1-3 Ms. Jalaine Malabanan

CASE STUDY REFLECTIONS

• Group 7 “Digital Disinformation in the 2022 Philippine National Election: Factors
that make PUP Sta. Mesa students vulnerable to fake news and its effect on their
views on the presidential candidates
• One thing that I noticed and agree with in this study, is that PUP students are less
vulnerable to fake news or disinformation for PUP students are knowledgeable
enough to distinguish the truth from the fakes. They aren’t easily swayed by what
they see in social media and will always fact share first before spreading information.
They aren’t afraid to be educated and they will always seek the truth above
everything else for PUP students, or even the faculty members, are always on the
receiving end of fake news. What’s disappointing is that, even now that sources are
limitless, technologies are accessible, people still believes that when you’re from
PUP, you’re an activist, part of the NPA, and that all we know is throw shades, do
rally, and oppose the government. I also love the fact that PUP students, based on
their surveys, are consistent in saying that our former Vice President Leni Robredo is
the most qualified among the presidential candidates. Though it made me angry that
trolls have gotten out of their way to ruin her image in every social media, where
most of the people stay updated in social issues. All in all, I find this case study very
comprehensive and find it helpful as well in informing others about how fake news
works and how we shouldn’t be easily fooled by it.
• Group 2 “Poverty Porn: Empathy or Exploitation”
• Group 2’s case study is very relevant, wherein some video creators use poverty as
their source of income, uses the struggles of the lower-class people to gain financial
stability through them. I think that empathy is not present in situations like that,
especially if the contents about poverty are not made to be informative but something
that they only use for publicity purposes. For instance, documentation videos that
focuses on the daily lives of the poor, what does poverty really means, what does it
really mean to be poor, the raw and unfiltered ones, those kinds of videos are the ones
 who have empathy towards the poor. Their main purpose is to educate people, the
rich, that you won’t be rich alone, you’re rich because you exploit the working class,
the ones in the bottom of the human hierarchy. Their goal is to be informative and
spread awareness and all the money they receive from making documentations are
being donated to the people they filmed. Unlike those vloggers who only uses
someone else’s lives to gain money, they help people in one video, but the next
videos will show how they’re also part of the reasons why poor people are poor.
Though, I kind of disagree that they considered this case study as something that can
be distinguish under Categorical Imperative for Hypothetical Imperative is the best
way in explaining why Poverty Porn is unethical.
• Group 9 “Experimental Online Class Platform: Understanding Different Factors
Affecting College Performance”
- While I agree that experimental online class platforms in the midst of pandemic are
something that is anti-poor, and affects our performance in school, if I will base it on
this case study alone and how she explained how unethical it is, I think that I will
have to disagree with it. Based on her case study she used deontological theory to
prove that online classes are unethical, the deontological class of ethical theories
states that people should adhere to their obligations and duties when engaged in
decision making when ethics are in play. This means that a person will follow his or
her obligations to another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what
is considered ethically correct. I think that what the DepEd did is ethically correct no
matter how much we find it absurd at the first time of hearing it, for they followed
their obligations to the society of proposing or presenting a solution that doesn’t
disregard our education even in the times of pandemic. At the same time, all of the
other countries are doing that as well, what made it unethical is that we were forced to
continue it for a long time for the government failed to propose a proper COVID 19
response, as well as bringing back the face-to-face classes even if the cases are
continuously growing or cases have not depleted yet to an extent that it’s 100% or
even 90-95% safe to go back to school. For the we are in this pandemic for too long
already when other countries have moved on from it a long time ago, that we have no
choice but to adapt even if we’re not given the assurance of safeness from the virus.
• Group 8 “You Think I’m A Liar? The Effects of Academic Dishonesty of the
Third Year College Students of Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Sta.
Mesa”
- Academic dishonesty is something that I think we can’t get rid of, no matter how
ethically wrong we think it is. For the reasons behind it, as what the study
summarized and gather based on their respondents, overshadows the concept of
academic dishonesty and how unethical it is. I think that we can easily disregard our
guilt when it comes to school especially if we gain something good from it, like high
grades, validation, awards, etc. I also think that it’s easy to justify academic
dishonesty as long as we’ve done it with people, for instance, our friends or
classmates, or with people who aren’t expected to cheat but they cheated alongside
you, the top students, and the likes. Although I agree that according to Thomas
Aquinas’ natural law theory, that all people are born with inherent rights, moral
values, and obligations, and that everybody has the same idea of what constitutes
morally good and bad behavior. But if you’re surrounded by people who thinks
cheating in exams are such a shallow example for what is morally right or wrong, or
that academic dishonesty is something that we can always get away from or can be
justified for it’s such a simple basis for morality or ethics compared to death penalties
and the likes, I think that it will be hard for us to get rid of academic dishonesty, for
how saddening it may sound, it already became a norm for us, something so simple
that it doesn’t matter much anymore and people won’t make a big deal out of it for a
long time. Personally, I think it would be better if they used Immanuel Kant’s ethical
theory about universal moral laws such as "Don't lie. Don't steal. Don't cheat."
• Group 1 “Killing or Healthcare: The Ethical Study on Abortion”
- At first, I was kind of confused on where this case study stands, if abortion is
ethically correct or wrong, until I read their closing statement. But then again, I
agree that abortion is healthcare and can’t be considered as killing or “murder of
your own blood and flesh.” If I were to interpret it ethically, I think that the
utilitarianism is the best way to use as an argument, considering that most women
who wants to abort are a victim of rape, abused, poverty, lack of comfort and
capabilities to provide for a child, all these means pain and abortion means
 preventing this pain from spreading and affecting people negatively, even the
ones unborn can be spared from pain that they will encounter once they were
born, just because “pro-lifers” wanted them to be born. Less pain means more
happiness and that is what utilitarianism means and is considered ethical.
• Group 4 “Euthanasia as an Ethical Dilemma: Compassion or Murder”
- I agree that life gets tough with no remorse sometimes, and that sometimes, death
is the only answer that seems fascinating for death, is the end of everything,
suffering, and struggles. What makes it unethical is that people are robbed of their
options to decide for themselves, a 2nd chance with life, when they are being faced
in a life and death situations and families or the professional are the ones who get
to decide for them. Though, how can they decide when they aren’t capable of
deciding about it? But that’s what ethics means; we have high regards in
respecting the lives of every living thing. Group 4 concluded that Euthanasia is
unethical no matter what argument it takes place, I think I’d have to disagree with
that, using the utilitarianism theory, once again. Which promotes greater pleasure
and focuses on outcomes. For instance, if a person’s life only brings pain,
sufferings from within, pain from themselves to themselves, emphasis on patients
with illnesses that can’t be cured anymore no matter the instances and are only
still living because of the machines attached to them, I think euthanasia is a way
to end those sufferings and pain, to relieve them from it and receive pleasure by
dying.
• Group 5 “God are you real?: Understanding Moral Evil From An Ethical
Perspective”
- Firstly, I think there are no such things as moral evil, for how can something so
evil be morally accepted? Second, I think that this study is different from all the
other study for they used ethical theories to prove if God is real, they didn’t use it
to prove that something is unethical or morally wrong. I find this study somewhat
difficult to dissect for I don’t get what they are trying to prove, is believing in
God unethical? Just because there are evil things that are happening in the world?
I think it would be better if they chose to analyze an issue that would suggest
instances like being an atheist is unethical or ethical or believing in God even
 though there are evil things are morally wrong or right. Does not believing in God
makes you unethical? Things like that. Although, I agree with their study, I think
it will be just more comprehensive if they address issues like what I mentioned.
• Group 6 “Ethical Issues on No Vaccine, No Work Policy: A Violation to
Human Rights or Utilitarianism”
- I’d have to agree with this group case study for utilitarianism somewhat clashes
with our human rights, though utilitarianism promotes greater pleasures and
focuses on the outcomes, our human rights doesn’t work that way. Human rights
focus not only on the outcomes but also the means as well. I agree that forcing
people to be vaccinated to be able to work is unethical but if we’re going to look
at it in the aspect of deontological ethical theory, it is ethically correct for
establishments/companies to require their employees to be vaccinated for that is
their obligations as well, to ensure a safe and healthy environment.

• Group 3 “UNETHICAL PRACTICES IN POLITICS: HOW IT AFFECTS

THE PHILIPPINES IN TIMES OF PANDEMIC”
- Since I was the one who edited our group’s case study and the one assigned to
accomplish the discussion part, I might have to get some of the things that I’ve
written in our soft copy for some of those are my insights while making our case
study. The governance of the Duterte administration is considered unethical, and
how they used the pandemic to their advantage to steal from the Filipino people,
as well as violating their rights, all for their own selves. The lack of integrity is
clearly shown to our faces, that’s why as a concern citizen, we must know how to
protect ourselves from politicians like them, to use our voice and rights to its
limits, to hold them accountable, to give ourselves the good governance that we
keep on longing for and that we all so deserve. In all honesty, I kind of find our
case study as something that people will listen to but not really comprehend it.
Something that will pass by their thoughts easily for they refused to be educated
deeply and politics is something that they want to avoid for it’s too
“controversial.” People, especially Filipinos have the tendency to always give
second chances especially to the ones who wronged them, they can easily forgive
the worst kind of people just because they were not the one who experienced the
mistreatment firsthand. They can easily give untrusted people the benefit of the
doubt, even though they are presented with people who doesn’t need all of that,
all of those forgiveness, second chances, benefit of the doubt, for they were
capable, skilled, and trustworthy already the 1st chance they got it. Also, another
take away from me is that Filipino’s are not well-informed when it comes to
ethics. They see things as they are, accept things as they are, even if it is unethical
and morally wrong, and their reasons? “Just because”, or senseless, selfish
reasons that comes from their egos and personal reasons that affects the greater
number of people negatively. That concludes my learned lessons in the process of
making our case study, politics in times of pandemic.