University of the Philippines Visayas

College of Arts and Sciences Division of Social Sciences

History and Philosophy Cluster

Ethics 1 – Ethics and Moral Reasoning in Everyday Life

Study Guide Learning Materials

Module 3: Normative Ethics

We learned how the study of Ethics is crucial part of philosophy, the nature
of ethics and moral reasoning, and what are some of the Western
disciplines that are continuously contributing to or is influenced by the
concepts in ethics.

This Module discusses dominant frameworks in Normative Ethics defined,

as branch of ethics concerned with general criteria of what is morally right
and wrong. The first part introduces ideas on ultimate good. This came as
a reaction to the conceptual and logical flaws of ethical relativism, which
claims that moral values depend on the individual or culture. This includes
discussions on Egoism and Altruism, which later on will be integral
components of what is known as Virtue Ethics. The second part of this
module discusses other normative ethical frameworks ranging from
deontology to rights-based ethics and more.

The Objectives of the module:

1. Introduce ideas and theories on ultimate good

2. Discuss other normative theories in Ethics such as
rights-based/feminist care and supererogatory ethics
3. Value normative ethics as reference to approach
practical and later on applied ethical discussions

1
DIRECTIONS:

(1) Make sure that the your answers for the activities found in this material are
computerized and are highlighted in red.

(2) ☐ Put a check or a mark on boxes once you have finished the reading parts.
You may leave a mark such as this example: X☐

(3) Once you are done with reading and answering the activities in this module,
make sure that you save the file as PDF and attach the file to an email to be
sent to your instructor’s email using this file name: SECTION (_), SURNAME,
FIRSTNAME, MODULE _ Part _.

(4) Please note that this course pack is intended only for your use as a student
currently enrolled in Ethics 1. You are NOT ALLOWED to share, reproduce or
distribute it to anyone else. Should you need to use the course pack for any other
purpose than class, you should seek permission from the Author/Editor.

Week 6-7. Normative Ethical Frameworks

Normative Ethical Frameworks

Mar 23/24 1.Theories of Ultimate
Good – Egoism, Altruism
and Virtue Ethics
Mar 30/31 2.Utilitarianism
3. Kantianism
Apr 13/14 4. Contractualism
5.Feminist Care Ethics
1. Discuss and apply in principle
western theories on ultimate good
2. Expand appreciation on utility
and imperatives in ethical decision
making
3. Introduce concepts of traditional
contract based and non traditional
feminist care ethics

n 3.1 Normative Ethics: Theories of Ultimate Good

The first part of this module discusses Western theories of ultimate good.
This came as a reaction to the conceptual and logical flaws of ethical

2
relativism which claims that moral values depend on the individual or
culture. The first part will focus on Egoism and Altruism, and the later part
will be about Virtue Ethics.

Egoism espouses the idea that good is whatever promotes our own
personal good, while Altruism holds that what is good and right is that
which is done solely for the benefit of others. But the question is, can good
and right be based on what promotes the self and benefits others at the
same time?

Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics is that theory of morality based on virtue or moral

character. Virtue Ethics believe that attainment of a person’s excellence is
through the actualization of the person’s highest potential as a rational
human being via a life of virtue. It is interesting to note that this virtuous life
can only happen through morally virtuous acts (habituation) towards others.
Take note that the emphasis is not so much on the individual actions, but
rather on the forging of the disposition or character of the moral agent.

☐ What is Egoism (1/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Egoism as a normative theory requires that “Everyone ought to look out

and seek only for their own best interests. People ought to help others only
when and to the extent that it is also in their own best interest to do so.”
(MacKinnon 2004, p. 35) Ethical egoism has been framed also as a
principle which requires that “One ought always to maximize one’s own
personal good as an end.” (Holmes, 1998) From this perspective, the
highest moral value is one’s own good. An egoist is oftentimes mistaken for
an egotist. An egoist is someone who embraces the ideals of Egoism while
an egotist is a highly self-opinionated, self-obsessed, boastful, arrogant
person. An Egoist is not necessarily an egotist.

Activity 1:

Read the chapter on “Myself or Others?”in Nina Rosenstand’s The

Moral of the Story. An Introduction to Ethics, pp. 163-166. Answer the
following study questions:

1. What is the difference between egoism and egotism? Why is it

important that we don’t confuse these two?

3
 ______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

2. How different is Psychological Egoism from Ethical Egoism?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

3. Why is Psychological Egoism not the proper subject of ethics?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

Egoism really requires that our moral obligation is to pursue self-interest as

our priority. Does this mean that it is acceptable to lie, cheat, and kill if that
is what is necessary to gain our ends? If you have a Ring of Power and you
can get away with trampling on the interest of others to gain political power,
would you do it?

You may have noticed that one’s self-interest may not really be exclusive of
the interest of others. You may also end up considering others if doing so is
necessary to promote your self-interest

Ethical Egoism, ought not to be confused with Psychological Egoism, which

is the theory that attributes the way humans behave to their nature as
selfish or self-interested agents. That is, Psychological Egoism simply
describes human behavior as motivated by the pursuit of self-interest which
is inborn, while Ethical Egoism is a theory of what human beings ought to
do. Psychological Egoism is descriptive while Ethical Egoism is normative.

☐What is altruism?
(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Generally speaking, actions that promote self-sacrifice tend to be

immortalized and venerated in society.

“Happiness comes from making other people happy.”

“It is better to give than to receive.”
“Self-sacrifice entails offering oneself for the good of others.”

4
 These age-old aphorisms are expressions of Altruism.

The term altruism derives from the Latin ‘alter’ which means “other”.
Hence, altruism in the normative sense entails that “Everyone ought to
disregard his or her own self-interests for the sake of others.”
(Rosenstand, 2009 p. 189) It requires that we perform actions to help
others, even if doing so may involve great loss to ourselves.

A pure altruist is therefore totally selfless. Such a person does not consider
his or her own welfare but only that of others. Levinas, a twentieth century
Lithuanian-French philosopher thought that the Other (another human
being) should always be more important than yourself, and that the needs
of others should be placed ahead of your own. Although this presupposes
that you, yourself will also be valued as more important than the Other,
because you are the Other, of your Other. The pure altruistic view is not
really very popular among ethicists because in the end people will always
look for what’s in it for them, according to Rosenstand.

Peter Singer, an Australian philosopher has discussed altruism in his book

The Expanding Circle in a different light. He claims that “human beings are
social animals and that we were social before we were human” (Singer,
1981, p.3) On this account, Singer theorizes that since human beings have
lived in groups (as what fossil records show of the Australopithecus
africanus who were still half-human, half-ape, and therefore were not yet
fully rational), they have learned to restrain their behavior towards their
fellows even before they became rational. Social ethics therefore,
according to him, could have begun in this pre-human pattern of behavior.
“If we define altruistic behavior as behavior which benefits others at some
cost to oneself, altruism in non-human animals is well-documented.
Understanding the development of altruism in animals will improve our
understanding of the development of ethics in human beings, for our
present ethical systems have their roots in the altruistic behavior of our
early and pre-human ancestors.” (5) Singer in this work, offers Reciprocal
Altruism as another way of viewing altruism. It is one that looks at the
interests of others because in the end everyone benefits from it. Although,
philosophers are still in disagreement if Singer’s altruism really deserves
the name of altruism. It would be interesting if you can read about this
version of altruism.

Activity 2:
Read

5
 1. Read Ayn Rand's “The Virtue of Selfishness: A new concept of Egoism” in
The Moral of the Story, pp. 2017-210.
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

☐What is Virtue ethics? (2/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he espoused the idea that everything

has a teleological basis or that everything has a purpose and that it aims at
some good or end. He highlighted the rule of rational nature and
emphasized the purposive nature of the universe (Albert and Denise 1984).
The latter is clearly illustrated in the following lines:

6
“Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and choice, is
thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been
declared to be that at which all things aim.” (Aristotle, Book I.1. p.3)

☐What are special arenas of Virtue Ethics? (3/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

To have a grasp of Aristotle’s ethical theory and what he meant by living

well, it is important to understand his conception of happiness, virtue, vice,
and doctrine of the mean, and how these are related to one another.

Man’s Telos and Happiness

“Since there are evidently more than one end, and we choose some of
these (e.g. wealth, flutes, and in general instruments) for the sake of
something else, clearly not all ends are final ends; but the chief good is
evidently something final. Therefore, if there is only one final end, this will
be what we are seeking, and if there are more than one, the most final of
these will be what we are seeking. Now we call that which is in itself worthy
of pursuit more final than that which is worthy of pursuit for the sake of
something else, and that which is never desirable for the sake of something
else more final than the things that are desirable both in themselves and for
the sake of that other thing, and therefore we call final without qualification
that which is always desirable in itself and never for the sake of something
else.” (Aristotle, Book I.7, p10.)

Aristotle classified ends into three: instrumental, final and supreme.

Instrumental ends are not pursued for themselves or for their own sake;
rather, they are utilized as instruments to other ends that are regarded to
be of greater value. Final ends are perceived as inherently good but not
unconditionally final, contrary to the label. While they are pursued for their
own sake, there are some circumstances when final ends become
subservient to other ends. This happens when a “more comprehensive
end” has to be taken into account. Aristotle added that the decision as to
which final ends to pursue, especially in cases when not all of them can be
chosen at the same time, is determined by the “supreme end” or that which
is described as unconditionally final. Aristotle named this as happiness or
eudaimonia in Greek translation. This, he claimed, is the reason why some
final ends are embraced or abandoned.

Happiness is man’s supreme end; it should be understood in terms of

7
man’s distinctive function:

“Life seems to be common even to plants, but we are seeking what is

peculiar to man. Let us exclude, therefore, the life of nutrition and
growth. Next there would be a life of perception, but it also seems to
be shared even to the horse, the ox, and every animal.
There remains, then, an active life of the element that has reason…”
(Aristotle, Book I.7, p. 11)

Activity

Do the following:
1. List down 10 things that you desire to achieve. Classify each item in your
list in terms of whether it is an end in itself (EI) or whether it is a means to
attaining another end (EM).
Achievements EI or EM

8
☐Virtue vs Vice: The Doctrine of the Mean
How do we make sense of Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean? (4/5)
(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Virtue is a key concept in Aristotle’s theory of morality. To get a better

grasp of his concept of happiness, we need to understand his notion of
virtue. The word “virtue” is from the Latin vir, which means “strength or
manliness.” In Aristotle’s ethics, its equivalent is the Greek term arête,
which means “excellences of various types” (MacKinnon 2004). It is a
disposition to effectively perform one’s proper function. For instance, in the
case of a lyre-player, Aristotle pointed out that his function is “to play the
lyre;” but if he is to be a good lyre-player, his function must be “to play it so
well” (Aristotle, Book I.7, p. 11). In the same light, if man’s function is tied
up to activities of the soul that implies a rational principle, it follows that the
function of a good man is to be good in the performance of these activities.

Central to Aristotle’s theory is the distinction he made between the two

types of virtues: moral virtue and intellectual virtue. Moral virtue is also
known as the virtue of the character (generosity and temperance) while
intellectual virtue is the virtue of thought (wisdom, comprehension,
intelligence). Both of these virtues were identified as activities not of the
body but of the soul.

Aristotle provided a very comprehensive account of the virtue of the

character. Its central thesis revolves around the concept of moderation or
temperance. This was given a clearer explanation by elaborating on the
structure of man’s soul and discussing how moral virtue relates to it.
According to Aristotle, our soul is comprised of the rational component,
which directs us to what is right, and the irrational element, which is
naturally opposed to reason. The latter is further subdivided into two: the
nutritive and appetitive components. The nutritive component, which is
concerned with nutrition and growth, does not in any way share with the
rational element. Nutrition and growth are beyond the control of reason and
have nothing to do with man’s excellence. On the other hand, the appetitive
component, which includes the desiring elements, is in a sense subject to
reason. As Aristotle puts it, “It is reason that directs the desires and
appetites to what is best. That is, the mean between two extremes.” Only

9
when man allows his desires and appetites to be governed by the rational
component of his soul is he able to achieve moderation or temperance;
otherwise, deficiencies and excesses rule.

The above spells out Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Mean which follows from
the principle that excess and deficiency destroy perfection while the mean
preserves it. The mean is moral virtue while excess and deficiency are
regarded as vices.

Below are examples of examinations pertaining to the doctrine of the mean

taken from Aristotle, Books II.7-II.9, pp32-35:

DEFICIENCY MEAN EXCESS

(Vice) (Virtue) (Vice)

Cowardice Courage Rashness

Insensibility Temperance Self-indulgence

Stinginess Generosity Extravagance

Indecisiveness Self-control Impulsiveness

Secrecy Honesty Loquacity

Unirascibility Good temper Irascibility

Mock Modesty Truthfulness Boastfulness

Activity 5

Think of someone who you consider to be a good person and then

complete the table below by doing the following:
1. How is Atman (inner self) described in Bhagavad Gita? 1. List down at
least 5 virtues that you will find in that person.
2. Write your explanation why you consider them virtues.
3. Give your own definition of virtue.

5 Virtues This, to me, is a virtue

because …

10
 1. 1.
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.
For me, a virtue is . . .

Aristotle argued that there are actions that are automatically wrong in all
conceivable circumstances. Also, no one is by nature morally virtuous.
Moral virtues are developed through the repeated exercise of the acts.
Making it a habit to strike the “mean” should be the goal of any moral agent
aspiring to be virtuous in character. The performance of these rational
activities requires some time to completely develop the disposition that will
render one virtuous in character.

☐Life of REASON as the happiest (5/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Aristotle also pointed out that it is important not only that man acts but
also that he should know. The latter refers to intellectual virtue. It
consists of wisdom, intelligence, and understanding. It is through
these virtues of thought that man is able to grasp, deliberate, and
discern the first principles and the truths concerning the particulars
and the universals. And this requires reason. Every excellent decision
presupposes an excellent reason. Decision is to the character while
deliberation and thought are to the intellect (White 1992).

Aristotle was clear in pointing out the important connection between

virtue and happiness. Anybody who aspires to live a happy life must
endeavor to live a virtuous life. The continued pursuit of their virtuous
person for the rational sovereign end is an expression of their

11
sovereign self. There is peace and self-respect gathered from living a
life of reason and virtue.

Activity:

Read Book I of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, preferably the 2009

translation by David Ross and edited by Lesley Brown.

1. How is happiness as an end different from other ends of man?

_____________________________________________________

2. Contemplate on what you would consider intellectual virtues and

moral virtues. How are they different and how are they the same?

Aristotle enumerated some requisite characteristics that must

describe a morally virtuous agent when doing virtuous acts. Agents
who will find themselves lacking in these descriptions cannot be said
to be genuinely virtuous in character: (1) the agent must act in full
consciousness of what he is doing; (2) he must will his action and
pursue it for its own sake; and (3) the act must proceed from a fixed
and unchangeable disposition. Thus, you will not qualify as morally
virtuous if you only accidentally landed on the mean, if your choice
was forced on you, if you are unable to demonstrate consistency in
choosing the mean, or if you are only choosing to do good because
you see it is a way to attaining another end.

12
Activity:

1. Read the news article entitled “Celebrating Good Unique Filipino

Values”which is available at
https://news.mb.com.ph/2016/11/05/celebrating-good-unique-
filipino-values/

List down at least five Filipino values from the given article. Examine
your chosen Filipino values in the light of Aristotle’s Doctrine of the
Mean and discuss your answers to the following questions:

Can you think of possible scenarios where any of your chosen Filipino
values is better categorized as vice rather than virtue? Explain your
answer.

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

13
 ______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

n3.2 Normative Ethics: Theories of Conduct

In the previous part of the Module on Normative Ethics, we talked about

egoism, altruism and virtue-based ethics. Those are theories revolving
around the concept of what is good. Is good defined in terms of what is
good for the self? For others? Or, is it the case that one can be good to the
self when you do good to others? Egoism, altruism and virtue ethics can
be considered theories of value and focus on What do we value most?

In the second part of the Module on Normative Ethics, we will talk about
Theories of Conduct. Our decision on What is Right is conventionally
divided into Duty-based or Consequence-based notion. The former is
called Deontology and highlights the rightness of an action based on
following a rule. The latter is called Teleology and justifies that the act is
right based on the consequence of the action.

In recent development of philosophy, other areas of concerns have been

presented and these paved the way for more complex discussion on
feminist ethics, human (and animal) rights, and other acts which can be
considered unnecessary or heroic but are done by people nevertheless, the
supererogatory acts.

In Ethical concepts are, or purport to be, normative. Normativity means that

they command, oblige, recommend, or guide. Normative theories make
claim on us. But the question is, where does the authority over us come
from? We accept such claims simply because we consider them as part of
the real world, or that we voluntarily accept them being products of self-
reflections, or expression of our autonomy.

Moral philosophy aspires to understand the fact that human actions, unlike
the actions of the other animals, can be morally right or wrong. We already
have the idea that actions might be morally good or bad. The function of a
certain action must be determined in order to know what counts as a good
or bad action.

14
As rational beings, we are aware of, and therefore in control of, the
principles that govern our actions. A good action is one that constitutes its
agent as the autonomous and efficacious cause of her own movements.
These properties correspond, respectively, to Kant's two imperatives of
practical reason. Conformity to the categorical imperative renders us
autonomous, and conformity to the hypothetical imperative renders us
efficacious. And in determining what effects we will have in the world, we
are at the same time determining our own identities.

☐ 4.2.a Deontological/Duty Ethics (1/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Deontology comes from the Greek word deon which means “being
necessary” and refers to the study of duty (and obligation). Deontology
suggests that the ultimate standard of morality focuses on the right or
wrong of the action itself. In order words, the right or wrong is not affected
by external factors. The actions are not affected by the goodness or
badness of their consequences. To consider an action as moral is only
because it contains positive values in nature, and therefore we have the
responsible to do it.

For example, there are some old sayings like "to kill one as a
warning for a hundred" as what proponents of death penalty or supporters
of extrajudicial killing justify. Whether or not these methods can reduce the
number of crime, some innocent people will definitely be involved.
Therefore, these actions are immoral under any conditions.

One of the philosophers who strengthened deontology is Immanuel

Kant (1724-1804). He said that human beings have the faculty called
rational will. We act according to principles that we determine for
ourselves. These principles are not limited to our immediate surroundings
but reflect on our actions that affect the world and generations. We do not
just act based on natural animal instincts.

Our rational will triumphs over base impulse. We realize our capacity
to not mindlessly react to the environment and base impulse but to have
rational authority over things. This is agency, and with our agency we can
self-legislate or become autonomous authors of the law which we create as

15
basis for our action.

In life, we are often told which actions are right or wrong, but these
are based on what the authority figures say. Our parents, schools,
government, organizations have determined certain commands. What
deontology does is to show us our capacity for rational and moral reflection,
whether to accept those commands blindly or be enlightened with the
reason behind them. Should children be expected to comply and obey, or
should they exercise rational will to mature and survive in the complex
world. With deontology, we can validate the rules and laws and reject
those that are irrational because they are self-contradictory or self-
destructive.

One of Several key points of the Kantian Theory

1.The importance of emphasising reason

Any moral behaviour must be based on a sense of goodwill. Our reason

enables us to differentiate right from wrong. Hence doing good in goodwill
is clearly the perfect scenario; but even if bad is done in goodwill after
analysing the action with reason is still morally acceptable.

2. Unconditionally taking up responsibility is of utmost importance

Everyone has the responsibility to comply with moral principles, but the
compliance of such principles is not merely done to achieve a certain
objective. One complies unconditionally since it is the moral thing to do.
Kant would consider this as moral. For example, doing good for other
people’s compliment is immoral It is only moral if we do good purely
because we think it is the right thing to do.

3. It is immoral to tell lies under any circumstance.

Kant believes that morals and ethics should be based on integrity. Without
integrity, there is no way to establish any ethical principles and values.

4. Treating people equally with no discrimination

If you agree that certain behaviour and the principles behind these
behaviour are moral, you may also accept that these behaviour be applied

16
on yourself. We cannot agree on one thing while behaving in another way.

Activity:

Case Study: We have the duty to defend “xxxxxx” (taken from Personal,
Social and Humanities Section. HK: Government Logistics Department,
2009)

THE THREE PRINCIUPLES OF THE PEOPLE by Sun Yat-sen

(http://sun.yatsen.gov.tw/content.php?cid=S01_03_03)

The Three Principles of the People are political principles for China
implemented by Sun Yat-sen. The principles reflected the core values of
the Chines people in the early 20th century, including “The People’s
Relation”, “The People’s Power” and the “The People’s Welfare”.

1. The People’s Relation: Oppose to aggression of other countries; defeat

warlords collaborating with imperialism, so as to unite all different
ethnicities of China, and to recognize self-determination.

2. The People’s Power: The government is owned by its people. The

people are entitled to four rights – election, recall, initiative and
referendum—to monitor their government. On the other hand, the
government has five rights (power of governance) – legislation, jurisdiction,
execution, examination, and control – to govern our country. This principle
emphasizes that the government holds the power of governance so that it
can carry out the policies effectively; while the people have the power of
politics to monitor the government.

3. The People’s Welfare: It involves another two important principles. First

is the equality of land holdings so that all peasant farmers have their own
farmland. This allows the people to handle basic food issues for survival.
Second is the restriction of capital. Individuals cannot control people’s
livelihood, so that people can engage themselves in economic activities
and improve their living standard.

Questions

1. What do think are the things in the “Three Principle of the People” are
obligated to preserve?
___________________________________________________________

17
 ___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

2. Why should these core elements be preserved?

___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

☐3.2.b. Teleological/ Utilitarianism/ Consequentialist Ethics (2/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

It seems that “bringing the greatest happiness to the majority” is a

reasonable principle to judge right and wrong. But what is “happiness” after
all?
Is the happiness one gets from sex comparable to that from winning
the Nobel Peace Prize? How to measure the magnitude of happiness?
Regarding the definition of happiness, Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and
his student John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873) have distinctively different views.

What is happiness?

Bentham’s theory

Bentham thinks that all kinds of happiness in the world are the same
and have no difference in nature. The only difference lies in the magnitude
of different types of happiness. We can only say that one behaviour brings
relatively more happiness while another brings relatively less.

Mill’s theory

Mill is a student of Bentham. Regarding ‘what is happiness’, they

both have different views. He thinks that happiness is not only different in
terms of magnitude but also in terms of levels. Therefore, inferior
happiness can never be compared to superior happiness, no matter how
much more there are. Mill thinks that human beings have the ability to

18
pursue superior happiness, for example through the pursuance of the true,
the good and the beautiful. Superior happiness is often the happiness of
the majority instead of happiness of an individual.

Activity:

THE PARABLE OF THE BURNING HOUSE (adapted for The Lotus Sutra
https://www.age-of-the sage.org/buddhism/parable_burning_house.html )

The Parable of the Burning House appears in Chapter 3 ( the Hiyu Chapter )
of the Lotus Sutra. In this parable a scenario is presented where children are
in great danger in a house on fire.

One day, a fire broke out in the house of a wealthy man who had many
children. The wealthy man shouted at his children inside the burning house to
flee. But the children were absorbed in their games and did not heed his
warning, though the house was being consumed by flames.

Then, the wealthy man devised a practical way to lure the children from the
burning house. Knowing that the children were fond of interesting playthings,
he called out to them, "Listen! Outside the gate are the carts that you have
always wanted: carts pulled by goats, carts pulled by deer, and carts pulled by
oxen. Why don't you come out and play with them?" The wealthy man knew
that these things would be irresistible to his children.

The children, eager to play with these new toys rushed out of the house.
Seeing that the boys were safe, the old man was relieved. He was glad that
his lie had successfully lured his boys from the fire.

QUESTIONS

1. Under normal circumstances, do you think that lying is moral?

______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
2. If you were the old man, facing the above scenario, what factors would
you consider before making your decision?
______________________________________________________________

19
 ______________________________________________________________

3. From the perspectives of utilitarianism, do you think the old man’s

behavior is moral?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

☐3.2.c. Rights-based Ethics (3/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

Justice is the respect for rights of the society to pursue the greatest
happiness of the greatest number. According to J.S. Mill (1907):

“When we call anything a person’s right, we mean that he has a valid

claim on society to protect him in possession of it, either by force of
law, or by that of education and opinion. If he has what we consider a
sufficient claim, or whatever account, to have something guaranteed
to him be society, we say that he has a right to it.”

Activity:

10 Countries With the Worst Human Rights

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIe4K8tUxqw

Human Rights Watch: Gov't will do everything to prevent probe on human

rights situation in PH | ANC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zViI7Fp36kM

From the documentary NO BOUNDARIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

(RTHK, June 2004)

In some western countries, in order to protect the defendant’s rights, criminal

trials are conducted on the principle of “presumption of innocence”, which
means that a defendant is presumed to be innocent and the prosecutor bears
the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The
rationale behind this stringent principle of burden of proof is “rather be lenient
than accuse wrongly”, which means rather set 10 bad people free than
wrongly accuse and convict one good person. At the same time, however, the
principle allows some true criminal offenders to be set free, thereby doing
injustice to the victims. How then should our society strike a balance?

20
More than a decade ago, a murder took place in Devil’s Peak, Kowloon.
Despite the overwhelming evidence against the murderer, he was acquitted
because the police were found to have extorted a confession from him. There
was another case which involved illegal abortion causing death. The victim
was a girl aged 17 or 18, who allegedly died following an illegal abortion that
she underwent at an unlicensed clinic. Law Or, the unlicensed doctor who
performed the abortion, was charged with murder, but he was given the
benefit of doubt and hence acquitted. A fair trial is the foundation of justice in
the contemporary society. However, occasionally the trial process is liable to
be tainted with errors of judgment or deficiencies in forensic technology, as a
result of which a defendant may be wrongly convicted. These victims, who
suffer from the mistakes of others, have to spend the rest of their precious
lives behind bars and may not achieve anything in the future.

Camera crew went to America and the UK to visit local scholars, and visited
an American group which specially reverses injustice judgments for innocent
people, with the purpose to see how they reverse and find out the truth. In this
special series, two controversial cases happened in Hong Kong many years
ago were selected as examples to illustrate how the right of the accused is
protected under the principle of innocence hypothesis.

QUESTIONS

1. Do you think severe punishment should be applicable to repeated

criminals to maintain law and order? What factors do you take into
consideration before you make a decision?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
2. 2. Enumerate the merits and demerits of severe punishment?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

21
 ______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

☐ 3.2.d. Feminist care ethics (4/5)

(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)
(Discussion (from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-ethics/)

Feminist ethics is not merely a branch of ethics but is instead “a way of

doing ethics” (Lindemann 2005, 4). Feminist Ethics believes that
oppression involves ignoring the marginalized and vulnerable sectors of the
society. Hence, it is committed to highlight the personal experience/s of the
oppressed people, especially in gendered ways.

It aims to understand, criticize, and correct:

(1) the binary view of gender,

(2) the privilege historically available to men, and/or
(3) the ways that views about gender maintain oppressive social
orders or practices that harm others, especially girls and women who
historically have been subordinated, along gendered dimensions
including sexuality and gender-identity.

Not all feminist ethicists are the same. Some operate on the binary and
criticize the privileging of men as the more morally worthy half of the binary.
They argue against the maintenance of such social order. Feminist
ethicists who are attentive to the intersections of multiple aspects of identity
including race, class, and disability, in addition to gender, focus more on
criticizing and correcting oppressive practices that harm and marginalize
others who live at these intersections.

In a broad sense, feminist ethics is fundamentally political (Tong 1993,

160). This is not necessarily a feature of feminist ethics that distinguishes it
from “mainstream” ethics, however, since feminist analyses of ethical
theory as arising from material and nonideal contexts suggest that all ethics
is political whether its being so is recognized by the theorist or not.

The point of feminist ethics is, ideally, to change ethics for the better by
improving ethical theorizing and offering better approaches to issues.
Meaning to say, feminist ethics is not limited to gendered issues alone but

22
to analyses of moral experiences that share features with gendered issues
or that reflect the intersection of gender with other bases of oppression.

Read

Case Digest from the PHILIPPINE Context

LIBERATED WOMEN II
by Ma. Lorena Barros
Pugadlawin Taon 18 Blg. 3; Enero-Pebrero, l971

The oppression of women in Philippine society cannot be isolated from the

oppressive character of the society as a whole. Filipino women comprise
what has been described by Juliet Mitchell (in Women: the Longest
Revolution) as “half a totality.” Filipino women are fundamental to the Filipino
condition; their oppression must reflect a fundamentally oppressive system
of social relationships.

And indeed, if we look at Philippine society as a whole, we find that it is a

society characterized by the oppression and exploitation of the many by the
few. More exactly, it is a society where the peasants and workers (90%) of
the total population, and to a lesser but no less real extent, the students,
professionals, small businessmen and the national bourgeoisie (9%) are
systematically deceived and coerced to submit to the greedy domination of
the U.S. Imperialists, the comprador bourgeoisie, the landlords and the
bureaucrat capitalists (1%) who run the country. (See Amado Guerrero,
Philippine Society and Revolution). …

Although by standards of contemporary bourgeois social science

(which has developed more instruments of measurements than useful
concepts for comprehending social phenomena) the literature on women’s
liberation may be said to be impressionistic and inexact, it is clear at any rate
that imply because “women are the other half” and are thus an integral part
of society, their oppression is integral to the oppressive nature of the society
as a whole.

Therefore, as Juliet Mitchell wrote: “Since the problems that face women are
related to the structure of the whole society, ultimately our study of our
particular situation as women will lead us to the realization that we must
attempt to change this whole society.”
Women in the Philippines who have become conscious of their oppression
have indeed arrived at this realization. The programme of the Malayang
Kilusan ng Bagong Kababaihan (MAKIBAKA) states:

23
To liberate the creative potential of women, it is first of all necessary to
liberate the Filipino masses of which they are part. No sector of the
population can be free from exploitation of any sort unless the primary
exploitative relation, that between U.S. Imperialism and domestic feudalism
on the one hand and the broad masses of the Filipino people on the other, is
totally destroyed. Moreover, it is in their participation in the national struggle
for liberation for feudal and foreign oppression that women can achieve their
own liberation.

This position puts the women’s liberation movement in the Philippines

squarely in the context of the national democratic revolution. It defines
women’s liberation in terms of participation in the revolutionary struggle now
assuming unprecedented heights in the cities and the countryside.

The new femininity

At one point in the December 4 rally protesting the blacklisting of
more than 800 student activists from their schools (in which a high school
student, Francis Santillano, was brutally slain by fascist hirelings of the Feati
Administration), a male demonstrator succinctly defined the new woman, the
new femininity. The protest march had entered the UST campus and the
marchers were urging the other students to join them. A male demonstrator
shouted to some women students watching the marchers from a safe
second floor window: “Maganda sana kayo, mga miss, kung nandito kayo sa
baba at nakiki-martsa sa amin!” You would be beautiful if you were down
here marching with us).” Although he spoke in terms of beauty, since it is
primarily in terms of beauty that women are valued, it is clear that he was
referring to anew ideal of femininity.

It is an ideal that is a far cry from the Maria Clara satirically described
by Rizal but taken as a model by several generation of Filipinos both men
and women, who took him too literally. Maria Clara was a social ornament, a
weakling who fainted in times of stress and who ran away to a nunnery to
hide her head (while her lower region, just like the ostrich’s stuck out in an
extremely vulnerable position for Padre Salve’s delectation), a poor sort of
human being who could betray the man she loved for the sake of an
abstraction such as her own and her dead mother’s “honor”. Maria Clara’s
social conscience manifested itself in impulsively donating her necklace to a
beggar, a leper. It was beyond her capacity to conceive of more substantial
action. In all things, Maria Clara’s supreme quality was submission, a quiet,
un-protesting acceptance of her sad fate.

The new woman, the new Filipino, is first and foremost a militant. It is not
enough for her to decorate a school window and smile encouragement at the
boys marching in protest against student harassment: she must march with
them. And since, in the cities, participation in protest marches means not
only marching but often also dodging police truncheons, evading precinct-

24
produced Molotovs and pillboxes and trying to get some over to the pigs’
lines oneself, expertise in hitting the ground when the Metrocom or Task
Force Lawin or whatever pig force it is start firing, agility in climbing wall, and
other requirements of urban street fighting - the new Filipina is one who has
learned not only to march, but also to carry herself in these situations with
sufficient ease and aplomb to convince the male comrades that they need
not take care of her, please.

The new Filipina is one who can stay whole days and nights with
striking workers, learning from them the social realities which her bourgeois
education has kept from her. This means that she is also ready to picket for
hours under the sun, ready to throw herself in front of a truck bearing scabs
or materials for the factory’s machines to prevent it from breaking the picket
line. More important, this means that she has convinced her parents of the
seriousness of her commitment to the workers’ and peasants’ cause, a
commitment which keeps her out of the house at all hours of the day and
night, and requires all sorts of behavior previously way beyond the bounds of
respectable womanhood.

For the militant in the rapidly developing revolutionary situation in

which we find Philippine society today, there is never enough time for all the
work that has to be done. There are political tracts and manifestoes to
mimeograph, correspondence to type, research files to keep in order and
update, revolutionary articles to write or reproduce, press releases and other
propaganda materials to distribute - to mention only routine , almost clerical
tasks. There are discussion groups to organize and sustain, and always
several strikes which need support, speeches to make, teach-ins to attend,
first aid and nursing classes, fund-raising projects to finance day-to-day
activities, a myriad things which require more than 24 hours each day.

The militant has therefore to spend all of her waking hours at the
organization headquarters or wherever her political tasks take her; more
conveniently, even her sleeping hours. That is, all her time. For most Filipino
families, with their traditional feudal set-up, this means virtually being a
stowaway, cut off from one’s family and home….

The Filipina, through her militant participation in the revolutionary

struggle, has thus brought to life a new women, this new woman is no longer
either a mindless ornament (which she would be if born to a well-to-do
family) or a mindless drudge (if she were the wife or daughter of a peasant
or worker). She is a woman who has ‘discovered the exalting realm of
responsibility’, a woman fully engaged in the making of history, in the
destruction of imperialism and feudalism and the building of a new
democratic society. No longer is she simply a woman-for-marriage, but more
and more a woman-for-action. A comrade. …
It may be noted that both the new femininity and the new masculinity are

25
 defined in terms of revolutionary militance. Those who like to say “Vive le
difference!” may inquire: but where then is the difference? What
distinguishes the new woman from the new man?

The answer is nothing. …

In a future article, I hope to discuss how the differences between men

and women have been overplayed in history for the purpose of exploiting
both. For now, let me just say quite arbitrarily that there are very few
differences between men and women which are not culturally or ideologically
defined; that is, the biologically given differences are very few and cannot be
the most important reasons for the marked social differences we find today
between men and women. Especially in the face of the high level of
technology available to contemporary generations, whatever biological
inequalities there might be are easily rendered insignificant. All evidence
points to the conclusion that men and women belong to a single species and
cannot differ to the extent of requiring for each of them a whole and separate
set of cultural definitions.

QUESTIONS

1. What is New Femininity? How should the new Filipina be defined,

according to Lorena Barros?
__________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

2. In the context of Feminist Ethics, identify the concept of good.

__________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
3. Elaborate on what is considered right for feminism.
__________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

26
☐3.2.e. Supererogatory Actions (5/5)
(Put a mark on the box once you have finished this section)

When an act that is more than is necessary, that is supererogatory. It is

good but not morally required to be done. Meaning to say, even with a
lesser course of action is involved, it would still be an acceptable action. It
differs from a duty, which one is obliged to do. We can say that it is
supererogatory if we perform above and beyond a normative course of duty
to further benefits and functionality.

Whether an act is supererogatory or obligatory is, of course, debatable. For

instance, in many religion, donating money to charity is supererogatory.
Also, a nation state has no duty to protect the citizens of an adjacent nation
from crime committed to them, but some nation sends a peaceful
intervention into another country to help other people.

Erika Summers Effler (2010) undertook ethnographic fieldwork with anti–

death penalty activists STOP and the Catholic Workers who strive to
alleviate poverty. It was presented that in both of them, members face
serious problems that range from the broad to the intimately personal.
These include adverse political conditions, internal conflict, and financial
difficulties and daily frustration, etc. Effler (2010) finds that overcoming
these obstacles, recovering from failure, and maintaining the integrity of the
group require a constant process of emotional fine-tuning, and she
demonstrates how activists do this through thoughtful analysis and a lucid
rendering of their deeply affecting stories.

27
n Conclusion of Module 3

☐ Summary

In this module, you have learned different normative ethical frameworks as

a reference guide to approach practicl and later on applied ethical
discussions. The frameworks discussed here include ideas and theories on
ultimate good, came as a reaction to the conceptual and logical flaws of
ethical relativism, which claims that moral values depend on the individual
or culture. This includes discussions on Egoism and Altruism, which later
on will be integral components of what is known as Virtue Ethics

The second part of this module discusses other normative ethical

frameworks ranging from deontology to rights-based ethics and more.
to approach practical and later on applied ethical discussions.

In the next module, you will learn that that different cultures are
governed by numerous value systems, and that they too have different
standpoints on the question of ethics and morality.

Summative Assessment:

(1) Option 1: Write a 500-word analysis of the situation portrayed in

the following video using the Asian ethical frameworks and religious
conceptions discussed in this module:
[Zero] <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOMbySJTKpg >

(2) Option 2: Write a 500-word Reflective Essay applying the

frameworks discussed to our current society . Analyze the strengths
and weaknesses of using these frameworks.

28
Guide Criteria for evaluating activities/responses and assesments

Rating Criteria
A = Excellent • Focused, Succinct Thesis
• Organized from the beginning to end to Support Thesis
• Effective, Germane Use of Textual Support
• Originality of Ideas
• Clear, Well Formulated Sentences
• Correct Citation Form, Well Documented
• Precise and Effective Language
• Fluid Transitions
B = Good • Focused, Succinct Thesis
• Adequately Organized to Support Thesis
• Some Originality of Ideas
• Textual Support not always Effective, Germane
• Mechanical Problems that do not Interfere with Readability
• Clear, Well Formulated Sentences
• Correct Citation Form, Well Documented
C = Fair • Unfocused, Weak Thesis
• Partially Organized to Support Thesis
• Paucity of Original Ideas
• Ineffective Textual Support
• Incomplete, Poorly Formulated Sentences
• Informal, inappropriate Language
• Careless Editing, Incorrect Citation Form
• Mechanical Errors that do not Interfere with Readability
D = Poor • No Thesis
• Lack of Organization
• No Original Ideas
• Little Textual Support, Irrelevant Appeal to Text
• Mechanical Errors that Interfere with Readability
• Lack of Editing, Incorrect/Missing Citation
• Inadequate Length, Underdevelopment of Ideas
U = Unacceptable • Plagiarism
• Inappropriateness
• Unintelligibility
• No Thesis
• No Organization/Structure
• Failure to Submit

29