SHOWS SITUATIONS

THAT DEMONSTRATE
FREEDOM OF CHOICE
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Explain that freedom is the part of the inherent
nature of the human life.
Recall the notion of consequentialism in arguing
that choice has consequences.
Give examples of the situations where freedom of
choice and the consequences of a choice are
demonstrated.
DEFINITION OF FREEDOM
Freedom Of Choice- Describes an individual’s opportunity and
autonomy to perform an action selected from atleast two available
options,unconstrained by external parties.
Article 18 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights sates,
 “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief,
and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public
or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice,
worship and observance.”
FREEDOM
 Thomas Hobbes argued
that in the law of nature,
man has the freedom to do
anything, even sacrifice
others people’s rights and
survival in exchange of his
own.
 John Locke argued that man
is born with the right to life,
right to property, and right to
liberty but he is also born in a
state of perfect freedom.
 Survivals becomes paramount
that he soon loses regard for
the observance of other
people’s rights.
 Jean-Jacques Rousseau
argued that man is born
free, independent, and
with the capacity to
survive without
considering peace and
security measures in
relation to others.
Many philosophers demonstrate that
freedom is a bit part of the life of human
beings. As human beings have the capacity
to will and think rationally, freedom is also
inherent in their nature.
Freedom is usually associated with free will.
FREEDOM OF CHOICE AND ACTIONS
 This freedom of the will enables all of us to
commit actions we deem appropriate for a situation.
 Every action has a corresponding result or
“consequence”.
 A consequence has a tendency to be either helpful
or harmful to ourselves and to others.
 FREEDOM OF CHOICE
Freedom of choice describes an individual’s
opportunity and autonomy to perform an
action selected from at least two available
options, unconstrained by external parties.
 
FREEDOM OF CHOICE: CONSEQUENTIALISM
Consequentialism holds that all actions have consequences and
that the ultimate basis for any judgement or wrongness of a conduct or
action is their consequences.
 Utilitarianism = greatest number if happiness for greatest number
or people
 Teleology = final or end goal of an action or decision
 State Consequentialism = welfare of the whole society or state
 Ethical Altruism = welfare of other people
 Ethical Egoism = maximizes good for oneself
FREEDOM OF CHOICE: MORAL DILEMMA
 Due to the freedom that is innate to human beings, the exercise of
this freedom in making choices leads to moral dilemmas.
 Moral dilemmas occur when a person is trap between a situation that
poses a serious conflict with his or her principles.
 Moral dilemmas also occur at times when an agent has to do two
things but cannot do them at the same time and failure to do so can
cause harm.
 MORAL DILEMMA: Situation 1

 You have a talent in painting. You also have a passion in

science and mathematics. It is now the time that you need
to choose which degree you will take. You know that you
have a greater passion in the arts but it is more practical to
choose a degree related to math and science like
engineering. Your parents can only pay for one college
degree and your parents are not getting younger. Given
that they gave you the freedom to choose the degree that
you will take, what will you choose.
 Which will you pick?

Study Arts
 it is your passion Pros
 you know that you will be great in this field
 when you enjoy doing something, you keep
on improving your skills and talents to be top

 it is not practical as the opportunities to

Cons
get a decent job after graduation is lower
than being an engineer
 Study Engineering

 it is more practical choice

 you can help you parents after since Pros

there are sure opportunities in this field

 it is not the field that you really want to pursue

 you have doubts if you keep up with requirements of the
field Cons
 you will lose precious time that you can put in improving
your craft
 MORAL DILEMMA: Situation 2

 Imagine that you are a brilliant surgeon. The hospital you are working in
have 5 patients who are in critical condition and 2 patient who is in the
stage comatose. The 5 patients are each in need of a different organ and
will die without the organ. Unfortunately, there are no available or organs
for the transplant operations of the 5 patients. Going to the patient in
comatose stage, you know that this patient will make any time soon but
you also discovered that this is in fact a homeless and family-less man.
His organs are also match to the 5 patients. Suppose that if the patient
will die, no one will look for him. Will you kill the patients in comatose
stage in order to provide his healthy organs to the 5 dying patients?
 Which will you pick?

 This might sound morally correct if one will use that utilitarian
principle. By killing 1 person, you will be able to save 5 lives,
which follows the principle of utility. Furthermore, saving 5 lives Option A
extend the happiness to their families and friends. Hence, it is
justified to kill 1 patient to save 5 patients. Furthermore, as it is
also given in the situation, the patient was homeless and has
no family. This means that the person is not contributing to the
welfare of the society and probably, a problem for the
government.; hence, it does not matter if the patient will die.
Killing the person will even give the state a favor. Therefore, it Kill 1 to save 5
is morally right to kill the comatose patient if it will cause
“greater good for the many”.
 Killing person intentionally is murder. By killing the
patient in comatose, the doctor is also allowing
future similar situations to happen in reference to Option B
this. Hence, it will become acceptable to kill
anyone through the justification that killing that
person will save more lives. On top of this, isn’t it
unfair and wrong to kill a person, who has the Do not kill 1
potentiality to change and become a good citizen the
of the homeless makes him inferior that the 5 other
comatose
patients? Therefore, it is not right to kill the
comatose patient. patient
SUMMARY
 Freedom is an integral part of the human life but in
exercising one’s freedom of choice, one is also
facing different moral dilemmas.
 Every choice has a consequence corresponding it;
thus, it is important to critically evaluate one’s
options before deciding.
THANK YOU
FOR LISTENING!