CHAPTER 3:

| Ethics for College Students| Dominican College of Tarlac

LESSON 1:
| Ethics for College Students| Dominican College of Tarlac
 - W H AT I S -
Universal Value
A value is a quality that weans people, things, events or
situations. The term is used to designate the moral
characteristics that are inherent in a subject piety,
responsibility, secularism, respect, etc.

Universal, however, is an adjective that is related to what

belongs or which relates to the universe. The concept refers
to the set of all things created and what is common to all its
kind.
Universal Values
• are formed by implied behavioral standards that are
necessary to live in harmonious and peaceful society.
• It is a notion which is not obvious to define, because, a value is
associated with morality and ethics, which is difficult to
transpose, or refer to the level of the group.
• In addition to cultural differences, we can say that the goodness,
solidarity, volunteerism and honesty are virtues you want in any
country or region. So, these are universal values.
• It is acquired with family education and school, because the
process of socialization involves that new generations internalize
timeless concepts.
The Universal Values

S. H. Schwartz, defined “values” as conceptions of the

desirable that influence the way people select action and
evaluate events.
Schwartz’s results from a series of studies that included
surveys of more than 25,000 people in 44 countries with a
wide range of different cultural types suggest that there are
fifty-six specific universal values and ten types of universal
values.
 - VA L U E T Y P E S -
With the specific
Related Values
1. Power: Social status and prestige, control or dominance
over people and resources.
2. Achievement: Personal success through demonstrating
competence according to social standards.
3. Hedonism: Pleasure or sensuous gratification for oneself.
4. Stimulation: excitement, novelty, and challenge in life.
5. Self-Direction: Independent thought and action –
choosing, creating, exploring.
 - VA L U E T Y P E S -
With the specific
Related Values
6. Universalism: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and
protection for the welfare of all people and for nature.
7. Benevolence: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of
people with whom one is in frequent personal contact.
8. Tradition: Respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs
and ideas that traditional culture or religion provide.
9. Conformity: Restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely
to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.
10.Security: Safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships,
and of self.
 Schwartz also tested an 11th possible universal value,
“spirituality” or the ‘goal of finding meaning in life’,
but found that it does not seem to be recognized in all cultures.
LESSON 2
What is Moral Character?
•Moral Character or character is an evaluation
of an individual’s stable moral qualities.
•The concept of character can imply a variety of
attributes including the existence or lack of
virtues such as empathy, courage, fortitude,
honesty, and loyalty, or of good behaviors or
habits.
 What is Moral Character?
•Lawrence Pervin defines moral character as “a
disposition to express behavior in consistent
patterns of functions across range of situations.
•A moral Character is defined as an idea in which one
is unique and can be distinguished from others.
•In another words, it is “human excellence,” or
unique thoughts of a character.
 CHARACTER TRAITS THAT IMPACT ONE’S HAPPINESS
Good Character consists of defining your values and integrity based on time-tested
principles and self-reflection and having the courage to live your life accordingly.

1. Integrity 8. Fairness 15.Kindness

2. Honesty 9. Forgiveness 16.Lovingness
3. Loyalty 10.Authenticity 17.Optimism
4. Respectfulness 11.Courageousness 18.Reliability
5. Responsibility 12.Generosity 19.Conscientiousness
6. Humility 13.Perseverance 20.Self-discipline
7. Compassion 14.Politeness
LESSON 3
STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
 Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development
• Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, a
comprehensive stage theory of moral development based on
Jean Piaget’s theory or moral judgment for children (1932) and
develop by Kohlberg.
• It focuses on the thinking process that occurs when one decides
whether a behavior is right or wrong.
• The framework of Kohlberg’s theory consists of six stages
arranged sequentially in successive tiers of complexity. He
organized his six stages into three general levels of moral
development.
LEVEL 1: PRE-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL
• At the pre-conventional level, morality is externally
controlled. Rules imposed by authority figures are
conformed to in order to avoid punishment or receive
rewards, this perspective involves the idea that what is right
is what one can get away with or what is personally
satisfying.
• Stage 1: Punishment/obedience orientation -Behavior is
determined by consequences. The individual will obey in
order to avoid punishment.
•STAGE 2: INSTRUMENTAL PURPOSE ORIENTATION
•– Behavior is determined again by
consequences. The individual focuses on
receiving rewards or satisfying personal needs.
Level 2: Conventional Level
•Conformity to social rules remains important to the
individual. However, the emphasis shifts from self-
interests to relationships with other people and
social systems. The individual strives to support rules
that are set forth by others such as parents, peers,
and the government in order to win their approval or
to maintain social order.
• Stage 3: Good boy/Nice girl orientation – Behavior is
determined by social approval. The individual wants to
maintain or own the affection and approval of others by
being a “good person”.
• Stage 4: Law and order orientation: Social rules and laws
are determined behavior. The individual now takes into
consideration a larger perspective, that of societal laws.
Moral decision making becomes more than consideration of
close ties to others. The individual believes that rules and
laws maintain social order that is worth preserving.
LEVEL 3: POST-CONVENTIONAL OR PRINCIPLED LEVEL
• The individual moves beyond the perspective of his/her own
society. Morality is defined in terms of abstract principles and
values that apply to all situations and societies. The individual
attempts to take the perspective of all individuals.
• Stage 5: Social contract orientation – Individual rights determine
behavior. The individual views laws and rules as flexible tools for
improving human purposes. That is, given the right situation, there
are exceptions to rules. When laws are not consistent with
individual rights and the interests of the majority, it does not bring
about good for people and alternatives should be considered.
•Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principle orientation -
According to Kohlberg, this is the highest stage of
functioning. However, he claimed that some
individuals will never reach this level. At this stage,
the appropriate action is determined by one’s self-
chosen ethical principle of conscience. These
principles are abstract and universal in application.
This type of reasoning involves taking the perspective
of every person or group that could potentially be
affected by the decision.
Arguments against Kohlberg’s Theory
• How does this theory apply to males and females?
• Kohlberg (1969) felt the more males than females move
past stage four in their moral development.
• He went on to note that women seem to be deficient in
their moral reasoning abilities.
• These ideas were not well received by Carol Gilligan, a
research assistant of Kohlberg, who consequently
developed her own ideas of moral development.
•In her groundbreaking book, in a “Different Voice:
Psychological Theory and Women’s Development”,
Gilligan criticized her former mentor’s theory because
it was based only on upper class white men and boys.
•She argued that women are deficient in their moral
reasoning – she proposed that males and females
reason differently.
•Girls and women focus more on staying connected
and the importance of interpersonal relationships.
 Kohlberg’s theory of moral
development provides a framework
in which to investigate and begin
to comprehend how moral reasoning
develops within individuals.
Human act vs Acts of Humans.
Acts of Man are actions that we do
based on our instinct and something
that we do even unaware and not
necessarily with the presence of our
will while Human Acts are actions that
we do with our awareness and
personal choice.
 üLet us explain this using this illustration
üAna who has the ability to hear involuntarily can hear
other people’s gossiping to another person (Act of
Man). But if Ana will listen attentively to those people
gossiping with an intention to know, who are they
gossiping about and what are they gossiping, this
becomes now the Human Acts.
üAs a result, human acts have moral value and
accountability. Human acts are moral behaviors that
can be either right or wrong, good or evil, based on
the three components.
Object, Intention and Circumstance

•The determinants of
morality are: Object,
Intention and Circumstance.
Definition of Terms:
•Object is the act done or accomplish with
our own freewill.

•Intention is the motive for which the act is

performed.

•Circumstance relates to the situations in

which the act is performed.
• The object of an act is the human act that's being performed. (Example: stealing a pack of gum from a
store)
• The intention of an act is what the person intends for the action to accomplish. (Example: to take a
pack of gum from the store without paying)
• The circumstance of an act is the outstanding factors of an act, along with the consequences that
come out of it. (Example: there are security cameras in the store)

• Yes, there are certain objects that are always wrong to choose. (Example: abortion, sex before
marriage, etc.)
• No, the intention of an act doesn't make it good or just, because the end doesn't justify the means.
• An evil intention doesn't make the action good or evil even if the object is good, because the end
doesn't justify the means either.

• Circumstances of a moral act can increase or diminish the moral goodness or evil of human acts and
the person's responsibility. (Example of moral goodness: a person steals money because they can't
pay off their sick brother's medical bills ) (Example of evil: a person steals money because they will be
killed if they don't )
 Lesson 1: REASON AND IMPARTIALITY
❑The ultimate basis for ethics is clear:
human behavior has consequences for
the welfare of others.
❑We are capable of acting toward others
in such a way as to increase or decrease
the quality of their lives.
REASON AND IMPARTIALITY
❑Reason and Impartiality are not absolute to any particular
group of people, while morality is absolute.
❑Whatever is considered wrong morally within a certain
group cannot be debated through reason. Morality decides
the outcomes first and then employs reason to justify it.
❑For impartiality, fairness is given more importance where
people are supposed to be treated equally before the law.
❑While morality may apply generally to a particular group of
people, the same cannot be said of reason and impartiality
because the two take a more individualized approach.
WHAT IS REASON?
• Reason is the capacity for consciously making sense of things,
establishing and verifying facts, applying logic, and changing or
justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or
existing information.
• Reason, is sometimes referred to as rationality.
• Reasoning is associated with thinking, cognition, and intellect.
• The philosophical field of logic studies ways in which humans
reason formally through argument.
IMPARTIALITY
• Also called evenhandedness or fair-
mindedness is a principle of justice
holding that decisions should be based on
objective criteria, rather than on the basis
of bias, prejudice, or preferring the
benefit to one person over another for
improper reasons.
• Impartiality makes no discrimination
as to nationality, race, religious beliefs,
class or political opinions.
Consequences of the fundamental
principle of Impartiality
It establishes one of its key values: non-
discrimination, which is one of the most
important elements of all aspects of the
protection of the human being: human
rights law, humanitarian law, and
refugee law.
•Impartiality is one of the more commonly
recognized aspects of the role of the
Mediator.
•This does not mean that the mediator should
somehow become inhuman and not have a
feeling of bias towards one party or another,
but that/he or she practices in a way that
minimizes any manifestation of this bias.
•Impartiality serves a purpose in
supporting conflict resolution
whether we are a mediator or not,
•The mediator creates a channel for
communication and not an obstacle
to it and remaining impartial allows
for the channel to be as unimpeded
as possible.
Reasons and Impartiality
as Requirement of Ethics
• In the Euthyphro, Socrates expresses astonishment that a young
man would prosecute his own father for murder.
• The conventional assumption he seems to be making is that filial
relationships impose special constraints that may override other
considerations, even in the gravest matter.
• For Euthyphro, by contrast, a murder is a murder, the fact us was
committed by his father has no bearing upon what he is required
to do about it. He must prosecute his father just as he would a
stranger.
• This brief passage can serve as an emblem of a perplexing range of
problems that bedevil ethical theory.
 There are at least three distinct elements that run
through these problems, namely:
1. We grant the powerful and persistent force of self-interest in our
lives, and assume that morality must somehow give us reasons for
constraining such motives;
2. We grant that rules and principle of conduct will be useless or
counter-productive in purely local or short-range terms, and
assume that morality must give us reasons for acting in principle
in spite of it;
3. We grant that our favorites and friends have special claims on our
attention, and assume that morality must give us reasons for
occasionally denying such claims.
Morality, thus, requires that we should
not play favorites, or manipulate rules to our
personal advantage, or make ad hoc
exceptions for ourselves. In that sense it
requires us to be Impartial.
 Lesson 2: FEELINGS and Moral Decision-
making
• Broadly stated that ethics is “concerned with making
sense of intuitions” about what is right and good. We
do this by reasoning our feelings.
• Biologists verify that ‘Emotion is never truly divorced
from decision making, even when it is channeled aside
by an effort of the will.”
• Moral philosopher Mary Midgley writes “Sensitivity
requires rationality to complete it, and vice versa”.
Ethics vs Feelings
•Many times, there’s a conflict between what
we naturally feels and what is considered to
be ethical.
•The problem is most of our feelings in today’s
world are unethical, politically incorrect or
even outright harmful.
1. GROUPISM
a. Natural Feeling: I am part of a group. I am supposed to help
this group become better. I am also supposed to compete with
other groups.
b. Reasoning: Being part of a herd made it easier for our
ancestors to survive in the wild. There were so many survival
benefits that belonging to a group brought. Naturally, our
ancestors started developing good feelings about belonging to
a group.
c. Ethical viewpoint: Help the group. Help other groups too,
there is no compelling reason to compete in today’s times of
peace.
 2. PATRIOTISM
• Natural Feeling: I was born in a place. I am supposed to help people
in the geographical vicinity around me. Those outside the border
don’t deserve that much attention as those inside the border do.
• Reasoning: Patriotism is Groupism in a higher scale. There have
been countless stories of propaganda by governments to motivate
people to join their wars to fight people over borders. We humans
tends to justify these efforts as noble.
• Ethical viewpoint: wars are always bad. There is no reason to be
proud of your country just because you were born in it.
3. DUNBAR’S NUMBER
a. Natural feeling: I cannot maintain more than 150
stable relationships.
b. Reasoning: Our brains have limited capacity and it
becomes mentally hard to maintain more
relationships.
c. Ethical viewpoint: Acceding to the Dunbar’s
number promotes groupism. Just as we push
ourselves to become better human’s we should
also try to push the Dunbar number further.
4. NEGATIVE FEELINGS TO CONTENT ON SOCIAL NETWORKS
a. Natural Feeling: I hate what’s being posted on Facebook.
They are just stupid selfies, people gloating their
achievement or just distracting, unproductive content.
b. Reasoning: Many of us have been taught to compete with
others since our childhood. We tend to compare ourselves
with other.
c. Ethical Viewpoint: We don’t have to compete with our
friends, we can applaud their life achievements without
comparing our lives with theirs.
 Steps in Moral Reasoning Model
Step 1: Identify the problem. What facts make this an ethical
situation?
Step 2: Identify the potential issues involved. What level of ethical
issues are we dealing with: systematic, corporate, or individual?
Step 3: Review relevant ethical guidelines. Given the facts and the
ethical issues, what alternative actions are possible in this situation?
Step 4: Know relevant laws and regulations. Who will be affected
by the alternatives and to what degree?
Step 5: Obtain consultation. Use ethical principles to decide on
the best alternative. The ethics of each of the most plausible
alternatives is assesses using ethical principle or rules.
Step 6: Consider possible and probable courses of action. Can the
best alternative be put into effect? Having decided on one
alternative, we need to see whether there are any practical
constraints which might prevent that alternative from being acted
upon.
Step 7: List the consequences of the probable courses of action.
Step 8: Decide on what appears to be the best course of action.
Implementing the best alternative.
 ‘Only human beings can be ethical’
Only human beings can be Ethical (lifted from the
book of De Guzman, (2017) -Ethics: Principles of
Ethical Behaviour in Modern Society)

Only human beings are rational,

autonomous, and self-conscious

Only human beings can act that can

be labeled morally or immorally
Only human beings are part of the moral
community
 Human Acts
vs.
Acts of Man
Human Act
An act that proceed from the deliberate free will of man

Acts of man
Acts that man performs inadvertently and without the
exercise of free choice.
 1. Knowledge
- has intellectual knowledge in doing the
act
- Awareness to the means and end of act
2. Freedom
Elements of - Acted under control of his will
Human Acts - no influence or constraint
- no force
3. Voluntariness
- presence of knowledge and freedom
Modifier Of Knowledge: Ignorance
Ignorance is the absence of knowledge that a person ought to
possess
Ignorance is either vincible or invincible. Vincible ignorance can
easily be reminded through ordinary diligence and reasonable efforts.
The ignorance of a visitor regarding a particular address in a certain
place is vincible, since he can easily ask for information from a
policeman or pedestrian.
Invincible ignorance is the type in which a person without being
aware of it, or having awareness of it, lacks the means to rectify it.
Ignorance regarding missing persons or objects is often invincible.
Thus, a cook might be unaware that the food he is cooking is
contaminated.
 1. Elicited Acts
- Acts which are started by
the will, performed by the will, and
completed by the will.
Human Acts in e.g. “I wish” , “I want” , “I like”
relation to the Will 2. Commanded Acts
- Acts which are begun in the
will, performed by the
will,completed by the will through
another medium which is under
the control of the will.
e.g. controlling emotions
Observable actions like running,
walking, lifting etc.
 Elements of Elicited Acts
I WANT TO BE AN ATTORNEY TO ENSURE THAT
JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED TO POOR INDIVIDUALS.
Counsel Consent
Wish Intention “judgement” or “decide what
“desire” “attainability” “do I really need means to
that?” use”

Choice Command Fruition

“interplay “satisfaction
“right to between intellect of attaining
pick” and the will” desired end”
 1. Internal Acts
- Actions by man by way of
internal mental powers under the
Types command of the will.
of
Commanded e.g. Act of remembering
Acts Imagination
Controlling anger
 Types of
2. External Acts Commanded Acts
- Acts that are
affected by bodily powers
of man under the
command of the will.
e.g. eating
jumping
singing
 3. Mixed Acts
Types - Acts that include the use of
body and mental powers
of
Commanded e.g. exam/quiz
Acts driving
debating/speaking
 Human Acts in Relation to Reason
1. Good Acts
- Actions “in harmony with the dictates of right reason”
e.g. Businesses paying the right amount of taxes
Appropriate use of authority of the law enforcers
2. Evil Acts
- Actions “contradiction to the dictates of right reason”
e.g. Selling expired products
Manipulated raid and arrest
 Voluntary Act (freewill)
Voluntariness is the act which
of proceeds from an intrinsic
principle with knowledge
Human Acts of the end.
 Philosophers nowadays tend to divide
ethical theories into three areas:
metaethics, normative ethics and
applied ethics.
• Meta-ethics deals with the nature of
moral judgement. It looks at the
Approaches origins and meaning of ethical
principles.
to ethics • Normative or Prescriptive ethics is
concerned with the content of moral
judgements and the criteria for what
is right or wrong.
• Descriptive or Applied ethics looks at
controversial topics like war, animal
rights and capital punishment
 There is no ethical theory that can
resolve every situation perfectly.
Moral dilemmas are inevitable.

Not every ethical Should you tell a lie to protect a

family member who has done
question has one something wrong? Lots of people
would say lying is always wrong.
right answer. But those same people probably
think we have special duties to
That's ok. take care of our families. Our
answer in a case like this depends
on how much we value certain
ideals - truth or family.
MORAL ISSUES AND ETHICS
IN PRAXIS
 What is Ethical Case Analysis?
Ethical case analysis is a common exercise for identifying and reasoning
about ethical challenges in complex situations.

It is a systematic approach in figuring out the right moral decision in a

particular situation.

Its principles also encourage you to form an accurate picture of the

situation and think through the effect of your decisions before you act.
 What are Ethical / Moral Dilemmas?
Ethical or Moral dilemmas are situations in which conflicts between two
choices are present.
A mother, who has the sole responsibility of feeding her children but is
unemployed, has the tendency to commit theft.

In other words, the moral agent is faced with the difficulty of making a moral
decision between stealing or letting her children go hungry which could even
lead to death.

Ethical or moral dilemmas are complicated challenges that cannot be easily

solved. Therefore, the ability to find the optimal solution in such situations is
critical to everyone.
 SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL
REASONING MODEL
Seven Steps to Ethical Decision Making which is developed by Scott B. Rae and Kenman L. Wong.
“A Model for Moral Decision Making”. Chap. 16 in Beyond Integrity: A Judeo-Christian Approach to Business Ethics.
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996.
SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL

1. GATHER FACTS 2. DETERMINE THE ETHICAL

ISSUES
In order to know the situation— After having identified the facts and overall
either it involves a moral dilemma or context of the moral situation, the ethical
an ethical issue—before dealing with issue/s involved in the situation must be clearly
it, we must ask basic questions to stated in order to specify what issue one has to
gather information. make a decision to. This section must likewise
clearly state the major moral dilemma involved
in the case.
SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL

3. IDENTIFY THE VIRTUES OR 4. LIST THE ALTERNATIVES

PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE A
BEARING ON THE CASE
These suggested courses of actions must then
Universal principles such as right to life, to
be evaluated based on its applicability,
security, to privacy, among others are
sensibility, practicality before selecting one as
imperatives for the human being to live
well. Thus, identifying the surrounding the course of action or decision to be made
principles of a certain case is a must in regarding the moral situation.
ethical decision making.
 SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL

5. COMPARE THE ALTERNATIVES WITH 6. CONSIDER THE

THE VIRTUES / PRINCIPLES CONSEQUENCES

If principles have not yielded a clear decision,

The initial list of suggested courses of consider the consequences of your alternatives. Take
actions must then be evaluated from the the alternatives and work out the positive and
vantage point of the identified ethical negative consequences of each.
values and principles.
SCOTT RAE’S 7-STEP MORAL REASONING MODEL

7. MAKE A DECISION (INCLUDING ONE’S

JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DECISION)
After having analyzed the moral dilemma situation (from
steps 1 thru 6), one must now make a decision based on
what has been previously discussed and must clearly
justify the decision that has been made.