ETHICS

LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

LESSON 1: BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS
A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
After engaging in these topics, you should be able to:
1. define the terms ethics, moral agent, and act;
2. differentiate moral standards from immoral standards;
3. explain the meaning of dilemma;
4. enumerate and describe the three levels of dilemma;
5. expound why freedom is crucial in our ability to make moral decisions; and
6. elucidate the minimum requirements of morality.
KEY CONCEPTS:
A. DEFINITION OF TERMS
1. ETHICS
Ethics is based on well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought
to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues.
Some years ago, sociologist Raymond Baumhart asked business people, "What do ethics mean to
you?". Among their replies were the following:
"Ethics has to do with what my feelings tell me is right or wrong."
"Ethics has to do with my religious beliefs."
"Being ethical is doing what the law requires."
"Ethics consists of the standards of behaviour our society accepts."
"I don't know what the word means."
The above replies might be typical of our own. The meaning of ethics is hard to pin down, and
the views many people have about ethics are shaky. Like Baumhart's first respondent, many
people tend to equate ethics with their feelings. But being ethical is clearly not a matter of
following one's feelings. A person following his or her feelings may recoil from doing what is
right. In fact, feelings frequently deviate from what is ethical.
Ethics should not be identified with religion. Most religions, of course, advocate high ethical
standards. Yet if ethics were confined to religion, then ethics would apply only to religious
people. But ethics applies as much to the behaviour of the atheist as to that of the devout
religious person. Religion can set high ethical standards and can provide intense motivations for
ethical behavior. Ethics, however, cannot be confined to religion nor is it the same as religion.
Being ethical is also not the same as following the law. The law often incorporates ethical
standards to which most citizens subscribe. But laws, like feelings, can deviate from what is
ethical. The United States of America’s pre-Civil War slavery laws and the old apartheid laws of
present-day South Africa are grotesquely obvious examples of laws that deviate from what is
ethical.
Finally, being ethical is not the same as doing whatever society accepts. In any society, most
people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical. But standards of behaviour in society can
deviate from what is ethical. An entire society can become ethically corrupt. Nazi Germany is a
good example of a morally corrupt society.
Moreover, if being ethical were doing whatever society accepts, then to find out what is ethical,
one would have to find out what society accepts. To decide what I should think about abortion,
for example, I would have to take a survey of American society and then conform my beliefs to
whatever society accepts. But no one ever tries to decide an ethical issue by doing a survey.
Further, the lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to equate ethics with
whatever society accepts. Some people accept abortion but many others do not. If being ethical
were doing whatever society accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues which does
not, in fact, exist.
What, then, is ethics? Ethics is two things. First, ethics refers to well-founded standards of
right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights,
obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to
those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder,
assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty,
compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the
right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are
adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well-founded reasons.
Secondly, ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As
mentioned above, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is
necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-
founded. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and
our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to
standards that are reasonable and solidly-based.
The advancement of technologies, the economic realities, the pluralistic worldviews and the
global communication make it difficult for the society to manage its views when it comes to the
directives on either good or bad. Ethical directives are not always clearly evident to humanity but
sometimes the society disagrees on the bases of what is right or wrong. The advancement of
technology changes or diverts what is already practiced.
The following are the other definitions of Ethics:
The word ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos, meaning a characteristic way of doing
things or a body of customs. From the etymology of the word, one understands ethics to be a
study of human customs or ways of doing things.
Ethics is also defined as the science of the morality of human acts. It is a science because it is a
systematic body of knowledge meant to guide people in their pursuit of the good and happy life.
Ethics is therefore, a practical science; it is not a speculative science that merely theorizes. Ethics
is meant to be applied- that is, it teaches how people ought to live.
REFERENCES:
BOOKS
Bulaong, O.G., et.al. 2018. Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation. Rex Book Store. Nicanor
Reyes St., Manila, Philippines.
Carino, J. V. 2018. Fundamentals of Ethics. C and E Publishing, Inc. 839 EDSA, South Triangle,
Quezon City, Philppines.
Maboloc, C.R.B. 2010. Ethics and Human Dignity. Rex Book Store. Nicanor Reyes St., Manila,
Philippines.
Pasco, M.O.D. 2018. Ethics. C and E Publishing, Inc. 839 EDSA, South Triangle, Quezon City,
Philippines.
Quito, E.S. 2008. Fundamentals of Ethics. C and E Publishing, Inc. 839 EDSA, South Triangle,
Quezon City, Philippines.
ONLINE SOURCES
http://www.attitudes/ethics/values/edocu.
https://www.thrall.org/readyref/Ethics.html
https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
https://primaryethics.com.au/references/
https://www.quora.com/How-does-culture-shape-moral-behavior
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/all-is-not-relative
https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-0-387-79061-9_1831
http://www.ethics.com.ph : Ac, Edwards. The components of Ethics, Texas Publishing 2012
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/what-is-ethics/
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/moral-agent
https://study.com/academy/lesson/moral-agency-nature-of-persons-moral-character-
personhood.html
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-
https://www.quora.com/What-is-human-acts-in-ethics
https://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/glossary/moral-standard
https://ourhappyschool.com/node/824
https://literaryterms.net/dilemma/
https://www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/ethics-articles/What_Is_an_Ethical_Dilemma
https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_human-relations/s09-01-an-ethics-framework.html
https://www.coursehero.com/file/47090594/Foundation-of-Morality
https://www.thrall.org/readyref/Ethics.html
https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
https://primaryethics.com.au/references/
1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS
1.1. DEFINITION OF MORAL AGENT
DEFINITION OF MORAL AGENT:
A moral agent is a person who has the ability to discern right from wrong and to be held accountable for
his or her own actions. Moral agents have a moral responsibility not to cause unjustified harm. Some
philosophers believe personhood requires moral agency, the capacity to make moral decisions based on the
perception of right and wrong. Stated simply, it is the ability to judge between good and bad, moral and
immoral. Building on this definition, a moral agent is a being who is conscious of the concepts of right and
wrong.
For instance, a 7-year-old who bites her little brother, then lies about it to escape punishment, is
exhibiting the traits of a moral agent. She knows what she did is wrong. Therefore, she makes it into the
personhood club. However, a puppy who bites and excitedly tears up every shoe in sight does not. At first
glance, this whole thing might seem cut and dry.
However, what about the severely and profoundly mentally handicapped man who bites his nurse every time
she tries to feed him? Based on all observation, he has no concept that his biting is hurtful and wrong. Does
this mean he's not a person? Just like the autonomy argument, the requirement of moral agency often gives rise
to more questions than answers.
In moral agency, we have unjust actions and fair doings. When do we say that actions are unjust, when it
is not giving enough proof leading to explainable situations, while fair doing is the equality and truthfulness of
one’s behavior or action? Adults with full capacity relinquish their moral agency only in extreme situations,
like in being held hostage. How? Simply by the expectation that a person is accountable for the harm he/she
causes others. For example: The hostage taker is responsible for the person he harmed.
Questions to be asked regarding moral agency:
1. Do companies have moral agency?
2. How artificial intelligences like robots can also develop moral agency?
3. How about socially intelligent non-human animals such as dolphins and elephants?
Indeed, future philosophers and legal scholars will need to consider moral agencies as it applies to these
situations and others. Exemption to the rules: A person with mental disability is not regarded as a moral agent.
He has no capacity of rational reasoning because of his condition.
1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS
1.2. HUMAN ACT
HUMAN ACT
The following are the definitions of human act:
1. Human act refers to every action of a person and the only one that proceeds from the deliberate will
of this human being. Consequently, it proceeds from the knowledge of the intellect and the free decision of
the human will. It is an act of which a human being is the master, whether the act begins and ends in the will,
i.e., elicited act (such as love), or the will affects another faculty, i.e., commanded act (such as writing). Only
human acts are morally imputable to the one who performs them, unlike what are called acts of a human being
performed by persons who lack the use of reason or whose freedom is totally inhibited as in sleep or under
anesthesia.
2. Human acts are either good or bad, depending on whether they agree or disagree with the norms of
morality. Morally indifferent human acts are purely theoretical. In practice all deliberate actions are somehow
either morally good or bad.
3. Human act is more of conscience involved, where he knows and understands the act being
performed. Example: Before jumping into the river to save a person who is drowning, he judges his ability to
swim and save. If not, he asks the right person to do it.
4. Human acts are the actions that humans do: any and every action. That action, whatever it may be, can
be, or is, subject to an interpretation by whatever prescription or grouping of rules one calls ethics.

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.3. MORAL VERSUS NON-MORAL STANDARDS
MORAL VERSUS NON-MORAL STANDARDS
Moral Standard Non-Moral Standard
A moral standard refers to the norms which we Non-moral standards refer to rules that are
have about the types of actions which we unrelated to moral or ethical considerations.
believe to be morally acceptable and morally Either these standards are not necessarily linked
unacceptable. Specifically, moral standards to morality or by nature lack ethical sense.
deal with matters which can either seriously Basic examples of non-moral standards include
harm or seriously benefit human beings. The rules of etiquette, fashion standards, rules in
validity of moral standards comes from the line games, and various house rules.
of reasoning that was taken to back or support
them, and thus are not able to be formed or
changed by particular bodies of authority.
Moral standards are those concerned with or Technically, religious rules, some traditions,
relating to human behavior, especially the and legal statutes (i.e. laws and ordinances) are
distinction between good and bad (or right and non-moral principles, though they can be
wrong) behavior. ethically relevant depending on some factors
and contexts.
Moral standards involve the rules people have
about the kinds of actions they believe are
morally right and wrong, as well as the values
they place on the kinds of objects they believe
are morally good and morally bad. Some
ethicists equate moral standards with moral
values and moral principles.

The following six (6) characteristics of moral standards further differentiate them from non-moral standards:
1. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits. Moral standards deal with matters which
can seriously impact, that is, injure or benefit human beings. It is not the case with many non-moral standards.
For instance, following or violating some basketball rules may matter in basketball games but does not
necessarily affect one’s life or wellbeing.
2. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values. Moral standards have overriding character or
hegemonic authority. If a moral standard states that a person has the moral obligation to do something, then
he/she is supposed to do that even if it conflicts with other non-moral standards, and even with self-interest
3. Moral standards are not established by authority figures. Moral standards are not invented, formed, or
generated by authoritative bodies or persons such as nations’ legislative bodies. Ideally instead, these values
ought to be considered in the process of making laws. In principle therefore, moral standards cannot be
changed nor nullified by the decisions of particular authoritative body. One thing about these standards,
nonetheless, is that its validity lies on the soundness or adequacy of the reasons that are considered to support
and justify them.
4. Moral standards have the trait of universalizability. Simply put, it means that everyone should live up to
moral standards. To be more accurate, however, it entails that moral principles must apply to all who are in the
relevantly similar situation. If one judges that act A is morally right for a certain person P, then it is morally
right for anybody relevantly similar to P.
5. Moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Moral standard does not evaluate standards on
the basis of the interests of a certain person or group, but one that goes beyond personal interests to a universal
standpoint in which each person’s interests are impartially counted as equal. Impartiality is usually depicted as
being free of bias or prejudice. Impartiality in morality requires that we give equal and/or adequate
consideration to the interests of all concerned parties.
6. Moral standards are associated with special emotions and vocabulary. Prescriptivity indicates the
practical or action-guiding nature of moral standards. These moral standards are generally put forth as
injunction or imperatives (such as, ‘Do not kill,’ ‘Do no unnecessary harm,’ and ‘Love your neighbor’). These
principles are proposed for use, to advise, and to influence to action. Retroactively, this feature is used to
evaluate behavior, to assign praise and blame, and to produce feelings of satisfaction or of guilt. If a person
violates a moral standard by telling a lie even to fulfil a special purpose, it is not surprising if he/she starts
feeling guilty or being ashamed of his behavior afterwards. On the contrary, no much guilt is felt if one goes
against the current fashion trend (e.g. refusing to wear tattered jeans).

LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.4. DEFINITIONS OF DILEMMA
DEFINITIONS OF DILEMMA
It is defined as a difficult situation in which you A dilemma is a conflict, problem, or situation
have to choose between two or more with two possible solutions. When a dilemma
alternatives. When you are in the state of occurs, a person has to make the difficult
dilemma, you are facing problems on certain choice between two desirable options, or,
situations that you are not sure on the contrastingly, two undesirable options. The
consequences after each decision was made. word comes from the Greek dilēmma (di
Examples: “twice” + lēmma “premise”); it is a term used
He was faced with the dilemma of whether or in logic and rhetoric when causing an opponent
 not to return to his country. to choose between two unfavorable options.
He is thinking whether he will enroll this
semester or wait after two years to continue his
studies.
There are three conditions that must be present for a situation to be considered an ethical
dilemma. These are:
The first condition occurs in situations when an individual, called the agent, must make a
decision about which course of action is best. Situations that are uncomfortable but that do not
require a choice, are not ethical dilemmas. For example, students in their internships are required
to be under the supervision of an appropriately credentialed social work field instructor.
Therefore, because there is no choice in the matter, there is no ethical violation or breach of
confidentiality when a student discusses a case with the supervisor.
The second condition for ethical dilemma is that there must be different courses of action
to choose from.
Third, in an ethical dilemma, no matter what course of action is taken, some ethical
principle is compromised. In other words, there is no perfect solution.
KINDS OF DILEMMAS:
1. Ethical Dilemma: There is choice to be made between two options, neither of which resolves
the situation in an ethically acceptable fashion, in such cases, societal and personal ethical
guidelines can provide satisfactory outcome for the chooser.
Approaches to ethical dilemma:
1. Utilitarian approach - provides the most good and least harm
2. Rights approach -protects and respects the rights of everyone involved.
3. Fairness and Justice approach - treats all human equally.
4. Common Good approach - suggests that relationships in the society are the basis of ethical
reasoning
5. Virtue Approach - enables us to act upon our best potential character
Dilemma: A co-worker asked me to cover her shift because she had run away from home.
Because she was afraid her dad would come looking for her, she leaned on me to cover her shift.
Conclusion: My ethics were up to the test, but by using a utilitarian approach, the proper course
of action became apparent.
Approach used: Utilitarian and Virtue
Questions to ask by applying the utilitarian approach:
How many co-workers would be affected?
How the restaurant would be affected?
How I would be affected?
Questions to ask by applying the Virtue approach:
What kind of person will I become if I do that?
Virtues to consider: Comparison and Generosity
Analysis: By applying the Utilitarian approach, I had to consider how my co-worker, the
restaurant and I would be affected. My co-worker could risk her dad finishing her and she could
be punished for what she had done and the restaurant might have been short of an employee for
the night and I would have lost my day of work, but I would have to put more hours towards my
pay check. But if I did this for my co- worker, she would also owe me a favor when applying the
virtue approach, you have to ask yourself what kind of person will I become if I do this and is
this action consistent with my acting at my best and I considered the two virtues in my scenario,
compassion and generosity. I should feel sympathetic towards my co-worker because of the
situation she was in and I should be generous enough to take her shift.
2. Moral Dilemma: These are situations where persons, who are called “moral agents” in ethics,
are forced to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the
situation in a morally acceptable manner.
Situation: Lindsay is a deeply religious person; hence, she considers killing humans absolutely
wrong. Unfortunately, it is found out that Lindsay is having an ectopic pregnancy. Ectopic
pregnancy is an abnormal situation wherein the pregnancy occurs in the fallopian tube instead of
in the uterus. The development of the fetus will endanger the mother. According to experts the
best way to save Lindsay’s life is to abort the fetus, which necessary implies killing the fetus. If
they are not going to abort the fetus, both of them will die.
Lindsay’s conflicting Dilemmas:
A. Resort to abortion; which jeopardizes her moral integrity.
B. Does not resort to abortion; that endangers her life as well as the fetus.
CONDITIONS THAT MUST BE PRESENT IN MORAL DILEMMAS:
1. The person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make a decision about which course of
action is best.
2. There must be a different course of action to choose from.
3. No matter what course of action is taken; some moral principles are always compromised. It
means that there is no perfect solution for any problem.
In moral dilemmas the moral agent seems fated to commit something wrong, which implies that
she is bound to morally fail because in one way or another she will fail to do something which
she ought to do. In another words, by choosing one of the possible moral requirements, the
person also fails on others.
TYPES OF MORAL DILEMMA:
A. Epistemic and Ontological Dilemmas
-There are two or more moral requirements that conflict with each other
-The moral agent hardly knows which one takes precedence over the other.
Example: I ought to honor the promise to my mother to treat her in the classic restaurant after my
work hours but on my way home, I saw a woman nearly to give birth and needs to be brought to
the hospital.
Question: Where does my actual duty lie?
: Is an important purpose being served by treating my mom in the classic
restaurant?
: How serious is the condition of the woman who is about to give birth?
Realization: Indeed, it is very hard to decide what will be the decision after all, but there are
options to consider which should be better than the other. Only it needs a fuller knowledge of the
situation, this is called Epistemic.
Ontological moral dilemma on the other hand involves:
 - Two or more moral requirements that conflict with each other, yet neither of these
conflicting moral requirements override each other. This is not to say that the moral agent does
not know which moral requirements are stronger than the other.
Point: Neither of the moral requirements is stronger than the other, hence the moral agent can
hardly choose between the conflicting moral requirements.
Example: A military doctor is attending to the needs of the wounded soldiers in the middle of the
war. Unfortunately, two soldiers urgently need a blood transfusion. However only one bag of
blood is available at the moment.
Question: To whom shall the doctor administer the blood transfusion?
We could not tell that administering the blood to soldier A is more moral than on soldier
B.
B. Self-imposed and World -imposed Dilemmas: Caused by an agent’s wrong doings
Example: A is running for the position of town mayor. During the campaign period she promised
to the people and the community to protect their virgin forest. But at the same time she seeks
financial support from a mining corporation. Fortunately, she won the election.
Dilemma: She is faced with the dilemma on fulfilling her promise to the people and at the same
time, allowing the mining corporation to destroy the forest. Indeed, she created her obligations in
which it is impossible for her to be discharged from both obligations.
World imposed moral dilemma - Certain events in the world place the moral agent in a
situation of moral conflict.
Example: William Styron’s famous Sophie’s choice is a classic example. Sophie, a Jewish
mother, has been asked to choose which of her two children, Eva or Jan, will be sent to the gas
chamber in Auschwitz. An SS doctor, Fritz, will grant a dispensation to only one of her children.
If she does not choose which one should live, Dr. Fritz will send both to their death. Sophie
chooses her daughter Eva to go to the gas chamber. Her son, Jan, is sent to Children’s camp.

LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.4. DEFINITIONS OF DILEMMA
DEFINITIONS OF DILEMMA
It is defined as a difficult situation in which you A dilemma is a conflict, problem, or situation
have to choose between two or more with two possible solutions. When a dilemma
alternatives. When you are in the state of occurs, a person has to make the difficult
 dilemma, you are facing problems on certain choice between two desirable options, or,
situations that you are not sure on the contrastingly, two undesirable options. The
consequences after each decision was made. word comes from the Greek dilēmma (di
Examples: “twice” + lēmma “premise”); it is a term used
He was faced with the dilemma of whether or in logic and rhetoric when causing an opponent
not to return to his country. to choose between two unfavorable options.
He is thinking whether he will enroll this
semester or wait after two years to continue his
studies.
There are three conditions that must be present for a situation to be considered an ethical
dilemma. These are:
The first condition occurs in situations when an individual, called the agent, must make a
decision about which course of action is best. Situations that are uncomfortable but that do not
require a choice, are not ethical dilemmas. For example, students in their internships are required
to be under the supervision of an appropriately credentialed social work field instructor.
Therefore, because there is no choice in the matter, there is no ethical violation or breach of
confidentiality when a student discusses a case with the supervisor.
The second condition for ethical dilemma is that there must be different courses of action
to choose from.
Third, in an ethical dilemma, no matter what course of action is taken, some ethical
principle is compromised. In other words, there is no perfect solution.
KINDS OF DILEMMAS:
1. Ethical Dilemma: There is choice to be made between two options, neither of which resolves
the situation in an ethically acceptable fashion, in such cases, societal and personal ethical
guidelines can provide satisfactory outcome for the chooser.
Approaches to ethical dilemma:
1. Utilitarian approach - provides the most good and least harm
2. Rights approach -protects and respects the rights of everyone involved.
3. Fairness and Justice approach - treats all human equally.
4. Common Good approach - suggests that relationships in the society are the basis of ethical
reasoning
5. Virtue Approach - enables us to act upon our best potential character
Dilemma: A co-worker asked me to cover her shift because she had run away from home.
Because she was afraid her dad would come looking for her, she leaned on me to cover her shift.
Conclusion: My ethics were up to the test, but by using a utilitarian approach, the proper course
of action became apparent.
Approach used: Utilitarian and Virtue
Questions to ask by applying the utilitarian approach:
How many co-workers would be affected?
How the restaurant would be affected?
How I would be affected?
Questions to ask by applying the Virtue approach:
What kind of person will I become if I do that?
Virtues to consider: Comparison and Generosity
Analysis: By applying the Utilitarian approach, I had to consider how my co-worker, the
restaurant and I would be affected. My co-worker could risk her dad finishing her and she could
be punished for what she had done and the restaurant might have been short of an employee for
the night and I would have lost my day of work, but I would have to put more hours towards my
pay check. But if I did this for my co- worker, she would also owe me a favor when applying the
virtue approach, you have to ask yourself what kind of person will I become if I do this and is
this action consistent with my acting at my best and I considered the two virtues in my scenario,
compassion and generosity. I should feel sympathetic towards my co-worker because of the
situation she was in and I should be generous enough to take her shift.
2. Moral Dilemma: These are situations where persons, who are called “moral agents” in ethics,
are forced to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the
situation in a morally acceptable manner.
Situation: Lindsay is a deeply religious person; hence, she considers killing humans absolutely
wrong. Unfortunately, it is found out that Lindsay is having an ectopic pregnancy. Ectopic
pregnancy is an abnormal situation wherein the pregnancy occurs in the fallopian tube instead of
in the uterus. The development of the fetus will endanger the mother. According to experts the
best way to save Lindsay’s life is to abort the fetus, which necessary implies killing the fetus. If
they are not going to abort the fetus, both of them will die.
Lindsay’s conflicting Dilemmas:
A. Resort to abortion; which jeopardizes her moral integrity.
B. Does not resort to abortion; that endangers her life as well as the fetus.
CONDITIONS THAT MUST BE PRESENT IN MORAL DILEMMAS:
1. The person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make a decision about which course of
action is best.
2. There must be a different course of action to choose from.
3. No matter what course of action is taken; some moral principles are always compromised. It
means that there is no perfect solution for any problem.
In moral dilemmas the moral agent seems fated to commit something wrong, which implies that
she is bound to morally fail because in one way or another she will fail to do something which
she ought to do. In another words, by choosing one of the possible moral requirements, the
person also fails on others.
TYPES OF MORAL DILEMMA:
A. Epistemic and Ontological Dilemmas
-There are two or more moral requirements that conflict with each other
-The moral agent hardly knows which one takes precedence over the other.
Example: I ought to honor the promise to my mother to treat her in the classic restaurant after my
work hours but on my way home, I saw a woman nearly to give birth and needs to be brought to
the hospital.
Question: Where does my actual duty lie?
: Is an important purpose being served by treating my mom in the classic
restaurant?
 : How serious is the condition of the woman who is about to give birth?
Realization: Indeed, it is very hard to decide what will be the decision after all, but there are
options to consider which should be better than the other. Only it needs a fuller knowledge of the
situation, this is called Epistemic.
Ontological moral dilemma on the other hand involves:
- Two or more moral requirements that conflict with each other, yet neither of these
conflicting moral requirements override each other. This is not to say that the moral agent does
not know which moral requirements are stronger than the other.
Point: Neither of the moral requirements is stronger than the other, hence the moral agent can
hardly choose between the conflicting moral requirements.
Example: A military doctor is attending to the needs of the wounded soldiers in the middle of the
war. Unfortunately, two soldiers urgently need a blood transfusion. However only one bag of
blood is available at the moment.
Question: To whom shall the doctor administer the blood transfusion?
We could not tell that administering the blood to soldier A is more moral than on soldier
B.
B. Self-imposed and World -imposed Dilemmas: Caused by an agent’s wrong doings
Example: A is running for the position of town mayor. During the campaign period she promised
to the people and the community to protect their virgin forest. But at the same time she seeks
financial support from a mining corporation. Fortunately, she won the election.
Dilemma: She is faced with the dilemma on fulfilling her promise to the people and at the same
time, allowing the mining corporation to destroy the forest. Indeed, she created her obligations in
which it is impossible for her to be discharged from both obligations.
World imposed moral dilemma - Certain events in the world place the moral agent in a
situation of moral conflict.
Example: William Styron’s famous Sophie’s choice is a classic example. Sophie, a Jewish
mother, has been asked to choose which of her two children, Eva or Jan, will be sent to the gas
chamber in Auschwitz. An SS doctor, Fritz, will grant a dispensation to only one of her children.
If she does not choose which one should live, Dr. Fritz will send both to their death. Sophie
chooses her daughter Eva to go to the gas chamber. Her son, Jan, is sent to Children’s camp.
LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...
1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS
1.6. SOURCES OF PERSONAL ETHICS
SOURCES OF PERSONAL ETHICS
People are not born with a set of values. The values are developed during the aging
process. We can gain our values by watching others, such as parents, teachers, mentors, and
siblings. The more we identify with someone, say, our parents, the more likely we are to model
that person’s behavior. For example, if Jenny sees her father frequently speed when driving on
the highway, there is a good chance she will model that behavior as an adult. Or perhaps because
of this experience, Jenny ends up doing the exact opposite and always drives the speed limit.
Either way, this modeling experience affected her viewpoint. Likewise, if Jenny hears her mother
frequently speak ill of people or hears her lying to get out of attending events, there is a good
chance Jenny may end up doing the same as an adult—or the opposite. Besides our life models,
other things that can influence our values are the following:
1. Religion. Religion has an influence over what is considered right and wrong. Religion can be
the guiding force for many people when creating their ethical framework.
2. Culture. Every culture has a societal set of values. For example, in Costa Rica living a “pure
life” (Pura Vita) is the country’s slogan. As a result of this laid back attitude, the culture focuses
on a loose concept of time compared to the United States.
3. Media. Advertising shows us what our values “should” be. For example, if Latrice watches
TV on a Thursday night, advertisements for skin creams and hair products might tell her that
good skin and shiny hair are a societal value, so she should value those things, too.
4. Models. Our parents, siblings, mentors, coaches, and others can affect our ethics today and
later in life. The way we see them behave and the things they say affect our values.
5. Attitudes. Our attitudes, similar to values, start developing at a young age. As a result, our
impression, likes, and dislikes affect ethics, too. For example, someone who spends a lot of time
outdoors may feel a connection to the environment and try to purchase environmentally friendly
products.
6. Experiences. Our values can change over time depending on the experiences we have. For
example, if we are bullied by our boss at work, our opinion might change on the right way to
treat people when we become managers.
LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.7. SOURCES OF ORGANIZATIONAL/CORPORATE ETHICS
SOURCES OF ORGANIZATIONAL/CORPORATE ETHICS
 Since we know that everyone’s upbringing is different and may have had different models,
religion, attitudes, and experiences, companies create policies and standards to ensure employees
and managers understand the expected ethics. Understanding our own ethics and company ethics
can apply to our emotional intelligence skills in the form of self-management and managing our
relationships with others. Being ethical allows us to have a better relationship with our
supervisors and organizations.
For example, companies create values statements, which explain their values and are tied
to company ethics. A values statement is the organization’s guiding principles, those things that
the company finds important. A company publicizes its values statements but often an internal
code of conduct is put into place in order to ensure employees follow company values set forth
and advertised to the public. The code of conduct is a guideline for dealing with ethics in the
organization.
We often see in our Bollywood movies where the hero, a victim of injustice fights against
the system. But that is merely the legal aspect. Deep ingrained is ethics and in many of the
situations all the three (individual, corporate and system) are to blame.
LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.8. FOUNDATION OF MORALITY (FREEDOM)
FOUNDATION OF MORALITY (FREEDOM)
Morality presupposes that the person is capable of choosing right from wrong. The
person’s ability to choose is grounded on the idea that the person is free. Freedom distinguishes
the person from other creatures, especially to his nearest kin – the brutes. Freedom sets the
person apart from nature. Freedom is about making our way within the limits of physical and
material entanglements. We either live in a life of virtue or vice. To live in either way depends
on our choices.
According to Kant, is an idea of reason that serves an indispensable practical function.
Without the assumption of freedom, reason cannot act upon. Freedom is the integral part of
reasoning which conveys that action functioned well because we have the freedom to choose
from.
Examples:
1. Woman regaining her independence after a controlling marriage is over. A woman feels that
she is free from pain and emotional destabilization when she was freed from her abusive
husband.
2. The right of every Filipino citizen to express their ideas and opinions like the constitutional
freedom of expression.
3. Filipinos exercising their right to vote.
TYPES OF FREEDOM
1. Internal Freedom – It is happening inside you. What you feel that your emotion dictates.
2. External Freedom – It is all about what is happening in your surroundings.
THREATS TO FREEDOM
A. External
It includes all factors in your environment like:
Injustice - When the society you live in does not see the good effects of values.
Criminal Act - When someone keeps on stealing what you have.
Social Factor - The kind of place where you belong cannot accept what you are and the ability
that you can.
B. Internal. This refers to the factors within the person like:
Dogma- is defined as the official system of principle or tenets concerning faith, moral and
behavior often pertaining to those of a church. If you always follow rules based on how you do
things, your freedom to think the best in what you do may be oppressed. So, it is still a threat for
your freedom.
Irresponsibility is being not able to do things because you are taking it for granted.
Fear- If you are coward to try, you do not have freedom to be courageous.
Habits- Your desire to do things as you always do will limit you to discover more.
Freedom as foundation of moral acts, freedom itself is based off of a moral argument,
specifically that everyone is equal and should have the right to succeed. The concept of morality
implies freedom to choose; if no freedom is possible then the possibility of a moral choice is
null. When we say null, it is invalid and has zero value. The moment a moral action becomes
obligatory; it ceases to be moral, and becomes a matter of self-interest. Morality is not
necessarily founded on freedom, but without it, could you say any obligatory act was done
morally? Therefore, to be free, we should be so morally inclined. We cannot justify freedom if
we do not have moral values and virtues to hold on.
LESSON 1

BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

A. Definition of ethics, moral agent, and human act
B. Moral versus non-moral standards
C. What are dilemmas?
D. Three levels of moral dilemma (individual, organizational, systemic)
E. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others
F. Minimum requirements of morality: reason and impartiality
Show more...

1. BASIC CONCEPTS IN ETHICS

1.9. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF MORALITY
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF MORALITY
1. Reason is the ability of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of
logic. It also means innate and exclusive human ability that utilizes new or existing information
as bases to consciously make sense out of things while applying logic. It is also associated with
thinking, cognition, and intellect.
It must be noted that reason in and by itself is also not a sufficient instrument in assessing
moral situations. Reason can sometimes be blinded in implementing and following its own strict
rules that it becomes incapable of empathy for the other. While it is morally wrong for someone
to steal food out of hunger, to punish a person for doing it without even trying to listen to his
reasons for committing such an act may be considered cold and cruel. That is not to say that the
act is deemed right after one finds out why someone stole. It is then viewed as a complex act,
connected to a web of various circumstantial factors and motives. A person’s act of stealing may,
in fact, appear to be a symptom of a greater injustice in one’s society prompting one to do good
not by simply punishing an immoral act but by proactively seeking justice for the disadvantaged
people who are pushed by poverty and societal injustice to feed themselves by stealing. In other
words, reason, while a reliable ground for moral judgment, needs the feeling of empathy to come
up not just with a moral but also a just decision.
2. Impartiality means manifesting objectivity. It is the quality of being unbiased and objective
in creating moral decisions. It underscores that a morally impartial person makes moral decisions
relative to the welfare of the majority and not for specific people alone.
Example: Your friend is Japanese and she cannot understand English. The doctor wants to
explain her condition but you need to translate it so that your friend can understand.
Doctor: I am sorry to tell you that you need to take the abortion to save your life.
You (translator): The doctor said that you do not need an abortion because it is against the will of
God, you will just wait and see your fate if you will die or live.
The way you interpret things to your friend is not the exact idea that the doctor wants to
emphasize to your friend, but instead you changed the idea. You are impartially treating your
friend with the wrong explanation or wrong idea from what was given emphasis earlier. You
created your own objective rather than relay the original one. This is called impartiality.
One way of ensuring the rationality and impartiality of moral decisions is to follow the
seven-step moral reasoning model. These steps can serve as guide in making choices of moral
import.
1. Stop and think. Before making any decision, it is best to take a moment to think about
the situation itself, your place in it, and other surrounding factors which
merit consideration, such as the people involved and the potential effects
of your decisions on them.
2. Clarify goals. One often decides on the basis of what he wants to accomplish.
Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, short term wants eclipse long-
term goals. Thus, you must determine if you are willing to sacrifice more
important life goals to achieve your short-term goals.
3. Determine facts. Make sure you gather enough information before you make a choice. An
intelligent choice is one that is supported by verified facts. Never make a
choice on the basis of hearsay. Make sure your sources are credible and
have integrity.
4. Develop options. Once you are clear in terms of your goals and facts, try to come up with
 alternative options to exhaust all possible courses of action. Clear your
mind and try to think of other creative ways of clarifying your motives
and implementing your actions with the least ethical compromise.
5. Consider Filter your choices and separate the ethical from the unethical choices
consequences. bearing in mind both your motives and the potential consequences of
your action. A decision turns something in your mind into reality. Make
sure you do not regret the decision you have conferred reality upon.
6. Choose. Make a decision. If the choice is hard to make, try consulting others who
may have knowledge or experience of your situation. Once you make up
your mind, summon the will to do the right thing even if it is hard and
seemingly counter-intuitive.
7. Monitor and Monitor what happens after your decision and have enough humility to
modify. modify your action or behaviour as necessary. Pride may get in the way
of admitting that you might have not thought out the decision well
enough. Do not hesitate to revise your decisions in light of new
developments in the situation.
These seven steps can help you ensure that you do not take moral decisions lightly. They
shed light on the various aspects of moral situations that you have to consider before making a
decision. An important element, though, is your will to commit to an action based on moral
principles. You must have the necessary resolve to put your choice in motion after a long process
of deliberation. Goodwill, though sufficient as a ground for morality according to some
philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, must nevertheless be enacted and applied to make a
difference in the world of practical moral affairs.
WHY ARE REASON AND IMPARTIALITY THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR
MORALITY?
Reason and impartiality become the basic prerequisites for morality as one is expected to
be able to deliver clear, concise, rightful, and appropriate judgments made out of logic and
understanding in an unbiased and unprejudiced manner while considering the general welfare to
accurately concoct moral decisions.