EXISTENCE

Objectives
- IDENTIFY THE ETHICAL ASPCT OF HUMAN LIFE AND THE SCOPE OF ETHICAL THINKING
- Define and explain the terms that are relevant to ethical thinking
- Evaluate difficulties that are involved in maintaining certain commonly-held notion of ethics.

ETHICS
- About matters such as the good thing that we should pursue and the bad thing that we should
avoid.
- The right ways in which we could or should act and the wrong ways of acting.
- About what is acceptable and unacceptable in human behavior.
- Obligations that we are expected to fulfill, prohibitions that we are required to respect, or
ideals that we are encouraged to meet.
- Matters that concern life and death such as war, capital punishment or abortion and concerns
human beings such as poverty, inequality or sexual identity.

AESTHETICS
- Derived from the Greek word aesthesis (‘sense” or “feeling”)
- Refers to the judgement of personal approval or disapproval that we make about what we
see, hear, smell or taste.
- Personal preferences
- Examples are: Preferences in terms of movies, food, and dress

ETIQUETTE
- Concerned with right or wrong actions but those which might be considered as not quite grave
enough to belong to a discussion of ethics.
- Examples: Using the word “please” while asking for something; offering a set to an elderly.
TECHNICAL
- Derived from the Greek word “techne” and English words “technique” and “technical” which
are used to refer to a proper way of doing things.
- Examples are, learning how to bake; learning how to pray basketball.

ETHICS AND MORALS

MORALS
- may be used to refer to specific beliefs or attitudes that people have or to describe acts that
perform.
- Individual’s personal conduct
ETHICS
- A discipline of studying and understanding ideal human behavior and ideal ways of thinking
- Acknowledge as an intellectual discipline belong to philosophy.

DESCRIPTIVE AND NORMATIVE

DESCRIPTIVE
- Study of ethics reports how people, particularly groups, make their moral valuations without
making any judgement either for or against these valuations.
- Examples are work of the social scientist (historian or anthropologist)

NORMATIVE
- Study of ethics done in philosophy engages in the questions: What could or should be
considered as the right way of acting?
- Prescribes what we ought to maintain as our standards or bases for moral valuation.

A philosophical discussion goes beyond recognizing the characteristics of some descriptive

theory.
It does not simple accept as correct any normative theory
A philosophical discussion of ethics engaged in a critical consideration of strengths and
weaknesses of these normative theories.

Moral issue
- A situation that calls for moral valuation
- When one is placed in a situation and confronted by the choice of what act to perform
- Situation wherein an individual cannot afford to buy certain item and the possibility for him to
steal is present in that situation.

MORAL DECISION
- An individual make when he/she is placed in a situation of moral issue.
- Action about a certain moral issue

MORAL JUDGEMENT
- When a person is observer who makes an assessment on the actions or behavior of someone
- Assessment to the act of stealing as wrong

MORAL DILEMMA
- Going beyond the matter of choosing right over wrong, or good over bad
- Considering instead the more complicated situation wherein one is torn between choosing
one of two goods or choosing between the lesser of two evils
- A mother wanting to feed his hungry child but then recognizing it would be wrong to steal.
 Reasoning
- Why do we decide to consider this way of acting as acceptable while that way of acting
(opposite) is unacceptable?

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:
- Is fear of punishment and desire for reward can be spoken of as giving someone a reason for
acting a certain way?

Reasoning
- One can rise above the particulars of a specific situation going beyond whatever motivation or
incentive is resent in any instance.
(Example: Cheating)

- Can only motivate us

- Not a determinant of the rightness and wrongness of a certain way of acting or of the good or
the bad actions

THINKING ON A LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION

- Detaching itself from a particular situation
- Recognizing proper reasons for acting or not acting in a specific way
- Example: cheating (Cheating is wrong)

PRINCILPLES
- Beyond rewards and punishments, it is possible for our moral valuation to be based on
principles.
- Rationally established grounds by which one justifies and maintains her moral decisions and
judgements.

HOW EXACTLY WE ARRIVED AT ANY PARTICULAR CLAIM?

MORAL THEORY
- Is a systematic attempt to establish the validity of maintaining certain moral principles.
- Can also be referred to Framework defined as a theory of interconnected ideas and a
structure through which we can evaluate our reasons for valuing a certain decision or
judgment.

SOURCES OF AUTHORITY
- Standards of valuation are imposed by a higher authority that commands our obedience
- Authority of the law, authority of one’s religion and authority of one’s own culture

LAW
Positive law – refers to the different rules and regulations that are put forward by an authority
figure that require compliance.

ACTS THAT WE CONSIDERED AS UNETHICAL AND FORBIDDEN BY LAW (MURDER OR THEFT)

CAN ONE SIMPLE IDENTIFY ETHICS WITH THE LAW?

LAW
- PROHIBITIVE NATURE OF THE LAW
- The law does not tell us what we should do or pursue, ONLY WHAT TO AVOID.

HOW ABOUT CERTAIN WAYS OF ACTING WHICH ARE NOT FORBIDDEN BY THE LAW BUT ARE
ETHICALLY QUESTIONABLE?
- CONTRACTUALIZATION (BENEFITS & JOB SECURITY)
- TODDLER WHO HAD BEN RUN OVER BY VEHICLES
RELIGION
- DIVINE COMMAND THEORY
- The divinity called God, Allah or Supreme Being commands and one is obliged to obey her
creator.
- Writings and individuals or figures.

RELIGION
- More or less clear code of prohibitions
- “Thou shall not kill”
- “Thou shall not steal”

NOT SIMPLE PROHIBITIVE, BUT IS ALSO PROVIDES IDEALS TO PURSUE (Forgive those who
sinned against him)
- DOES NOT ONLY PROHIBITS BUT CAN COMMAND ABSOLUTE OBEDIENCE

PRESENCE OF MULTIPLICITY OF RELIGION

- Differences of adherence resulting to conflicting ethical standards.

CONCEPTUAL LEVEL
- We may find an instance wherein we could believe that GOD is commanding us to kill our
fellow human beings.

CULTURE
- CULTURAL RELATIVISM
- What is ethically acceptable or unacceptable is relative to or dependent on one’s culture
- Reality of differences

JAMES RACHEL’S CRITICISM – We Cannot say that anyone moral code is the right one because
of differences
- We are in no position to judge any of wrong acts
- We may not be satisfied with the through of not being able to call our own culture into
question.
DIFFICULT TO DETERMIN WHAT EXACTLY DEFINES ONE’S CULTURE DUE TO UNIQUE PRACTICE
OR WAY OF LIFE.
 Senses of the self

“What I believe must be true if I feel very strongly about it.”

Three theories that center on the self:

*SUBJECTIVISM

*PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM

*ETHICAL EGOISM

Subjectivism

Recognition that the individual thinking person is at the heart of all moral valuations.

The subject the one who is confronted with the situation and is burdened to make a decision or
judgement.

“No one can tell me what is right and wrong”

Means that no one can compel another to accept such value judgement if she herself does not concur
with it.

Problem: We had maintained an idea or opinion that was actually erroneous.

“No one know my situation better than myself”

The person who is put in a certain situations which calls for a moral decision has knowledge of the
factors that affect her situation and decision.

Problem: reality that many human experiences are common and that others may have something useful
to suggest.

“I am entitled to my own opinion”

Each person has the right to believe what she believes and has the right to express this.

Problem: Immunity from criticism and correction and exhibits a close-mindedness.

 “It is good if I say that is good”

Heart of the problem of subjectivism

I am the subject making the valuation and uses this fact as the very basis for that valuation.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM

“Human beings are naturally self-centered, so all our actions are always already motivated by self-
interest.”

A descriptive theory that describes the underlying dynamic behind all human actions.

Motivated by self-serving desire.

It points out that there is already an underlying basis for how one acts. The ego or self has its desires
and interests and all our actions are geared toward satisfying these interests.

Strong points:

SIMPLICITY, PLAUSIBILITY, IRREFUTABLE

Questions:

Whether to accept the theory because it happens to be irrefutable?

Do we want to give up on our moral intuition concerning the goodness and value of generosity versus
the wrongness of selfishness just for the sake of this theory?

It leads us to a cynical view of humanity, to a gloomy description of human nature and to a useless
theory for someone who is concerned with asking herself what is the right thing to do.
 ETHICAL EGOISM

It prescribes that we should make our own ends, own interests as the single overriding concern.

We may act in a way that is beneficial to others but we should do that only if it ultimately benefit us.

“Why should I have any concern about the interests of others?”

In the Republic, the characters are engaged in a discussion about justice.

The character named Glaucon provides a powerful restatement of the case for egoism by way of the
myth. (Gyges, who obtains the power to make himself invisible at will and how he quickly use his powers
for his own desire rather than any notion of justice)

*Harmony requires a certain ordering, a hierarchical system.

*The absence of harmony with presence of desires could result into injustice.

UTILITARIANTISM
Is an ethical theory that argues for the goodness of pleasure and the determination of right behavior
based on the usefulness of the action’s consequences.

Consequentialist

Claims that one’s action or behavior are good in as much as they are directed toward the experience of
the greatest pleasure over pain for the greatest number of persons.

THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY

Jeremy Bentham in the book, An introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, argues that our
actions are governed by two “sovereign matters” (pleasure and pain)

Refers to the motivation of our actions as guided by our avoidance and desire for pleasure.
Pleasure is good if they produce more happiness than unhappiness. It is not enough to experience
pleasure but to inquire whether things we do make us happier.

Mill clarifies what makes people happy is intended pleasure and what makes us unhappy is the privation
of pleasure. Things that produce pleasure and happiness are good.

Mill’s “Theory of Life” ; Natural Moral

Preferability of Pleasure

The pursuit for pleasure and avoidance for pain are not only important principles – they are in fact the
only principle assessing an action’s morality

“Are all pleasures necessary and ethically good?”

Jeremy Bentham
Felicific Calculus is a common currency framework that calculates the pleasure that some
actions can provide.
Basis of intensity and strength of pleasure, duration or length of the experience of pleasure,
certainty and uncertainty of the occurrence of pleasure, propinquity, remoteness or how soon
there will be pleasure.

Two dimensions to consider:

Fecundity or the chance it has of being followed by sensations of the same kind
Purity or the chance it has of being followed by the opposite kind.

When considering the number of persons being affected by pleasure or pain, another
dimension is to be considered – extent
Pleasure and pain can only be quantitively differ from other experiences of pain and pleasure.
JOHN STUART MILL
He thinks that the principle of utility must distinguish pleasure qualitatively rather than
quantitatively.
Utilitarianism cannot promote the kind of pleasures appropriate to gigs or to any other animals.
There are higher intellectual or lower base pleasures. We are the higher intellectual and are
capable of searching and desiring higher pleasures more than pigs are capable of.

Human pleasures are qualitatively different from animal pleasures.

Quality is more preferable than quantity.
In deciding over two comparable pleasures, it is important to experience both and to discover
which one is actually more preferred than the other.
We prefer the pleasures that are actually tithing our grasp.

PINCIPLE OF THE GREATEST NUMBER

Utilitarianism is also about the pleasures that can be experienced by the greatest number
affected by the consequences of our actions. It cannot lead to a selfish act.
It is interested with everyone’s happiness and similar from liberal social practices
Best consequence for the highest number or people

IS IT JUSTIFIABLE TO LET GO OF SOME RIGHTS FOR THE SAKE OF THE BENEFIT FOR THE
MAJORITY?

JUSTICE AND MORAL RIGHTS

Mill expounds that rights are related to the interest that serve general happiness.
Our participation in the government and social interactions can be explained by the principles
of utility. Mill associates utilitarianism with the possession of legal and human rights.

Mill claims that it is morally permissible to not follow or violate an unjust law. In instances of
conflict between moral and legal rights, Mill points out that moral rights take precedence over
legal rights.
Moral rights are only justifiable by consideration of greatest overall happiness.

Mill’s moral rights and consideration of justices are not absolute.

Justice can be interpreted in terms of moral rights because justice promotes the greater social
good.

1, 18, 30, 39, 34, 36,

1, S2 is the only correct

18, Descriptive

30, moral dilemma

34, James rachels

36, both false

39, only s2