ST.

AUGUSTINE UNIVERSITY OF TANZANIA

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & COMMUNICATION

DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY AND ETHICS

FIRST SEMESTER 2019/2020

Course Title: Social Ethics

Course Code: PH 113

Course: BAMC1 STR 1, & BAPRM1 STR 1

Credit Hours: 3 Hours per week

Lecturer: Sr. Christine Keneema, DM

Contact: +255753371515/ keneemachristine@gmail.com

Consultation Hours: Thursday: 8:00-13:00 Hours

Wednesday: 11:00-13:00 Hours

Office: Academic Block: East Wing D 1 & 2

1. AIM:

This course aims at introducing students to the importance of ethical values for the development of our
society; and the origins of socio-ethical dilemmas and moral problems in our today’s society as it is being
influenced by the contemporary globalized world.

2. OBJECTIVES:

(i) To introduce students to the meaning and importance of social ethics.

(ii) To introduce students to the societal ethical/moral values.
(iii) To introduce students to socio-ethical problems facing our society today.
(iv) To enable students identify the ethical solutions to the socio-ethical problems in our today’s
society.

3. LEARNING OUTCOMES:

At the end of this course students should be able to:

1
 (i) Explain the meaning and importance of social ethics.
(ii) Identify the socio-ethical/moral values of our society.
(iii) Identify the socio-ethical problems facing our society.
(iv) Find solutions to the conflicting socio-ethical issues of our society.
(v) Display good and acceptable behaviour.

4. METHODS OF TEACHING:

Lectures, discussions, class presentations, case studies and seminars.

5. COURSE ASSESSMENT:

Continuous assessment tests, quiz, term papers, class presentations, end of semester examinations,
lecture attendance and class participation. Coursework accumulation will account for 40% while the final
examination will account for 60%.

COURSE OUTLINE

1. Introduction:

1.1. Definition of ethics & social ethics

1.2. History of ethics and morality
1.3. Importance of ethics as a discipline
1.4. Steps in ethical decision making/problem solving process
1.5. Preference rules in value clashes

2. Classical socio-ethical theories:

2.1. The deontological theory

2.1.1. Different kinds of deontological theories
2.2. The teleological theory
2.3. Virtues ethics theory
2.3.1. What are virtues?
2.3.2. Cardinal virtues
2.4. Critique: excellence & limitations
2.5. The principles of social ethics
2.5.1 The factors of morality

3. Conscience as a foundation of ethical conduct

2
3.1. Notion of conscience
3.2. The role of conscience
3.3. Classification of conscience
3.4. Divisions of conscience
3.5. The rule of conscience
3.6. Freedom and commitment of conscience
3.7. Formation of conscience
3.8. Some important ethical values in the formation of conscience

4. Work and property

4.1 Meaning of work

4.2 Relationship of work to property ownership
4.3 Characteristics and purpose of work
4.4 The changing nature of work
4.5 The crisis of work in Africa
4.6 The obligation and dignity of work
4.7 Need for labour rest

5. Family

5.1 Meaning and types of family

5.2 Marriage and sexuality
5.2.1 Meaning of marriage
5.2.2 Four chief conditions
5.2.3 Meaning of sexuality
5.2.4 The relationship between marriage and sexuality
5.3 Types of marriage
5.4 Criteria for a happy marriage
5.5 Marriage as a covenant & contract
5.6 Marriage crises and dilemmas today

Contemporary socio-ethical dilemmas (For Term papers)

“Socio-ethical challenges need socio-ethical solutions”

1. Corruption
2. Nepotism
3. Drug abuse/substance consumption
4. Environmental crises: destruction & global warming
5. Poverty
6. ICT – opportunities and challenges
3
 7. Technology – opportunities and challenges
8. Reproductive technology
9. Sexual deviations today: homosexuality, lesbianism, bestiality, prostitution, etc.
10. The HIV/AIDS and venereal diseases
11. Globalization – challenges & opportunities
12. Witchcraft – magic
13. Life issues – Abortion, murder, suicide, mercy killing/euthanasia, self-defense, capital
Punishment
14. Freedom – free will and responsibility, freedom of speech, etc.
15. Justice – Mob justice, injustice, violence, etc.
16. Human rights and duties
17. The principle of double effect
18. Female Genital Mutilation
19. Responsible parenthood
20. Rehabilitation of criminals
21. Population control
22. Examination malpractice
23. Privacy
24. Professional ethics
25. Capitalism
26. Socialism
27. Authority in society

Hints on the group term paper:

 Choose a topic and discuss it with the course lecturer for approval.
 The length of the paper should be between 4-5 pages without including the preliminary pages.
 The font type used should be Times New Roman – font 12.
 The paper should contain the introduction, main body, conclusion and recommendations.
 Sources of information used should be cited within the work and a list of references attached at
the back of the paper.
 Proof-read your work before submitting it as typological errors will lead to deduction of some
marks.
 Every member of the group should participate actively and should be present when the group is
presenting the paper. Absent group members during the presentation will score 0!

4
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Asfaw Semegnish & Kerber Guillermo (eds) (2005): The responsibility to protect, Geneva, WCC
Publications.
2. Benezet Bujo (2001): Foundations of an African Ethic, The crossroad Publishing Company, New
York.
3. Costic, V (ed): AIDS (1987): meeting the community challenge, Middle green, England, St. Paul
publications.
4. Finnis John (1983): Fundamentals of ethics, Washington D.C, Georgetown University press.
5. Hoseach Edward G (ed) (1999): Essays on combating corruption in Tanzania, Dar es salaam.
6. Krasna Beth (ed) (2005): Thinking ethics: How ethical values and standards are changing, Geneva,
Profile Books.
7. Magesa Laurenti (2002): The Moral traditions of Abundant Life, Nairobi, Pauline Publications
Africa.
8. Milton A. Gonsalves (1995): Fagothey’s Right and Reason, Ethics in Theory and Practice, London,
Merill Publication Company.
9. Msafiri Aidan G. (2007): Towards a Credible Environmental Ethics for Africa: A Tanzanian
Perspective, Nairobi, CUEA Publications.
10. Peschke H. Karl (1992): Christian Ethics, Moral Theology in the light of VAT.II, Bangalore,
Theological Publications in India.
11. Rae B. Scott (2009): Moral choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 3rd ed.; Michigan, Zondervan, Grand
Rapids.
12. Sternberg (2004): Business Ethics in Action, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
13. Thiroux Jacques (1995): Ethics; Theory and Practice, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

5
 SOCIAL ETHICS (PH 113) LECTURE NOTES – For BAPRM1 & BAMC1
FIRST SEMESTER 2019/2020
Course Instructor: Sr. Christine Keneema
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General introduction

Ethics deals with what is right or wrong in human behaviour and conduct. It asks questions such
as what constitutes any person or action being good, bad, right, or wrong, and how do we know.
In ordinary language, we frequently use the words ethical and moral (and unethical and immoral)
interchangeably; that is, we speak of the unethical or moral person or act. On the other hand we
speak of codes of ethics, but only infrequently do we mention codes of morality. Some reserve the
terms moral and immoral only for the realm of sexuality and use the words ethical and unethical
when discussing how the business and professional communities should behave toward their
members or their public. What do all these words mean, and what are the relationships among
them?

1.2 Definition of ethics

Ethics is the study of morals or human conduct. Ethics is a branch of philosophy i.e. it is moral
philosophy or philosophical thinking about morality, moral problems, and moral judgment. This
philosophical study is basically concerned with the purpose of determining what type of activity
is good, right, and to be done, and what type of activity is bad, wrong, and to be avoided, so that
man may live well.

As a philosophical study, Ethics is a science or intellectual habit that treats information derived
from man’s natural experience of the problems of human life, from the point of view of natural
reason. The original stimulus for all human action is the desire to be happy. This is deep-rooted in
the being of every man. This universal desire for happiness is known under various names such as
‘the urge for self-perfection’, ‘the desire for success in life’, the drive of personal ambition’, to
mention but a few.

Man’s problem throughout life is to select and do the kind of actions that are conducive to true
happiness. Each human being should ask himself such questions:

 What should I do, and what should I not do in my life?

 Why should I do what I should do, and why should I not do what I should not do?
 What actions will give me true happiness?

In spite of all these, living a good moral life depends on personal thinking, choosing, and acting.
Ethics is not mathematical, and successful human living cannot be predetermined for the individual
by any kind of science or philosophy. Each person is a distinct person, living under particular
circumstances peculiar to him.

6
1.3 Human Acts versus Acts of Man

The actions of individuals supply the subject matter of ethics. We distinguish between actions that
are voluntary (those that are intended) and actions that are involuntary (unintended). Ethics studies
voluntary actions. This includes all actions and omissions over which man has and exercises
personal control because he understands and wills these actions and omissions in relation to some
‘end’ he has in view. Such actions are under the direction of the intellect and will.

The actions or acts that a human being wills, knows, and voluntarily performs are called human
acts (actus humani). They proceed from man as man through reason and from consent of free will.
They are actions man chooses for which he can be either praised or blamed. They can also rightly
be called personal acts.

On the other hand, acts which are involuntary or undeliberate are acts of man (actus hominis).
They are performed without intervention of intellect and free will. They do not characterize human
activity as being human; for example, acts like breathing, digestion, reactions of anger and
sympathy, acts of those who do not use reason – like people asleep, lunatics, drunken people, etc.
Likewise distinguished from human acts are forced acts which, though effected with some insight
and cooperation of the intellect, are carried out against a man’s personal decision and will. Some
authors subsume forced acts under the acts of man as well.

Ethics, on the other hand begins with a concern for individual character – including what we
blandly call ‘being a good person’. But it is also the effort to understand the social rules which
govern and limit our behaviour, especially those ultimate rules – the rules concerning good and
evil – which we call ‘morality’. It is very clear that ethics and morality are very closely tied to the
laws and the customs of a particular society. E.g. kissing in public and making a profit in a business
transaction are considered moral in some societies while they are considered immoral in other
societies.

1.4 The origin of Ethics

The word ‘ethics’ originates from the Greek word ‘ethos’ or the Latin word ‘mos’ or ‘mores,’
meaning ‘character’, ‘conduct’, or ‘custom’. The Greek thinkers such as Aristotle, Plato and
Socrates saw that what makes a man good or bad is not one isolated human action, but the general
pattern of all his free choices. On the other hand, the Latin philosophers such as Cicero, Seneca,
and Marcus Aurelius used the word mos and mores to refer to ethics- hence the English words
morals, morality and moral philosophy.

An ‘ethos’, as we use that term today, is the character of a culture. Ethics is the study of a way of
life, our way of life – its values, its rules and justifications. It involves thinking about ‘good’,
‘right’, and ‘evil’ and what they mean. What is good, right and wrong/evil?
 Goodness – decency, kindness, honesty, integrity, righteousness
 Right – correct, true, accurate, exact, precise
 Wrong/evil – incorrect, mistaken, erroneous, not right, immoral, unethical, dishonest

7
The term ‘ethics’ is used in three different but related ways, signifying:
 A general pattern or “way of life”.
 A set of rules of conduct or “moral code”.
 Inquiry about ways of life and rules of conduct.

1.5 Ethics and morals

The terms ‘moral’ and ‘ethical’ are often used as equivalent to ‘right’ or ‘good’ and as opposed to
‘immoral’ and ‘unethical’. Some philosophers like to distinguish ethics from morality. To them
morality refers to human conduct and values, and ethics refers to the study of those areas. Ethics
does, of course, denote an academic subject, but in everyday parlance we interchange ethical and
moral to describe people we consider good and actions we consider right. And we interchange
unethical and immoral to describe what we consider bad people and wrong actions.

Ethics is about living a good and virtuous life according to the ethical virtues, that is, to become a
virtuous person, while the modern notion of morality is primarily focused on the interests of other
people and the idea of deontological constraints. That is, one acts morally because one has to meet
certain standards and not because it supports one’s own good life.

Ethics

It refers to the systematic general science of right and wrong conduct. Ethics pertain to the beliefs
we hold about what constitutes right conduct. Ethics are moral principles adopted by an individual
or group to provide rules for right conduct. Ethics is the generic term for ethical and moral issues.
Morality is a special part of ethics. Morality is the object of ethics. Ethics is the philosophical
theory of morality which is the systematic analysis of moral norms and values.

Morals or morality refers to the actual patterns of conduct and the direct working rules of moral
action. Philosophers base ethics upon a reflective analysis of moral experience. Morality is
concerned with perspectives of right and proper conduct and involves an evaluation of actions on
the basis of some broader cultural context or religious context. Morality consists not only in our
particular statements of conduct, but also in the general rules by which we justify an individual
case. For instance, a conscientious student may say: “I will not write in this library book”. If
someone asks for the reason behind this moral decision, the student may reply: “public property
should be respected”. Such judgments belong to the moral situation which the ethicist studies.
Ethics and morals, however, are not concerned merely with what people do, but with what is
generally accepted they should, must, ought to do, regardless of whether or not they do it.

1.6 Forms of morality

We can separate morality into two forms:

1.6.1 Reflective morality

8
Reflective morality is the type of morality that exhibits doubts about the basic moral judgments
that are evident in our society. It challenges the correctness of the whole moral system by seeking
proof for every statement the system poses. Reflective morality, from its name, requires reflection
about the things that we take for granted while busy with our non-introspective lives. Reflective
morality requires that moral ideas are carefully examined and tested. There is a need to search or
to observe adequate bases or principles for our judgments in particular and our whole moral system
in general.

1.6.2 Customary/Traditional morality

On the other hand, customary morality is the more traditional take on morality. Traditional
morality refers to the moral systems handed down through custom from generation to generation.
We might call this static morality. It uses the conventional or conservative knowledge and
judgment of the society to assess the rightness or wrongness of an act. Traditional morality can
become reflective and dynamic when those moral ideas that are simply handed down and accepted
are subjected to analysis and criticism. Customary morality will look at the basic social norms and
prevailing constructs of a particular society at a particular time in order to evaluate the correct
answer to a moral question or to give out its moral judgment for a specific situation.

1.7 Definition of Social Ethics

The word social ethics is a scientific study which deals with different social aspects of human life.
It examines how a human person interacts with his/her surroundings. It gives the person principles
of good moral conduct. It is the academic discipline concerned with examining and evaluating the
commitments, values, and choices of any given society or culture both in relationship to itself and
in relationship to other societies and cultures. Therefore it gives the person principles of good
moral conduct of life. It examines how a human person interacts with his\her surroundings. It has
more to do with what is good and right for a society, it asks about what societies and cultures do
and should do.

Social ethics form an infrastructure for us to live as a society. Religion, charity, morality, and
family values are all tools used to define standards of behaviour in our society. Morals are seen by
many as an infrastructure on which a community depends. Immoral behaviour is seen as a threat
to the community. More than anything it is a sense of social responsibility and public opinion that
define them for us all. Social ethics are defined by societal and cultural norms. Religion plays a
big role in certain societies. The concept of charity to others and morality within one’s actions are
important to many, especially those who subscribe to family values as a vehicle for their morals.

Social ethics vary in different parts of the world. The effect of religion on social norms also varies,
but charity and morality remain key components of societal infrastructure. Immoral behaviour will
always take place, but social responsibility and the power of public opinion combine to make social
ethics an important part of everyday life.

9
1.8 Purpose of ethics as a discipline1

Why study ethics? Why be moral?

1. The basic reason is that people become curious about their own actions and begin to reflect upon
them, compare them, and seek their general principles. In the case of ethical reflection, we
encounter certain difficulties. We are not always sure about what moral principle govern a
particular decision. E.g. A young woman may face the question of whether to continue her
education or go to work to help support her family. She may see the problem as one of loyalty to
her family – she owes it to them to sacrifice something in return because they have sacrificed to
keep her in school. But she may recognize the importance of continuing her education to prepare
her to make a significant contribution to society and to lay a sound foundation for a rich life by
getting a complete education.

2. Our ethics are continually changing. Our society has experienced enormous changes over the
past few decades in the realm of sexual morality; behaviour is accepted today which would have
been wanton immorality 50 years ago (e.g. topless beachwear and sagging/drooping trousers for
men, ‘see through’, mini-skirts, and body tights for ladies). Some of these changes have to do with
changing economic and social conditions in our society; others are reflections of deeper ethical
shifts, more emphasis on individual freedom and less emphasis on the differences between the
sexes and traditional roles. Changes in ethics are always disturbing and disruptive; the study of
ethics enables us to understand the nature of these changes and just as important, to discern the
stable basis of values that underlies them.

3. We live in an ethically pluralistic society, in which it seems that there is no single code of ethics
but many different values and rules. Some people in our society emphasize individual success and
mobility; others emphasize the importance of group identity and stable cultural tradition. Some
people insist that the ultimate value is individual freedom; others would insist that general welfare
is more important, even if it interferes with individual freedom. For example; some people or
societies consider it absolutely wrong to take a human life – even life of an unborn foetus; others
do not believe that such life counts as human; it should be sacrificed if necessary to the wellbeing
and interest of the mother. Though these ethical differences are irreconcilable, it is important that
we understand the nature of these differences, and this is much of what ethical discussion and
debate is about.

4. Our ethics involves choice. It strives to give or provide signposts for responsible action in all
areas of life. In fact freedom of choice is one of the main values of our ethics. But to choose
between alternative courses of action or opposed values requires intelligent deliberation and some
sense of the reasons why one should choose one rather than another. Having to choose between
alternatives, however, is more than enough reason to be clear about their values and implications,
and this too is a central function of ethics.

1
Solomon c. Robert: Morality and the good life; an introduction to ethics through classical theories, 2 nd ed. New
York, McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1992, p.2-4

10
5. Ethical values are often in conflict. Even when people agree on certain values, there will
inevitably be times when two or more accepted values run up against one another. Conflicting
goals and customs force us to reconsider continually our ethical priorities; freedom of speech
sometimes threatens safety, security or sensibilities e.g. when newspapers publish classified
military secrets. The virtue of honesty must be balanced by concern for the consequences of telling
the truth, and the virtue of courage must be measured against the danger one faces.

6. Ethics can help us make our own ideas clearer, more rational, and more responsive to the realities
of life.
7. It helps us think clearly and critically about our values, and to decide whether we need to develop
our values, and to decide whether we need to develop better ones – this is probably a process that
never ends.

8. Most people, when they are genuinely honest with themselves, associate doing well with being
a good person. Having moral character is still essential to most people’s conceptions of what makes
a person flourish in his or her life. For example it is difficult to imagine a person being considered
a success in life if he gains his wealth dishonestly. One of the principle reasons for being moral is
that it is central to most concepts of human fulfilment. We could say that being moral is inherently
good because it is foundational to a person’s flourishing in life, since doing well in life and being
a good person still go together for most people.

9. Ethics are important because they give direction to people and societies who have some sense
that they cannot flourish without being moral. In fact, it is unlikely that any sort of civilized society
could continue unless it had concern for key moral values such as fairness, justice, truthfulness,
and compassion.
10. Ethics helps us find answers for moral questions which are at the heart of life’s vital issues.
Morality is primarily concerned with questions of right and wrong, the ability to distinguish
between two, and the justification of the distinction. Closely related are such questions as, what is
a good person? What things are morally praiseworthy? What constitutes a good life? And what
would a good society look like? You cannot formulate an adequate worldview without providing
answers to these questions. For example, morality is fundamental to politics, since politics and the
law concern the way in which people ought to order their lives together in society.

11. Ethics helps us in dealing with the increasingly technological society. Technology comes along
with many benefits but also many challenges.

“Educating the mind without educating the heart is not education at all”. (Aristotle)

1.9 Divisions of ethics

Ethics can be divided into two broad divisions. These are:
1. General Ethics, which studies human acts and general principles of morality. This is our
scope of this course.
2. Special Ethics, which studies the morality of different departments of human activity, for
example; Individual ethics, Family ethics, Life ethics, Environmental ethics, Medical
ethics, Business ethics, Political ethics, Legal ethics, Cultural, Religious ethics, and so on.

11
1.10 Moral principles to guide decision making 2

Meara et al. (1996) describe six basic moral principles that form the foundation of functioning at
the highest ethical level as a professional: autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, justice,
fidelity, and veracity. These moral principles involve a process of striving that is never fully
complete.

(a) Autonomy
This refers to the promotion of self-determination, or the freedom of clients to choose their own
direction. Respect for autonomy entails acknowledging the right of another to choose and act in
accordance with his or her wishes, and to behave in a way that enables this right of another person.

(b) Non-maleficence
This means avoiding doing harm, which includes refraining from actions that risk hurting others.
We have the responsibility to avoid engaging in practices that cause harm or have the potential to
result in harm.

(c) Beneficence
This refers to promoting or doing good for others. We have the responsibility to respect the dignity
and to promote the welfare of clients.

(d) Justice or fairness

This means providing equal treatment to all people. Everyone, regardless of sex, age, race,
ethnicity, disability, socioeconomic status, cultural background, or religion, is entitled to equal
access to all services.

(e) Fidelity
This means that we should make honest promises and honour our commitments. We should fulfil
our responsibilities of trust in our relationships.

(f) Veracity
This means truthfulness. Unless we are truthful with our fellows, the trust required to form a good
working relationship will not develop.

1.8. Steps in making ethical decisions 3

When making ethical decisions, ask yourself these questions: “Which values should I rely on?
What values do I hold? Why do I hold certain values? It is important to acknowledge that emotions
play a part in how we make ethical decisions.

2
Corey Gerald et al: Issues and Ethics in the helping professions, 6th ed. Pacific Grove, USA, Brooks/Cole, 2003,
p.13-18

3
Corey Gerald et al: Issues and Ethics in the helping professions, p.18-22

12
In the many important decisions we make, the following steps can improve our decision making
strategies and may also help us think through ethical problems:

(i) Identify the problem or dilemma

Gather as much information as possible that sheds light on the situation. The first step toward
resolving an ethical dilemma is recognizing that a problem exists and identifying its specific
nature, that is, whether the conflict is ethical, legal, clinical, professional, or moral – or a
combination of any or all of these. Because most ethical dilemmas are complex, it is useful to look
at the problem from many perspectives and to avoid simplistic solutions. Ethical dilemmas do not
have ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers, so you will be challenged to deal with ambiguity (statements with
more than one meaning). What is the problem? Why am I constantly running out of money and
unable to meet expenses? Why am I scoring low marks? Why am I always quarrelling with my
roommate? Defining the problem is the most difficult yet the most important phase in decision
making.

(ii) Identify the potential issues involved

After the information is collected, list and describe the critical issues and discard the irrelevant
ones. Evaluate the rights, responsibilities, and welfare of all those who are affected by the situation.
Part of the process of making ethical decisions involves identifying competing moral principles.
Consider the basic moral principles of autonomy, non-maleficence (not harmful or evil),
beneficence, justice, fidelity, and veracity and apply them to the situation. It may help to prioritize
these principles and think throughways in which they support a resolution to the dilemma. Good
reasons can be presented that support various sides of a given issue and different ethical principles
may sometimes imply contradictory courses of action.

(iii) Review the relevant ethics codes

Ask yourself whether the standards or principles of your organization or institution offer a possible
solution to the problem. Consider whether your own values and ethics are consistent with, or in
conflict with, the relevant codes. If you are in disagreement with a particular standard, do you have
a rationale to support your position? As scholars we should choose the socially acceptable practice
or alternative. In other words we should form tentative conclusions which represent solutions to
the problem or suggest some possible answers.

(iv) Know the applicable laws and regulations

It is essential for one to keep up to date on relevant state and federal laws that apply to ethical
dilemmas. In addition, be sure you understand the current rules and regulations of your
organization or institution.

(v) Obtain consultation

At this point, it is generally helpful to consult with a colleague or colleagues to obtain different
perspective on the problem. Consultation can help you think about information or circumstances
that you may have overlooked. In making ethical decisions, you must justify a course of action

13
based on sound reasoning. Consultation with colleagues provides an opportunity to test your
justification. “Two heads are better than one head”.

(vi) Consider possible and probable courses of action

Brainstorming is useful at this stage of ethical decision making. By listing a wide variety of courses
of action, you may identify a possibility that does not follow socially acceptable traditional beliefs
or practices but may be useful. Discuss the options with your colleagues.

(vii) Enumerate the consequences of various decisions

Before any decision is made, one should bear in mind the consequences of that decision. If I
decide rightly the end result will be good and if I decide wrongly the end result will be bad. The
best action is the one with the best consequences. Consider using the six fundamental moral
principles (autonomy, non-maleficence, justice, fidelity, and veracity) as a framework for
evaluating the consequences of a given course of action.

(viii) Decide on what appears to be the best course of action

In making the best decision, carefully consider the information you have received from various
sources. One should apply the ‘see’, ‘judge’ and ‘act’ methodology before reaching any good
decision. The decision so arrived at must be all lasting decision and should square the problem
for now and for the time to come. One should avoid solving a given problem by creating another.
Once you have made what you consider to be the best decision, do what you can to evaluate your
course of action. Make a follow up to determine the outcomes and see if any further action is
needed.1

1.9. Values and standards4

Ethical values describe those ethical foundations from which individual and collective action
takes its bearings, and against which it measures its correctness and appropriateness. Values
identify that which is valuable and worth achieving. Value ethics is based on widely applicable
fundamental values. Ethical standards are often equated with values.

1.9.1. What is a value?

A value refers to something precious or worth of importance, it can be spiritual or material e.g.
life, love, money, education, happiness, etc. It is something highly relevant in life.

In ethics, ‘values’ denote orientation standards and objectives which guide and steer people’s
actions. They are constitutive for every cultural, social and economic system and thus also for
economic action. In the economy, ‘values’ denote the exchange, utility and capitalized value of

4
Stuckelberger Christoph: Global trade ethics, Geneva, WCC Publications, 2002, p. 25-31

14
goods, and serve as a yardstick for their scarcity. Their value is measured against demand,
usefulness and relative rarity.

1.9.2. What are value clashes?

This refers to a situation where there are two almost equal values which influence the decision
of a person. It is a conflicting situation whereby one faces a dilemma to choose what is more
important. Values are always in clash because they are inter-related with each other. This reflects
differing needs, points of departure, interests, aims and possible courses of action. For example,
the clash between mining versus environmental conservation, the clash between cutting down
trees for charcoal versus environmental conservation, education versus employment, pleasure
versus studies, and so on.

How can we find an ethically responsible solution to value clashes? Whenever we are faced with
value clashes we should consider the following:

 Choose the most precious and fundamental value at that moment of decision – making.
 Deal with something which is first – first things first e.g. first handle the first problem
before moving to the next.
 Life values should be safeguarded at all costs e.g. truthfulness – for it brings about inner
peace, justice, self-dignity or respect. Good choices lead to good results while bad
choices lead to bad results.

1.9.3. Preference rules/value judgments in value clashes

What is preference?

By preference we mean things or values which have more priority in ethical decisions i.e. what
I prefer compared to other alternatives. We should give more importance to what is most
important at a time. What is your preference as a scholar? To be very hardworking and be
successful in life or to have all the possible fun/pleasure and be a failure?

Preference rules attempt to solve a value clash by fixing a set of priorities regarding fundamental
or practical values. For example, there is a value clash between “prosperity for everybody” and
ecological sustainability” in that an increase of foodstuffs production and their worldwide
trade/transport may result in ecological damage. Here, a preference rule may stipulate as follows:
if the short-term satisfaction of needs may result in the destruction of long-term basic necessities,
then the protection of such basic necessities is preferable to the consumption of goods that are
not necessary for survival.

15
2. CLASSICAL SOCIO-ETHICAL THEORIES (The principles of moral action)5

A moral theory is a way of looking at morality. Social ethics uses scientific theories or approaches
to achieve its goals. These theories act as guidance. Philosophers attempt to provide standards or
rules to help us distinguish right from wrong actions or good from bad people, we are, therefore,
engaged in normative ethics. In normative ethics, we try to arrive, by rational means, at a set of
acceptable criteria which will enable us to decide why any given action is ‘right’ or any particular
person is called ‘good’. In ethics, normative theories propose some principle or principles for
distinguishing right actions from wrong actions. These theories can, for convenience, be divided
into consequentialist and non-consequentialist approaches. In this study we shall deal with three
of these theories: Consequentialist, Deontologist and Virtue Ethic theories.

2.1. Teleological Theory (consequentialism)

The word teleology comes from the Greek word “telos”, meaning “end” or “final results”. It
maintains that moral judgments are based entirely on the effects produced by an action. An action
is considered right or wrong in relation to its consequences. This view appeals to our common
sense. Often, when considering a course of action, we ask: ‘Will this hurt me?’ or ‘Will this hurt
others?’ Thinking like this is thinking teleological: whether we do something or not is determined
by what we think the consequences will be; whether we think they will be good or bad. Inevitably,
of course, people have different opinions about whether a particular result is good or bad, and this
accounts for the great variety of teleological or consequentialist theories.

Thus, an act is right if and only if it will probably produce, or is intended to produce at least as
great a balance of good over evil as any available alternative; an act is wrong if and only if it does
not do so. An act ought to be done if and only if it will probably produce, or is intended to produce
a greater balance of good over evil than any available alternative. For a teleologist, the moral
quality or value of actions, persons, or traits of character is dependent on the comparative non-
moral value of what they bring about or try to bring about. In order to know whether something is
right, ought to be done , or is morally good, one must know what is good in the non-moral sense
and whether the thing in question promotes or is intended to promote what is good in this sense.
Some consequentialists have identified good with pleasure and evil with pain, and concluding that
the right course or rule of action is that which produces at least as great a balance of pleasure over
pain as any vice versa. 6

Thus, in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some understanding of what will
result from our choices. When we make choices which result in the correct consequences, then we
are acting morally; when we make choices which result in the incorrect consequences then we are
acting immorally. Therefore, according to this theory, what is ethically right is determined through
an evaluative process. It maintains and advocates the general rule of actions which says, “Choose
the action that is likely to produce the greatest good for the greatest number”.

5
Palmer Michael: Moral problems, Cambridge, The Lutterworth press, 1994, p.11-16

6
Frankena K. William: Ethics, 2nd ed. New Delhi, Prentice-Hall, 2005, p.14-17

16
 2.1.1. The two major consequentialist theories7
The two major consequentialist theories are egoism and utilitarianism. They are distinguished by
their answers to the question that arises from this theory, i.e. consequences for whom? Should one
consider consequences only for oneself?

2.1.1.1 Egoism
The view that associates morality with self-interest is referred to as egoism. Egoism contends that
an act is morally right if and only if it best promotes the individual’s long-term interests. Egoists
use their long-term advantage as the standard for measuring an action’s rightness. If an action
produces, will probably produce, or is intended to produce for the individual a greater ratio of good
to evil in the long run than any other alternative, then that action is right to perform. The individual
should take that course to be moral.

Moral philosophers distinguish between two kinds of egoism: personal and impersonal. Personal
egoists claim they should pursue their own best long-term interests, but they do not say what others
should do. Impersonal egoists claim that everyone should follow his or her best long-term interests.

Egoists seek to guide themselves by their own interests, regardless of the issue of circumstances.
Ethical egoism ignores blatant wrongs (offensive behaviour) – they reduce everything to the
standard of best long-term self-interest, egoism takes no stand against seemingly outrageous acts
like stealing, murder, racial and sexual discrimination, false advertising, etc. All such actions are
morally neutral until the test of self-interest is applied.

2.1.1.2 Utilitarianism
This is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of
good over bad for everyone affected by our action. By “good”, utilitarians understand happiness
or pleasure. Thus, they answer the question “what makes a moral act right?” by asserting: the
greatest happiness of all. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) were the
first to develop the theory explicitly and in detail. Both were philosophers with interest in legal
and social reform. They used the utilitarian standard to evaluate and criticize the social political
institutions of their day – for example, the prison system. As a result, utilitarianism has long been
associated with social improvement.

Bentham argued for the utilitarian principle that actions are right if they promote the greatest
human welfare, wrong if they do not. For Mill, the utility principle allows consideration of the
relative quality of pleasure and pain. Both identified pleasure and happiness and considered
pleasure the ultimate value. In this sense they are hedonists: pleasure, in their view, is the one thing
that is intrinsically good or worthwhile. Anything is good because it brings about pleasure (or
happiness), directly or indirectly. Take education, for example. The learning process itself might
be pleasurable to us; reflecting on or working with what we have learned might bring satisfaction
at some later time; or by making possible a career and life that we could not have had otherwise,
education might bring us happiness indirectly.

7
Shaw H. William: Social and Personal Ethics, 3rd ed. U.S.A, Wadson Publishing Company, 1999, p.15-19.

17
The problem with teleological or utilitarianism is the impossibility to compare utility on the
interpersonal level. If the right action is what produce the net good for me, then there is a possibility
of being so uncaring, unconcerned to the other person, especially if he/she is a stumbling block to
my maximizing of the good. For utilitarian, the end justifies the means; that is, the end, which is
maximizing the net good, determines the means an individual will use to attain his/her end. As
history has taught us this can be really dangerous. If, for instance, the rich want to maintain getting
exorbitant profits, they will go to all limits, corruption, evading taxes and dubious business deals,
so as to maximize what they see as their net good.

2.2 Deontological Theory (Kant’s Ethics)8

The word deontology comes from the Greek roots “deon”, which means “duty”, and “logos”,
which means “science”. Thus, deontology is the “science of duty.” Deontology is an approach to
ethics that determines goodness or rightness from examining acts, or the intentions of the person
doing the act, as it adheres to rules and duties. This contrast to consequentialism, in which rightness
is based on the consequences of an act, and not the act by itself. In deontology, an act may be
considered right even if the act produces a bad consequence, if it follows the rule that “one should
do unto others as they would have done unto them”, and even if the person who does the act lacks
virtue and had a bad intention in doing the act. According to deontology, we have a duty to act in
a way that does those things that are inherently good as acts, or follow an objectively obligatory
rule. For deontologists, the ends or consequences of our actions are not important, and our
intentions important.

Kant sought moral principles that do not rest on contingencies and that define actions as inherently
right or wrong apart from any particular circumstances. Kant’s ethics contends that we do not have
to know everything about the likely results of, say, my telling a lie to my boss in order to know
that it is immoral. The basis of obligation must be sought in nature, not in the circumstances of the
world. An act is to be judged as good or bad depending on the person’s intentions. Kant believed
that the goodness of things or an act such as self-control, courage, happiness, and so on, depends
on the will that make use of them.
Only when we act from duty does our action have moral worth. When we act only out of feeling,
inclination, or self-interest, our actions – although they may be otherwise identical with ones that
spring from the sense of duty – have no true moral worth. For example, following up a customer
and giving him/her back the change which she had left back, with apologies, you may not have
necessarily acted from good will but may be from the desire to promote business or to avoid legal
entanglement. According to Kant, if you do not will the action from a sense of your duty to be fair
and honest, your action does not have true moral worth. Actions have true moral worth when they
spring from recognition of duty and a choice to discharge it.

According to this theory, when we fulfil our duties, obligations and responsibilities, we are
behaving morally and when we fail to fulfil them we are behaving immorally. Typically in any
deontological system, our duties, rules, and obligations are determined by God. Being moral is
thus a matter of obeying God.

8
Shaw H. William: Social and Personal Ethics, p. 23-24

18
Immanuel Kant’s theory of ethics is considered deontological for several different reasons. First,
Kant argues that to act in the morally right way, people must act from duty. Second, Kant argued
that it was not the consequences of actions that make them right or wrong but the motives of the
person who carries out the action.

Immanuel Kant insisted that what makes an act right or wrong cannot be its consequences – which
are often entirely out of our hands and a matter of luck – but the principle or maxim which guides
the action. There are certain obligations and duties that must be respected even if doing so does
not produce the desired results/consequences. The heart of Kant’s ethics is, “duty for duty’s sake”,
not for the sake of the consequences9.

Deontological moral systems typically stress the reasons why certain actions are performed.
Simply following the correct moral rules is often not sufficient; instead, we have to have the correct
motivations. This might allow a person to not be considered immoral even though they have broken
a moral rule, but only so long as they were motivated to adhere to some correct moral duty. E.g.
one may do something apparently right with a wrong intention or one may do something bad or
wrong with a good intention. Our duties and obligations should be fulfilled regardless of one’s
desire.

The questions that can be raised for this theory are: Is it the motive of duty that gives it its morality?
Is it only her sense of duty and not her love for her child that gives morality to a mother’s devotion?
Is it only cold obligation and not large-hearted generosity that makes relief of the poor a moral
act? Certainly a sense of duty will be present in such cases, but love and generosity are always
esteemed as higher motives than mere duty and give the act a greater moral worth. We fall back
on duty only when other motives fail. How could Kant explain heroic acts, such as giving one’s
life for one’s friend? These acts are always thought the noblest and best precisely because they go
beyond the call of duty.

2.2.1 Different kinds of deontological theories10

2.2.1.1. Act – deontological theories

These maintain that the basic judgments of obligation are all purely particular ones like “In this
situation I should do so and so,” and that general ones like “We ought always to keep our
promises”, are unavailable, useless, or at best derivative from particular judgments. Extreme act-
deontologists maintain that we can and must see or somehow decide separately in each particular
situation what is right or obligatory thing to do, without appealing to any rules and also without
looking to see what will promote the greatest balance of good over evil for oneself or the world.
Such a view was held by E. F. Carrit and by H. A. Pichard; and was at least suggested by Aristotle
when he said that in determining what the golden mean is “the decision rests with perception.”

9
Cf. BERNARD ROSEN, “Ethical theory: Strategies and concepts”, Mayfield, California 1993, 152-158; Cf. JOHN FINNIS,
“Fundamentals of Ethics”, Georgetown University Press, Rome 1983, 109-135.
10
Frankena K. William: Ethics, p.16-17

19
2.2.1.2. Rule-deontological theories
They hold that the standard of right and wrong consists of one or more rules – either fairly concrete
ones like “We ought always to tell the truth” or abstract ones like “It cannot be right for A to treat
B in a manner which it would be wrong for B to treat A”. They insist that these rules are valid
independently of whether or not they promote the good. In fact, they assert that judgments about
what to do in particular cases are always to be determined by in the light of these rules as they
were by Socrates in the Apology and Crito. Examples of rule deontologists: Samuel Clarke,
Richard price, Immanuel Kant, etc.

2.2.1.3.Complementarity of the deontological and teleological theories11

Purely deontological and purely teleological theories are ideal types and cannot stand singly to
determine the foundation of moral norms. In order to arrive at a concrete basis of the moral norm,
both deontological theories, including information on the nature of the laws and mechanisms of
the act, and teleological theories, that is the purpose, object and goal of the act must be considered.

The teleological theory should not be understood as systems that determine the morality of an
action so exclusively by consequences that no room is left for deontological considerations. Such
considerations remain essential and indispensable. So, deontological and teleological
considerations stand in need of each other. They are not mutually exclusive, but rather
complementary to each other in order to reach a moral basis of the evil or goodness of action.

2.3. Virtue ethics theory 12

Throughout its history morality has been concerned about the cultivation of certain dispositions,
or traits, among which are “character” and such “virtues” as honesty, kindness,
conscientiousness, and so on.

2.3.1. What are virtues?

Virtues are dispositions or traits that are not wholly innate; they must all be acquired, at least in
part, by teaching and practice, or, perhaps, by grace. They are also traits of “character”, rather than
traits of “personality” like charm or shyness. They all involve a tendency to do certain kinds of
action in certain kinds of situations, not just to think or feel in certain ways. They are not just
abilities or skills, like intelligence or carpentry, which one may have without using.

Virtues are qualities of excellence by which man is rendered more perfect. For Marxists, virtue is
the courage to revolt against the capitalists or the ruling classes. Existentialists hold that
authenticity or the ability to take risk and to be individual, or to self-actualize is the true and real
virtue.

11
Cf. N. JOSEPH, “A guide to Ethics”, Zapf Chancery, Eldoret (Kenya) 2008, 37.
12
Ibid p. 62-65

20
Virtue is twofold, partly intellectual and partly moral, and intellectual virtue is originated and
fostered mainly by teaching; it demands therefore experience and time. Moral virtue on the other
hand is the outcome of habit. From this fact it is clear that moral virtue is not implanted in us by
nature; for nothing that exists by nature can be transformed by habit. It is neither by nature then
nor in defiance of nature that virtues grow in us. Nature gives us the capacity to receive them,
and that capacity is perfected by habit.

In fact, it has been suggested that morality is or should be conceived as primarily concerned, not
with rules or principles as we have been supposing so far, but with the cultivation of such
dispositions or traits of character. Plato and Aristotle seem to conceive of morality in this way, for
they talk mainly in terms of virtues and virtuous, rather than in terms of what is right or obligatory.
Virtue-based ethical theories place much less emphasis on which rules people should follow and
instead focus on helping people develop good character traits, such as kindness and generosity.
These character traits will, in turn, allow a person to make the correct decisions later on in life.

The actions of virtuous people stem from a respect and concern for the well-being of themselves
and others. Compassion, courage, generosity, loyalty and honesty are good examples of virtues.
Because virtuous people are motivated to act in ways that benefit society, the cultivation of a
virtuous character is an important aspect of social ethics. For example, a generous person is more
likely to act in ways that benefit those who are least well-off in society. Virtues should be learned,
acquired, practiced and personalized right from childhood. Thus goes the saying, “charity begins
at home”. Virtue in general is a synonym for morality.

Virtue theorists also emphasize the need for people to learn how to break bad habits of character,
like greed or anger. These are called vices and stand in the way of becoming a good person. Virtue
ethics give a human person the proper direction in his behaviour or actions.

However, to avoid confusion it is necessary to notice that we must distinguish between virtues and
principles of duty like “We ought to promote the good” and “We ought to treat people equally.” A
virtue is not a principle of this kind; it is a disposition, habit, quality, or trait of the person, which
an individual either has or seeks to have. For example, we can speak of the principle of beneficence
and the virtue of benevolence to mark the difference, in the case of justice; we can also speak of
the principle of equal treatment with the virtue/trait to treat people equally.

2.3.2. Cardinal virtues

By a set of cardinal virtues is meant a set of virtues such that (1) they cannot be derived from one
another and (2) all other moral virtues can be derived from or shown to be forms of them. Plato
and other Greeks thought there were four cardinal virtues in this sense: wisdom, courage,
temperance, and justice. Christianity is traditionally regarded as having seven cardinal virtues:
three “theological” virtues – faith, hope, and love; and four “human” virtues – prudence, fortitude,
temperance, and justice. This was essentially St. Thomas Aquinas’ view, however, many moralists,
among them Schopenhauer, have taken benevolence and justice to be the cardinal moral virtues
since the other moral virtues – love, courage, temperance, honesty, gratitude, and considerateness
can be derived from these two.

21
2.3.3. Virtues and the mean

It appears then that virtue is a kind of mean because it aims at the mean. Virtues are destroyed by
excess and deficiency but preserved by the mean. Too much or too little meat and drink is fatal to
health, whereas a suitable amount produces, increases and sustains health. It is the same with
temperance, courage, and other moral virtues. A person who avoids and is afraid of everything and
faces nothing becomes a coward; a person who is not afraid of anything but is ready to face
everything becomes foolhardy. Similarly, he who enjoys every pleasure and abstains from none is
licentious; he who refuses all pleasures like a boor (ill-mannered person/insensitive) is an
insensible sort of person.

According to Aristotle most virtues entail finding the mean between excess and deficiency.
Aristotle’s theory of virtue is this: a virtue is neither too much nor too little, “a mean between the
extremes”. It is a kind of moderation and this is cultivated by habitually practicing moderation.

Aristotle was not advising us to take a moderate position on moral issues. The doctrine of the mean
is meant to apply to virtues, not to our position on social issues. By suggesting that we seek the
mean, Aristotle was not referring to being lukewarm but to seek what is reasonable.

2.4. The principles of social ethics

2.4.1. The factors of morality13

The factors of morality are of two classes, namely objective factors and subjective factors. These
factors of morality can be briefly summarized by the following diagram:

13
Cf. M. LUCIANO – P. WAMBUA, A guide to Christian ethics and formation in moral maturity, CUEA, Nariobi 2000,
111-141.
22
 Intrinsic morality Nature of things
Objective
Extrinsic morality Law

Factors of
Morality

Dependent on intellect Conscience

Subjective
Dependent on will Freedom and
voluntariness

The objective factors constitute the source of objective morality of an act, and they are independent
of the acting subject. Objective factors of morality are not produced or sanctioned by the individual
who acts. They can be intrinsic or extrinsic.

2.4.1.1. Objective intrinsic morality

What is objective intrinsic morality? Objective intrinsic morality, means that there are moral
principles which are objective (accepted by all people), which are intrinsic (which do not derive
their morality from any outside factors(s) but from within the act themselves). In other words, they
are intrinsic when they depend upon the nature of a given action; when they are the source of the
morality an act possesses by its own nature. For example, the intentional poisoning of another
person’s food to kill him or her is intrinsically bad in itself. The nature of the act, that is, killing an
innocent person intentionally, makes the act to be bad without or independent of what the person
who does it believes, unless one is a sadist, sickness is something bad to a person’s health. Health
is something good to all. All acts that inflict or can lead to sickness are, thus, bad in themselves;
and conversely all acts that promote health are good.

Does an objective intrinsic morality exist? Yes, there are things which are intrinsically good (e.g.,
life, truth, wisdom, health, friendship, love etc…) and there are others which are intrinsically bad
(sickness, death, deception, ignorance, foolishness, etc…). Accordingly, it is that the activities
pursuing those things enjoy an objective intrinsic morality, that is, they are either good or bad in
themselves.

What makes killing the innocent evil, and obeying the legitimate authority good? A traditional
answer is: the objective intrinsic morality of an action is its conformity or non-conformity with the
proper order of things. Such proper order is determined by the complete physical essence of the
elements that make up that act.

The proper order of things means the nature of things. That is, each and every thing has its own
uniqueness and laws or principles which govern its existence and activity. For example inorganic
matter such as rocks and minerals do not have life in them, yet they respond to the laws of physics.
23
When you throw a stone in the air, it will obey Newton’s Universal Law of gravitation, by falling
down. Living beings, plants, animals and humans – likewise follow the laws of their nature.

Complete physical essence means the actual nature which things have, not in abstract, but in a
given concrete situation (example: A man has killed another man. This proposition is abstract. Mr.
X is a soldier and in battle he has killed an enemy. This proposition is concrete).

In a more formal language we can say that objective intrinsic morality is the conformity or not of
an action with the laws of beings. It is possible to use the “self” or “things” according to or against
their nature. For instance, food and wine or beer can be used for nourishment and in this case they
are good; yet, if one use them for intoxication, they become bad.

2.4.1.2. Objective extrinsic morality

They are extrinsic when they do not belong to the nature of the action but they come from other
sources; hence, they are external modifiers of the morality of an action. They are the laws which
determine the morality an action possesses insofar as it is the object of a command or a prohibition,
for example, the laws which govern a country. Let us take an instance of the traffic law that says
every driver should slow down or stop at “zebra crossing”. One driver decides to drive at 100km/h,
not slowing down at the Zebra crossing. He knocks down a man who later dies in hospital while
undergoing treatment. A driver is arrested, convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment, having
being charged with careless driving resulting in the death of the boy. The morality of the driver’s
act is determined, hereby not by his desires, wishes or his reasons for driving, but by the traffic
law that is promulgated by the state and that prohibits careless driving. By the fact that the law is
promulgated, agreed upon by all citizens to safeguard life, the law exerts objective extrinsic
morality.

Objective extrinsic morality has to do with “human” acts, and as we have seen, it is fundamentally
determined by the “nature” of things. Yet, within the sphere of human activity, it is possible to
single out some human acts which are indifferent in themselves, but which become invested with
a particular moral value because they are object either of a command or a prohibition. Actually,
commands or prohibitions seem to increase the degree of the goodness or badness of a human act.
This observation brings us to consider the role “law” plays in determining the morality of some
human acts. “Law” is a factor of objective morality, but whereas the “nature of things” is an
intrinsic factor of objective morality, “law” is an extrinsic factor.

It is intrinsically good to obey a legitimate authority and it is bad to disobey. But a commanded
act besides being what it is becomes an act of obedience or disobedience. Hence, it acquires a new
morality, which is evidently extrinsic to its nature. For example, eating meat on Fridays during
Lent is indifferent, but when it becomes the object of a Church law, it acquires a new morality (at
least for Catholic Christians).

24
2.4.1.3. Subjective factors of morality: Conscience

The subjective factors depend upon the subject and they confer upon an action the subjective
morality, which can turn out to be profoundly different from objective morality. We define
subjective morality as the morality that an action receives from the subject who performs it. These
subjective factors can depend on the intellect (that is, the knowledge and awareness the subject
has, or does not have, when doing something), or on the will (that is, the freedom and will, involved
in performing the action).

The goodness or badness of any action is critically established only when we judge that action in
the light of objective principles. This factor of morality focuses our attention on the agent, or
subject, of a moral activity. Each one of us is such an agent. By the very fact that we are alive, we
are already caught in a web of activities. Through our actions we are making and defining our
existence, either as good or bad. At birth we have no moral character to begin with, but we
gradually build one for ourselves by the way we live. Our conduct shapes our moral character: the
kinds of things we do are either good or bad, and by doing them we ourselves become good or
bad.

Our own actions are fundamental in determining the existential quality of our life. But when we
are acting, what are the conditions of possibility of those actions? It is possible to act without being
aware of what we are doing. These actions, however, are not fully human; they are ‘acts of man.’
Theoretically, it is possible to live without thinking too much of what we are doing, but in this case
we should be bold enough to admit that life is not authentic. Life is on the way to authenticity only
when we are conscious of what we are doing and why we are doing it. Hence, we act as human
beings when we have knowledge of what we are doing. But knowledge alone is not yet sufficient
to determine activity. In order to do something I need to will it. Without my will an action cannot
represent me either, and thus cannot be fully human. At this point we can say that each one of us
is a subject capable of doing many things, but those things are really an individual’s own doing
only when there is sufficient knowledge, and sufficient will in performing those actions. We can
say that the subjective morality is thus dependent on the intellect of a person and on his/her will.

There is a double aspect of human knowledge: knowledge of something and awareness of

something. Knowledge of something constitutes a store of notions that may condition or determine
the type of awareness we may have in a particular case. Unless I am aware of what I am doing my
action is not fully human; but whether my action is moral or immoral is determined by my
knowledge about what is good and what is bad. This knowledge always precedes awareness. Life
is not made of generalities but it is a mosaic of small details that very often call for our decisions.
One thing is to know the general principles of morality; another thing is to apply them to the
concrete instances of our life. It is part of the dynamism of our intellect not only to perceive the
moral principles but also to have the ability of applying them to concrete cases. This ability of our
intellect is called “conscience”.

Conscience is our capacity of judging both our actions and the responsibility we have therein. It is
our intellect performing the function of judging the moral value, which is the rightness or
wrongness of our individual acts. Such a judgment is done according to the set of moral values

25
and principles we hold. Conscience reaches its verdict by means of a deductive process which is
analogous to any other logical deductive argument. In actual fact, though, we very rarely spell out
the steps for ourselves. Usually we draw the conclusions so quickly that we are not aware that we
have been engaging ourselves in a process of deductive reasoning.

Conscience is a subjective factor of morality insofar as it is the supreme and final guide to our
actions by commanding or forbidding when the act must either be done or avoided persuading or
permitting when there is question of the better or worse course of action without a strict obligation.
Accordingly, the fundamental norm of subjective morality says: “Always act according to the
voice of your conscience.” But in case of doubtful conscience one should not act till the matter has
been cleared.

2.4.1.4. Subjective factors of morality: the will

The will is the controlling factor in us. Its function is to issue commands. It can command both
bodily acts and mental acts. Therefore, we are held responsible for all that we control by the use
of will, both for the acts of the will itself and for the acts of other abilities that the will commands.
Hence, an action from an ethical standpoint fully represents an individual only when it is issued
by his or her free will, that is, when it is voluntary. In other words, for an act to become fully
human, it is not sufficient that it be guided only by knowledge, but it must also be willed. A
voluntary action, as the product of one’s own will, guided by one’s own intellect, is the actual
exercise of personal control over one’s conduct. This is responsibility and attributability of the act:
the former refers to the agent who is responsible, answerable, and accountable for the act; the latter
is proper to the act as it relates to the agent who is chargeable with or gets the credit for the act.

Voluntariness is the measure of the degree of responsibility and attributability. Hence, the
subjective morality of an act is modified by the degree the act is voluntary and free. Thus, the
following criterion: Whatever strengthens or weakens the will and whatever helps to evaluate the
goodness of a physical object, affects one’s voluntariness; whatever hinders a detached
deliberation decreases one’s freedom.

3. CONSCIENCE AS A FOUNDATION OF ETHICAL CONDUCT14

3.1.Notion of conscience

The word conscience has its root in different languages:

Latin word “Conscientia” or “cum scientia” which means “with science” or “with knowledge.”
Conscience therefore means to judge with knowledge or with reason. French word “Consiens”
which means “self-knowledge”.

In the popular mind, conscience is often thought of as an “inner voice”, telling us what to do or
warning us on what to avoid. It is a sense of right and wrong. It is that moral faculty which tells

14
Njino Joseph: A Guide to Ethics, Eldoret, Zapf Chancery Tertiary Level publications, 2008, p.69-71.

26
people subjectively what is good and evil and which manifests their moral obligation to them.
Conscience is a function of intellect concerned with actions that can be good or bad. It deals with
the practical question: “what ought I do here and now in this concrete situation?

Conscience is a moral faculty, which manifests to human beings their moral obligations and impels
them to fulfil them. It is a practical moral judgment, which tells human beings, in the concrete
situation what their moral obligations are. It is a judgment of the practical reason. It is the centre
of the human person, the insight, or the foresight. Conscience is more than mere reason, because
it is more than mere will, more than mere feeling. It is the depth of human existence, the core of
the person in his directedness towards his ultimate goal.

Every human person is given the ability to make correct judgments right from the time of
conception. Conscience is the same practical intelligence we use to judge what to do or avoid in
other affairs of life: how should I protect my health/life, how should I invest my money? Like
other human judgments, conscience can go wrong or it can make mistaken moral judgments.
Conscience works hand in hand with the human mind or intellect, heart and soul. It involves a kind
of self-examination or self-evaluation.15

3.2.What is conscience according to philosophy?

 The moral sense of right and wrong that governs a person's thoughts and actions.
 Regulation of one's actions in conformity to this sense.
 A supposed universal faculty of moral insight.
 Conscientiousness; diligence.
 A feeling of guilt or anxiety e.g. he has a conscience about his unkind action.
 Obsolete consciousness or awareness.
 Conscience is a motivation deriving logically from ethical or moral principles that
govern a person's thoughts and actions.
 An inner voice that judges your behaviour.
 A sense of duty, sense of shame - a motivating awareness of ethical responsibility.

3.3.The role of conscience16

Conscience has two major functions/roles namely; memory and judgment. It has a memory
function of remembering whether a certain human act has been performed or not. This is called
psychological conscience. It also has the function of judging whether the past, present, or future
human act conforms to moral rules or not. This is called moral conscience, which is our scope.

15
Cf. CHRISTINE W. GICHURE, “Basic concepts in Ethics. With an outline of different methods in Contemporary Moral
Philosophy”, Focus, Nairobi 1997, 98-100.
16
Ray Billington: Living Philosophy, an introduction to moral thought, New York, Routledge & Kegan Paul ltd. 1988,
p.65-67

27
“Always let your conscience be your guide”: how sound is this advice? Much depends on one’s
understanding of what precisely the conscience is. The assumption behind the quotation is that it
constitutes some kind of inner self, pure and untainted by selfishness and all the vices of the person
seen by others and with whom they must deal. It has been described as ‘another man within me
that’s angry with me’; more cynically ‘as the inner voice that warns us that someone may be
looking’. Either way, it is being described as an entity in its own right, capable of judgment on its
own.

Conscience is a judgment that commands, forbids, allows, and advices on an action. It declares an
action obligatory, prohibited, permissible, or prudent. It therefore acts as a ‘guide’ and also as a
‘judge’ because it directs the person whether to do or omit the action. It functions before the action,
hence, is ‘antecedent’.

Many people have spent their lives following the dictates of their consciences; some, by the same
measure have risked, and even surrendered their lives. John Nepomukeno’s (a Catholic priest)
conscience led him to respect the confessional secrecy; Martin Luther’s conscience led him to
denounce the authorities whom he had been brought up to accept as of God; on a more universal
level men have found themselves physically incapable of the act of adultery, despite intense sexual
desire because of a deep conscientious objection to marital infidelity.

Most of us probably make our list of behaviour we could not indulge in, acts we could not perform,
because of the dictates of our consciences, and we could perhaps give approval to Mark Twain
who wrote: “I have noticed my conscience for many years, and I know it is more trouble and bother
to me than anything else I started with.” The implication is that the conscience is something we
inherit at birth, remaining a fellow traveller with us throughout our lives. However, the conscience
lacks consistency, either between people in general or in any individual in particular. Like other
human judgments, conscience can go wrong or it can make mistaken moral judgments.

3.4. Basic characteristics of conscience

- It is an inner power which warns, condemns, praises and guides.

- Conscience is associated with duty and obligation, that is, it warns and tells one what to do
and what not to do.
- It is characterized with a spirit of tenderness, pity, true love and secrecy. In human life
there are things which are not supposed to be revealed e.g. confessions, medical doctor’s
secrecy, court secrecy, etc. this is conscience clause or professional secrecy.
- It presupposes the right use of reason (intelligence).

3.5.The limits of conscience17

How reliable a guide is conscience? People often say, “follow your conscience” or you should
never go against your conscience,” but not only is such advice not very helpful, it may sometimes

17
Shaw H. William: Social and Personal Ethics, p. 10-14

28
be bad advice. First, when we are genuinely perplexed over what we ought to do, we are trying to
figure out what our conscience ought to be saying to us.

Second, it may not always be good for us to follow our conscience. It all depends on what our
conscience says. Our conscience might reflect moral reflections that cannot withstand critical
scrutiny.

Just think of what appalling acts of behaviour have been, and still are, performed with a clear
conscience (and sometimes in the name of conscience). In the name of conscience, some old
women with red eyes have been executed as witches, opponents to political regimes have been
tortured to the point of death, different religions have fought each other in the name of holy wars,
mention it.

In all kinds of everyday matters, people’s consciences vary as to the issues they feel conscientious
about. Even within one individual this so-called traveller is inconsistent. Matters about which I
had conscientious feelings years ago no longer affect me; other matters have taken the place of
these earlier ones. We may let our conscience be our guide, to be confirmed every time we face a
similar problem; but new experiences will require us, so to speak, to reopen any investigation; and
the conscience may well change. The conscience may then, be the means whereby we know, or
are fairly sure of, what is right for us at any particular moment.

Reflection: It appears that this conscience that travels with us is as changeable as an April day:
how then can we possibly say that it is the final guide to moral behaviour?

The point here is not that you ignore your conscience but that the voice of conscience is itself
something that can be critically examined. A pang of conscience is like a warning. When you feel
one, you should definitely stop and reflect on the rightness of what you are doing. On the other
hand, you cannot justify your actions simply by saying you were following your conscience.
Terrible crimes have been committed in the name of conscience.

3.6.Types or divisions of conscience18

Conscience is not the standard or norm of morality; right reason is the moral norm and conscience
is the application of this standard of judgment of the moral value of the action.

3.6.1. A Good Conscience:

This St. Paul expresses various ways. In one place he simply terms it, a "good conscience toward
God;" in another, "a conscience void of offense toward God and toward man." But he speaks still
more largely in the text:

18
Peschke H. Karl: Christian Ethics; Moral Theology in the light of Vatican II, volume 1, Bangalore, Theological
Publications in India, 1996, p.174-175

29
"Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity," with a single eye, "and
godly sincerity, we have had our conversation in the world." 2Cor 1:12 Meantime he observes,
that this was done, "not by fleshly wisdom," commonly called prudence, "but by the grace of God;"
which alone is sufficient to work this in any child of man.

3.6.2. A Tender Conscience

A tender conscience is that which forms objectively correct judgments with comparative ease even
in finer distinctions between good and evil. It is exact in observing any deviation from the word
of God, whether in thought, or word, or work; and immediately feels remorse and self-
condemnation for it.

3.6.3. Antecedent conscience

It is called antecedent if the judgment on the morality of an action and the obligation to perform
or omit it is passed before the action is translated into reality. The antecedent conscience
commands, exhorts, permits or forbids. It acts before the act. Here conscience acts as a guide.

3.6.4. Consequent conscience

It is the judgment of the mind on the morality of an action already performed. Conscience is called
consequent if it evaluates a deed already done or omitted. The consequent conscience either
approves what has been done, giving peace to the mind and spiritual joy, or disapproves of what
was done, thus causing remorse and a sense of guilt. Here conscience acts as a judge.

3.6.5. Certain conscience

A certain conscience passes judgment without fear that the opposite may be true or without
error. For moral certainty it suffices that all reasonable fear be excluded. For example, a person
who has paid back the amount of money he owned his friend has a certain conscience.

3.6.6. Right conscience

A right conscience is a kind of conscience which judges as good what is really good, and as evil
what is really evil. Conscience is right or correct when moral judgment agrees with the objective
norms of morality. For example, a person who judges that it is not right to get a divorce simply
because his wife is no longer beautiful has a right conscience; a student who judges that it is not
right to cheat in exams simply because of getting a good grade has a correct/right conscience; a
student who judges that it is not right to write in library book because it is public property also has
a right conscience.

3.6.7. An informed conscience

Is one that has sought to inform and educate itself about a particular moral issue. For Catholics
informing one's conscience will always involve a prayerful reflection on what scripture and the
official teaching of the church has to say on a particular issue.
30
3.6.8. A doubtful conscience

The doubtful conscience on the other hand is uncertain concerning the morality of an action.
Therefore it suspends its judgments; or it passes judgment but with reasonable fear of erring. Thus
a youth who doubts whether it is right for him to see a controversial movie has a doubtful
conscience.

3.6.9. An erroneous conscience

It is erroneous when moral judgment defects from general principles of morality. It is one that is
contrary to God's Word and the teachings of the church. One may have an erroneous conscience
and not know it. For example, a couple may think that their marriage is recognized by the church
when in fact it is not. A couple may think that "living together" prior to marriage is morally correct
when in fact it is contrary to the teaching of the church.

3.6.10. A weak conscience

Is one that may know what is right but hasn't the courage or spiritual power to do what is right.
Or it may know what is wrong and sinful and yet it does it; e.g., a young lady may know abortion
is wrong but she does not have the psychological or moral strength needed to carry the baby to full
term. A weak conscience is also one that is easily swayed by the opinions of other people.

3.6.11. The perplexed conscience

Is the type of erroneous conscience which, in a conflict of duties, fears sin in whatever choice it
makes. A widowed mother, who has received many benefits from a friendly family whose father
has caused a car crash of which she was a witness, will easily find herself in the conflict between
the obligation of gratitude to her benefactor and the obligation to tell the truth in the court, where
she is cited as a witness.

In such instances, if the decision can be delayed, one must first postpone the action in order to
obtain information and deliberate on it. But if the decision cannot be postponed, one must choose
what appears to be the lesser evil. The perplexed conscience is classified as a type of erroneous
conscience, because objectively only one of the two conflicting obligations can be binding.

3.6.12. The Scrupulous conscience

A scrupulous conscience is one that frequently thinks that it is sinning when in fact it is not. For
example, because of deformative and perfectionistic training in a particular area like sexuality, one
may think that one is constantly sinning against the virtue of chastity. It has been said that a
scrupulous person thinks that God is a tyrant. His God has an all seeing eye that watches his every
move and is ready to pounce on him for every wrong act. A person with a scrupulous conscience
needs to place himself under the guidance of a competent and compassionate confessor who will
help to introduce him to the love and mercy of God.

31
3.6.13. Lax conscience

A lax conscience is one that is insensitive to the good that ought to be done and the evil that ought
to be shunned. For example one may be a racist or one may have little or no social conscience or
be very permissive in sexuality issues. The lax conscience is inclined on insufficient grounds, to
judge a thing to be lawful which is sinful, or something to be a light sin which is actually a grave
one. In a light-minded way the lax conscience does not face up to the gravity of the moral
obligation. This is a kind of conscience that does not judge things seriously. It is blunt and reckless.
It does not bother to look for objective truth.

3.7.The Rule of conscience

The slogan “Let your conscience be your guide” has long been, for many, what morality is all
about. Yet, despite their admiration for persons of conscience, philosophers have typically judged
appeals to conscience as alone insufficient and untrustworthy for ethical judgment. Conscience
vary radically from person to person and time to time; moreover, they are often altered by
circumstance, religious belief, childhood and training. The reliability of conscience, then, is not
self-certifying. Moral justification must be based on a source external to conscience itself. This
external source is often the common morality or ethical theory. 19

3.8.Freedom and commitment of conscience20

One of the basic rights of men is freedom of conscience as included in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights by the United Nations. Vatican II also declares, that a person “must not be forced
to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his
conscience” (Declaration on Human freedom no. 3). Man has the right to freedom of conscience.
However, a right is limited by duty. I may exercise my right up to the point where my duty to
others supersedes (replaces) my right. A right ceases to be a right when it injures others’ rights.
Duty is the moral necessity to do or omit something; it is the absolute demand for realization that
some value makes on one’s inner freedom.

Freedom refers to the power or ability of the human mind to choose a course of action or make a
decision without being subject to restraints imposed by antecedent causes, by necessity, or by
divine predetermination. Human beings possess freewill, if they do not, then they cannot be held
responsible for their actions, then the issue of morality becomes meaningless in that case.

3.8.1. The right to freedom of conscience comprises two claims

 The right not to be forced to act contrary to one’s conscience but motivated by a sense of
duty. This right is unconfined.

19
Beauchamp L. Tom et al: Ethical Theory and Business, 6th ed. New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc. 2001, p. 5

20
Peschke H. Karl: Christian Ethics, p.195-203

32
  The right not to be constrained from acting according to one’s conscience. This right meets
with restrictions where it happens to collide with the demands of the common welfare. For
example, can conscience entitle religious fanatics to hijack planes and shoot hostages in
order to compel compliance with their demands?

In availing any freedom man must respect the moral principle of personal and social responsibility:
in exercising their rights individuals and social groups are bound by the moral law to have regard
for the rights of others, their duties to others and for the common good of all. If an individual or a
group is not able to meet these demands, society has the right to defend itself against such
misguided threats by use of civil authority.

Freedom of conscience does not mean freedom from conscience. Freedom is a condition necessary
for the exercise of virtue, but it is not a virtue in itself. It does not make a person good. Freedom
enables us to do what we want, but it does not tell us what to want. Freedom is very important in
the proper functioning of the conscience. Therefore, only in true freedom can a person be truly
committed to do what is good and avoid what is evil. Every human person needs to be free in order
to commit himself/herself to doing good and avoiding evil. It helps one make responsible decisions
and judgments in whatever one does. Freedom involves will power and intellect. However, human
freedom can be misused e.g. in cases of rape, theft, corruption, etc. We should therefore be free
and responsible for our actions; freedom and responsibility entail each other. We are responsible
for the free choices we make. Hence, the slogan, “Always let your conscience be your guide”. We
must be careful about everything that could be affected by our choices: everything that could be
affected by my choices is within my responsibility, and I must not fail to do everything I can to
maximize overall net good, on the whole and in the long run. 21

3.8.2. Sin and freedom of conscience

This debate involves above all the problem of autonomy and freedom, especially as regards the
individual conscience and the understanding of sin. In this context we can see the closer connection
between the question of conscience in relation to the African concept of sin, the existential
perspective of conscience where by the person is responsible for his/her sin, and then the
communitarian dimension of the responsibility for sin and then the communitarian dimension of
the responsibility of the individual conscience.

3.8.2.1.Individual freedom

To what extent can one speak of individual freedom in the African community? Africans never
understand freedom independently of the community. The freedom and even the existence of the
individual depend upon the freedom and existence of the community and vice versa. By
contributing to the community, the individual gives himself freedom. Africans understand freedom
not only in the sense as freedom “from.” It is at the same time freedom “for,” but most importantly
of all, it is freedom “with.” Freedom does not only exist for me: it is for everyone, since I myself

21
JOHN FINNIS, Fundamentals of Ethics, Georgetown University Press, 1983, p. 136.

33
am free only when everyone is. Here once more, we find the fundamental principle of African
thinking: “I am because we are, and because we are, I am too.”

This principle can be expressed by means of the principle “cognatus sum”: “I am related, therefore
I am.” A genuine relationship will always tend to grant others genuine human existence, and this
includes freedom. We may gain the impression from what has been said that the individual exists
one-sidedly for the sake of the community, but Africans hold that the community is not allowed to
crush the individual members, the community is obliged to grant them the space necessary for the
unfolding of their personal existence.22 We can conclude saying that, even where the conscience
makes individual decisions, it must always have communitarian aspects, and must never lose sight
of the good of the community.

3.8.2.2 Conscience and freedom in an African context

Freedom is a condition necessary for the exercise of virtue, but it is not a virtue in itself. It does
not make a person good. Freedom enables us to do what we want, but it does not tell us what to
want. Freedom is very important in the proper functioning of the conscience. Therefore, only in
true freedom can a person be truly committed to do what is good and avoid what is evil. Every
human person needs to be free in order to commit himself/herself to doing good and avoiding evil.
It helps one make responsible decisions and judgments in whatever one does. Freedom involves
will power and intellect. However, human freedom can be misused e.g. in case of rape, theft,
corruption, etc. We should therefore be free and responsible for our actions; freedom and
responsibility entail each other. We are responsible for the free choices we make.

Are there any free choices? By free choices we mean a choice is free if and only if it is between
open practical alternative (i.e. do this, or to do that….) such that there is no factor but the choosing
itself which settles which alternative is chosen. 23 We must care about everything that we could
affect by our choices: everything that I could affect by my choices is within my responsibility, and
I must not fail to do everything I can to maximize overall net good, on the whole and in the long
run.24

3.8.3. Limitations of human freedom

Human freedom has its limitations. Our choices can be limited by:
- physical limitations (health, age, bodily physique),
- historical limitations (culture, language and symbols), and
- Environmental limitations (time and space, climate and geographical).
However, as long as we remain rational beings, these limitations do not take away our freedom of
choice. Here, we encounter the notions of acceptance and responsibility. The freest people in the
world are those who have a sense of inner peace about themselves and their situations even in the
midst of limitations and problems. Only a tranquil mind can afford to be creative, innovative. All

22
Cf. J. S. MBITI, Introduction to African Religion, 2nd ed. (Nairobi/Kampala, 1996), p. 177.
23
Cf. JOHN FINNIS, Fundamentals of Ethics, Georgetown University Press, 1983, p. 137.
24
ibid p.136.
34
depends on the attitude that we choose to adopt in any given circumstance. Accepting a situation
which cannot be changed, and choosing a positive attitude toward suffering and meaning in life is
the key to actualizing our freedom. Freedom demands responsibility. Responsibility means that
we should take charge of our choice-given situations and neither blame other nor our limitations
for whatever we do or fail to do. We should never let others bear our responsibility. Freedom is
the ability one has of self-determination, and this ability is rooted in the very consciousness one
has of himself/herself. To get in touch, however, with one’s source of freedom is not easy. To
discover our consciousness requires a new operation we have not been trained to perform, namely,
to look inside ourselves, usually referred to as introspection25.

3.9. Formation of conscience26

Conscience represents both the more general ability we have as human beings to know what is
good and right and the concrete judgments we make in particular situations concerning what we
should do or about what we have already done.

We are not born with a fully formed conscience. As a child matures and reaches the age of reason,
the ability to exercise his/her judgment of conscience slowly develops. There are many factors that
contribute to the formation of conscience in an individual. Our family upbringing, education, life
experience, our environment, the influence of friends, our faith etc … The purpose of the formation
of conscience is to reach – or help someone else reach – an awareness of moral truth by which to
direct one’s life to what is truly good and fulfilling. Formation is not simply a process of
promulgating laws, rules, and regulations, plus, perhaps, special rules to apply in case there is
doubt whether a law or rule applies: this is to view things legalistically. Rather, the goal of
formation of conscience is to understand moral truth and to be able wisely to direct one’s life. The
process of forming a conscience is a long process, it is a lifelong task.

In the process of forming our conscience we use:

 Head: Use your head to widen and test your understanding of what is good and right by
seeking the wisdom of others. What do/would others say about this situation and why? Study,
learn, ask questions, know facts, seek advice, pray, be willing to change one’s minds, prudently,
deciding the best course of action. Use your head and heart to make a personal decision.

As I reflect on the wisdom of others and apply it to my situation, does my own understanding of
what is at stake become clearer? Which direction gives me the greatest sense of peace? What is

25
Cf. L. MATTEI – P. WAMBUA, “A Guide to christian ethics and formation in moral maturity,” UEA, Nairobi 2000, 56-
57.
26
MILTON A. GONSALVESS, “Fagothey’s Right and Reason, Ethics in Theory and Practice”, Merill, London 1995, 56-59;
Fagothey Austin: Right and reason; Ethics and theory in practice based on the teachings of Aristotle and St. Thomas
Aquinas, 2nd ed. TAN Books, North Carolina, 1959, p. 216-218

35
my conscience telling me to do? Do I really desire to do the right thing and desire the best for
myself and others?

 Hands: consistently put the right choice into practice, taking responsibility for
consequences.
 Heart: openness to conversion.

The process of forming one’s conscience is accomplished by the use of reflex principles, so called
because the mind uses them while reflecting on the state of doubt which we use and ignorance in
which it now finds itself.

3.9.1 The duty to form one’s conscience27

Since conscience stands in need of illumination and guidance, a man is responsible for its
formation. To call upon the judgments of one’s conscience without having striven to inform it
properly is an insulting abuse. One should use the available resources to understand the truth of
the moral situation facing one. The sources of information are the word of God, the moral norms
handed down in society, findings of ethical sciences, elders, and so on. Also openness to correction,
readiness to dialogue, and the acceptance of criticisms are important elements of the formation of
conscience.

The necessary conditions for a well formed, true and upright conscience include: love for the truth.
We should always avoid destructive philosophies and deceptive ideas e.g. negative foreign
influences under the disguise of modernization. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful
for it formulates its judgment according to reason, in conformity with the true good.

In order to form an upright conscience, one should acquire the habit and culture of reflection before
speaking or acting. “Think before you act”. One should ask oneself: Are the words I’m going to
speak constructive or destructive? Are they of benefit to anyone? Are my actions constructive or
scandalous? Is God happy with my actions and words? We should always ask ourselves of the
consequences of our deeds and words.

Formation of conscience is a lifelong task, so parents, educators, and leaders (political, religious)
should constantly help children and the youth to form upright and active conscience i.e. they should
be exemplary. Much emphasis should be put on ethical values such as honesty, truthfulness,
prudence, commitment, transparency, accountability, responsibility, courage, etc.

27
Peschke H. Karl: Christian Ethics, p. 205-207

36
3.10. Some of the important virtues/ethical values in the formation of conscience

3.10.1. Justice28

Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought. Each person should
have an equal right. Liberty and equality are of key importance in conceptions of justice in
particular. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with
a similar liberty for others. For the libertarian, a society is just when individual freedom is
maximized.

Justice as equal treatment allows for equality of opportunity. Equality is a central characteristic of
justice throughout the various ethical conceptions of justice. The principle of equal treatment and
equality of opportunity is also of particular significance in terms of the equal treatment of genders.

Justice can also be participatory, this is justice with regard to participation meaning the fair,
appropriate participation in decision-making of all those involved. Fair participation is an essential
instrument capable of reducing a number of societal conflicts.

Justice can also be ecological, that is, justice with regard to ecology. This means the sustainable
use and distribution of resources, as well as e reduction in and a fair distribution of ecological
burdens. A fair distribution of resources and burdens extends to three dimensions: between
generations living today, between today’s and tomorrow’s generations, and between human beings
and their non-human environment.

3.10.2. Truthfulness29

Truthfulness is one of the important virtues. Truth-telling, or veracity, can be defined as the
avoidance of lying, deception, misrepresentation, and non-disclosure in interactions. It is
intellectual honesty and emotional sincerity or honesty. It is an attitude of mind in which one
admits the truth of facts. It is conformity between thought and thing. If our thought is conformed
to things as they are, we have logical truth, the opposite of which is error. If things are conformed
to someone’s thought of them, there is ontological truth; everything as known by God is
ontologically true. If our speech conforms to things as they are, we have verbal truth, we speak
true words. If our speech is conformed to our thought so that we can say what we think, we have
moral truth, the opposite of which is a lie.

Truthfulness should be expressed in thought, intellect and reason. It should also be shown in
conduct or action; emphasis should not be put on the ‘show off culture’ but rather on reality. We
should be truthful to ourselves, to our creator and to our fellow human beings.

28
Stuckelberger Christoph: Global trade ethics, p. 47-49

29
Fagothey Austin: Right and reason; p. 307-321

37
Human beings have the obligation to search for truth and defend it, this enables one achieve
integral human development i.e. development of the whole person. This will eventually lead to
society and humanity progress. Truthfulness should be translated into the culture of our lives.

The problem of truth - telling arises from the fact that a person may also have a right or duty to
conceal the truth about what he/she thinks or feels, for each person has a right to privacy. We may
be entrusted with a secret that must not be divulged (that must not be revealed). Take an example
of a physician, must he/she always tell the patient the whole truth? Are there some occasions when
our humanity fails to tell the truth? Truthfulness is opposed to the culture of telling lies. Lying is
a morally evil act; therefore, every lie is a sin and should be shunned. Lying is viewed as an
inherent wrong, i.e. something that we naturally consider unethical.

38
4. Work and property
4.1. Meaning of work and its relationship to property ownership30

According to the encyclopaedia of philosophy, work is “every material and spiritual activity
tending to a useful result”. More precisely, it can be said that work is a fatiguing activity intended
to modify things through the use of the body and instruments, with which man searches to satisfy
his own needs. Work can also be defined as any human activity in which physical strength and/or
other powers are exerted to do or make something. Work may be physical or intellectual or mental;
it is important for the individual, for the family and for the society. 31

Work may also be defined as the carrying out of tasks requiring the expenditure of mental and
physical effort, which has as its objective the production of goods and services that cater to human
needs. An occupation, or job, is work that is done in exchange for a regular wage, or salary. In all
cultures, work is the basis of the economic system, or economy. The economy consists of
institutions that provide for the production and distribution of goods and services.

For many people work is what they are paid for, but often people do not stop working when they
are not paid for it, for there is both paid work and unpaid work. Hence, work can be described as
a “purposeful activity”. Work is an essential part of being alive. Your work is your identity, it tells
who you are. People don’t work for the sake of working; they are working for a car, a new house,
a holiday, etc.

Work is a universal human activity; he is the only being capable of work. People everywhere
engage in physical and mental activities that enhance the physical and social survival of themselves
and others. Work distinguishes man from brutes (animals) just as much as thought, language,
freedom, etc. By virtue of work, man creates for himself his own environment, procures food and
clothing for himself, produces means of communication, transportation, etc. Therefore, work
constitutes a specific, essential dimension of man, and its study is of paramount importance and
necessary, if a full comprehension of man’s being is to be obtained.

4.2.Relationship between work and property ownership

The relationship between work and property ownership is the fact that most people get the income
and property they need by working for it. Human beings have a need and right to hold some things
as their own with the assurance that no other person may rightfully deprive them of what they hold
as their own. Private ownership of property is necessary for us to live a descent life. The right to
private ownership of property is an important element in forming a just economic policy, because
that right enlarges our capacity for creativity and initiative. Property ownership can either be public
(belonging to the community) or private (property in individual hands).

30
CHRISTINE W. GICHURE, Basic concepts in Ethics. With an outline of different methods in Contemporary Moral
Philosophy, Focus Publications Ltd, Nairobi (Kenya), 1997, 163-164. Cf. MILTON A. GONSALVESS: Fagothey’s
Right and Reason, Ethics in Theory and Practice, London, Merill Publication company, (ninth edition) 1995, p. 410-
423, 438-455.
31
MILTON A. GONSALVESS: Fagothey’s Right and Reason, Ethics in Theory and Practice, p.439.
39
4.3. Characteristics and purpose of work 32
4.3.1. Money – A wage or salary is the main resource many people depend on to meet their needs.
Without such an income, anxieties about coping with day-to-day life tend to multiply.
4.3.2. Activity level – Work often provides a basis for the acquisition and exercise of skills and
capacities. Even where work is routine, it offers a structured environment in which a
person’s energies may be absorbed. Without it, the opportunity to exercise such skills and
capacities may be reduced.
4.3.3. Variety – Work provides access to contexts that contrast with domestic surroundings. In
the working environment, even when the tasks are relatively dull, individuals may enjoy
doing something different from home chores.
4.3.4. Temporal structure – For people in regular employment, the day is usually organized
around the rhythm of work. While this may sometimes be oppressive, it provides a sense
of direction in daily activities. Those who are out of work frequently find boredom a major
problem and develop a sense of apathy about time.
4.3.5. Social contacts – the work environment often provides friendship and opportunities to
participate in shared activities with others. Separated from the work setting, a person’s
circle of possible friends and acquaintances is likely to dwindle.
4.3.6. Personal identity – Work is usually valued for the sense of stable social identity it offers.
For men in particular, self-esteem is often bound up with the economic contribution they
make to the maintenance of the household. In addition, job conditions, such as the
opportunity to work in jobs that are challenging, not routinized, and not subject and not
subject to close supervision, are known to affect a person’s sense of self-worth.

Through work man must earn his daily bread (cf. Ps 127 (128):2; cf. also Gen 3:17-19; Prov.
10:22; Ex 1:8-14; Jer 22:13) and contribute to the continual advance of science and technology
and, above all, to elevating unceasingly the cultural and moral level of the society within which he
lives in community with those who belong to the same family. And work means any activity by
man, whether manual or intellectual, whatever its nature or circumstances; it means any human
activity that can and must be recognized as work, in the midst of all the many activities of which
man is capable and to which he is predisposed by his very nature, by virtue of humanity itself. Man
is made to be in the visible universe an image and likeness of God himself (Cf. Gen 1:26.), and he
is placed in it in order to subdue the earth (cf. Gen 1:28). From the beginning therefore he is called
to work. Work is one of the characteristics that distinguish man from the rest of creatures, whose
activity for sustaining their lives cannot be called work. Only man is capable of work, and only
man works, at the same time by work occupying his existence on earth. Thus work bears a
particular mark of man and of humanity, the mark of a person operating within a community of
persons. And this mark decides its interior characteristics; in a sense it constitutes its very nature. 33

4.4. The changing nature of work

32
Cf. Giddens Anthony & Duneier Mitchell: Introduction to sociology, p.305-331
33
John Paul II: Laborem Exercens (encyclical on Human work), September 14th 1981.

40
The globalizing of economic production, together with the spread of information technology, is
altering the nature of jobs most people do. The proportion of people working in blue-collar jobs
(manual workers) in industrial countries has progressively fallen. New jobs have been created in
offices and in service centres such as supermarkets and airports. The nature of the work most
people do and the role of work in our lives, like so many other aspects of the societies in which we
live, are undergoing major changes. The chief reasons are global economic competition, the
widespread introduction of information technology and computerization, and the large scale entry
of women into the workforce.

There have been changes in industrial production. The concept of industrial automation, or
programmable machinery, was introduced in the mid-1800s, when Christopher Spencer, an
American, invented the automat, a programmable lathe that made screws, nuts, and gears.
Automation has thus far affected relatively few industries, but with advances in the design of
industrial robots, its impact is certain to become greater. A robot is an automatic device that can
perform functions ordinarily done by human workers. Robots were first introduced into industry
in 1946. Robots today can execute numerous tasks like welding, spray-painting, and lifting and
carrying parts, and so on.

In the light of the impact the global economy and the demand for a ‘flexible’ labour force, some
sociologists and economists have argued that more and more people in the future will become
“portfolio workers”. They will have a “skill portfolio” – a number of different job skills and
credentials – which they will use to move between several jobs during the course of their working
lives. Only a relatively small proportion of workers will have continuous “careers” in the current
sense.

In the positive sense, workers will not be stuck in the same job for years and will be able to plan
their work lives in a creative way. Others hold that “flexibility” in practice means that
organizations can hire and fire more or less at will, undermining any sense of security their workers
might have. Employers will only have a short-term commitment to their workforces and will be
able to minimize the paying of extra benefits.

4.5. Problems of work34

Workers in the labour force are faced with a number of problems including the following:

4.5.1. Dangerous/unfavourable working conditions

In a capitalist economy management keeps low labour costs in order to get greater profits. Low
labour costs mean that workers receive low wages, have inferior or non-existent fringe benefits
such as health care and work in unhealthy conditions. For example, mines and factories are
extremely unsafe. Such harmful working conditions have led to job-induced illnesses though they
are impossible to ascertain exactly, primarily because for some diseases it takes many years of

34
EITZEN D. STANLEY (et al): Social Problems, Allyn and Bacon, Needham heights, (4th Edition), 1989, p. 452-461
41
exposure to affect the skin, lungs, blood chemistry, nervous system, or various organs. Some
occupational diseases have led to physical handicaps.

4.5.2. The control of workers

Work in industries is sometimes difficult, often tedious and usually boring. There is effort to
increase worker efficiency and therefore increase profits meaning that workers develop a very
limited range of skills, their knowledge is severely curtailed. Specialization makes workers highly
susceptible to automation and being easily replaced by cheaper workers. There is a hierarchy of
authority/bureaucracy to control workers and work settings and to give orders to those below and
take responsibility for their actions. Workers who hope to get any promotion in the organization
must become obedient rule followers who do not question authority. If workers demand for higher
wages, safe working conditions, or benefits, management can threaten to replace them with
cheaper labour.

4.5.3. Discrimination in the workplace

Women and minorities have long been the objects of discrimination in the workplace in many
societies. At times men tend to express seniority rights, there are restrictions in job placement,
women have limited opportunities for advancement, and lower pay for equal work. There is
occupational segregation which accounts for women’s low average earnings. Despite the fact that
women constitute more than one-third of the world's labour force, in general they remain
concentrated in a limited number of traditional occupations, many of which do not require highly
technical qualifications and most of which are low paid.

The extreme occupational segregation of women in our society makes for a crucial difference
between women’s poverty and men’s. For men, poverty is often a consequence of unemployment,
and it is curable by getting a job. But for women, concentrated in the low-wage stratum of the
work force, a job may not be a solution to poverty. Many women are involved with “service work”
which includes nurses’ aides, school teachers, waitresses, etc. However, as countries have become
industrialized, more women have obtained jobs in more occupations. In other cases discrimination
is based on difference in races, cultural background, religious background, etc.

4.5.4. Alienation

This is the separation of human beings from each other, from themselves, and from the products
they create. According to Karl Marx, a capitalist, worker alienation occurs because workers do not
have any control over their labour, because they are manipulated by managers, because they tend
to work in impersonal settings, and because they work at specialized tasks. Under these
circumstances workers use only a fraction of their talents and have no pride in their own creativity
and in the final product. In absence of satisfaction and personal fulfilment work becomes
meaningless. For many workers, the alienation remains at a personal level and is manifested by
higher worker dissatisfaction, absenteeism, and alcohol or other drug abuse on the job.

42
4.5.5. Unemployment

Unemployment refers to enforced idleness of wage earners who are able and willing to work but
cannot find jobs. The experience of unemployment – being unable to find a job when one wants it
– is still a largely negative one. Unemployment rates have shot up in many countries. And within
countries, unemployment is not equally distributed. It varies by race or ethnic background, by age,
and by industry and geographic region. A substantial proportion of young people are among the
long-term unemployed, again especially among the minority groups. Few young people entering
the labour force find a job right away; workers may temporarily leave their jobs to seek new work;
some may be on strike; others suffer from long – term illness; and still others are illiterate or
without the skills to perform useful work.

“Unemployment is the worst evil, in the sense that the unemployed feel that they have fallen
out of common life … they are not wanted, that is the thing that has the power to corrupt
the soul of any man”. (William Temple)35

There are personal and social costs of unemployment. If a person loses a job, their sense of
belonging disappears – they can feel humiliated, angry, worthless, depressed, etc. Health problems
can increase; there is loss of self-esteem; families suffer extra strain; there are increases in the
abuse of alcohol and drugs, violence and suicide. Unemployment affects a person’s whole life and
the lives of those close to him/her. As work is a structuring element in a person’s psychological
makeup, the experience of unemployment is often disorientating.

In capitalist societies unemployment is kept relatively high because high unemployment deflates
wages and therefore increases profits. When there are unemployed people willing to work, workers
will not make inordinate demands for higher wages for fear that they will be replaced by cheaper
labour.

In developing nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America a much more serious and widespread
problem is underemployment – that is, people are employed only part time or at work that is
inefficient or unproductive, with a correspondingly low income that is insufficient to meet their
needs. Much of the unemployment and underemployment in developing nations has accompanied
migration from rural to larger urban centres in search of jobs.

4.5.6. The Types of unemployment

Economists have described the causes and types of unemployment as frictional, seasonal,
structural, and cyclical.

i) Frictional unemployment

This arises because workers seeking jobs do not find them immediately; while looking for work
they are counted as unemployed. Friction in this case refers to the incongruity between the demand

35
J. JENKINS, Contemporary Moral Issues, Heinemann Educational Publishers, Oxford (3 rd Edition), 1997 page 120
43
for and supply of labour. The amount of frictional unemployment depends on the frequency with
which workers change jobs and the time it takes to find new ones. This type of unemployment
could be reduced somewhat by more efficient placement services. When workers are free to quit
or change their jobs, however, some frictional unemployment will always be present.

ii) Seasonal unemployment

This occurs when industries have a slow season, such as construction and other outdoor work in
winter or rainy season. It also occurs at the end of the school or academic year, when large numbers
of students and fresh graduates look for work. Unemployment rates in many parts of the world
such as Africa and India are difficult to estimate because many people work in temporary or part-
time jobs. Few workers are permanently unemployed, but seasonally or marginally employed
people such as agricultural labourers are often under employed. State and national governments
have established fairly successful rural employment plans that hire labour to build roads and other
public works.

iii) Structural unemployment

This arises from an imbalance between the kinds of workers wanted by employers and the kinds
of workers looking for jobs. The imbalances may be caused by inadequacy in skills, location, or
personal characteristics. Technological developments, for example, necessitate new skills in many
industries, leaving those workers who have outdated skills without a job. A plant in a declining
industry may close down or move to another area, throwing out of work those employees who are
unable or unwilling to move. Workers with inadequate education or training and young workers
with little or no experience may be unable to get jobs because employers believe that these
employees would not produce enough to be worth paying the legal minimum wage or the rate
agreed on with the union.

On the other hand, even highly trained workers can be unemployed; this can happen, for example,
when the large numbers of new graduates with degrees in a given field exceed the number of jobs
available in those fields. If employers practice illegal job discrimination against any group because
of sex, race, religion, age, or national origin, a high unemployment rate for these workers could
result even when jobs are plentiful.

iv) Cyclical unemployment

Cyclical unemployment occurs when the economy goes into a recession. It results from a general
lack of demand for labour. Jobs disappear as occupations become obsolete, business close in the
face of foreign competition or economic recession and companies “downsize” to become more
profitable. When the business cycle turns downward, demand for goods and services drops;
consequently, workers are laid off. The basic causes of cyclical unemployment are decreases in
the levels of consumption, investment, or government spending in the economy, or a decrease in
the demand for goods and services exported to other countries. As national spending and
production levels fall, some employers begin to lay off workers. Cyclical unemployment varies
greatly according to the health of the economy.

44
Task: a. What are the effects of unemployment?
b. How can we overcome unemployment in our society today?

4.6. The obligation and dignity of work (value of work)36

The Church finds in the very first pages of the Book of Genesis the source of her conviction that
work is a fundamental dimension of human existence on earth. An analysis of these texts makes
us aware that they express-sometimes in an archaic way of manifesting thought-the fundamental
truths about man, in the context of the mystery of creation itself. These truths are decisive for man
from the very beginning, and at the same time they trace out the main lines of his earthly existence,
both in the state of original justice and also after the breaking, caused by sin, of the Creator's
original covenant with creation in man.

When man, who had been created "in the image of God.... male and female", hears the words: "Be
fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it", even though these words do not refer directly
and explicitly to work, beyond any doubt they indirectly indicate it as an activity for man to carry
out in the world. Indeed, they show its very deepest essence. Man is the image of God partly
through the mandate received from his Creator to subdue, to dominate, the earth. In carrying out
this mandate, man, every human being, reflects the very action of the Creator of the universe.

Work understood as a "transitive" activity, that is to say an activity beginning in the human subject
and directed towards an external object, presupposes a specific dominion by man over "the earth",
and in its turn it confirms and develops this dominion. It is clear that the term "the earth" of which
the biblical text speaks is to be understood in the first place as that fragment of the visible universe
that man inhabits. By extension, however, it can be understood as the whole of the visible world
insofar as it comes within the range of man's influence and of his striving to satisfy his needs. The
expression "subdue the earth" has an immense range. It means all the resources that the earth (and
indirectly the visible world) contains and which, through the conscious activity of man, can be
discovered and used for his ends. And so these words, placed at the beginning of the Bible, never
cease to be relevant.

4.6.1 Work in the Objective Sense: Technology

This universality and, at the same time, this multiplicity of the process of "subduing the earth"
throw light upon human work, because man's dominion over the earth is achieved in and by
means of work. There thus emerges the meaning of work in an objective sense, which finds
expression in the various epochs of culture and civilization. Man dominates the earth by the very
fact of domesticating animals, rearing them and obtaining from them the food and clothing he
needs, and by the fact of being able to extract various natural resources from the earth and the
seas. But man "subdues the earth" much more when he begins to cultivate it and then to

36
John Paul II: Laborem Exercens (encyclical on Human work), September 14 th 1981.

45
transform its products, adapting them to his own use. Thus agriculture constitutes through
human work a primary field of economic activity and an indispensable factor of production.
Industry in its turn will always consist in linking the earth's riches-whether nature's living
resources, or the products of agriculture, or the mineral or chemical resources-with man's work,
whether physical or intellectual. This is also in a sense true in the sphere of what are called
service industries, and also in the sphere of research, pure or applied.

In industry and agriculture man's work has today in many cases ceased to be mainly manual, for
the toil of human hands and muscles is aided by more and more highly perfected machinery.
Not only in industry but also in agriculture we are witnessing the transformations made possible
by the gradual development of science and technology. Historically speaking, this, taken as a
whole, has caused great changes in civilization, from the beginning of the "industrial era" to the
successive phases of development through new technologies, such as the electronics and the
microprocessor technology in recent years.

While it may seem that in the industrial process it is the machine that "works" and man merely
supervises it, making it function and keeping it going in various ways, it is also true that for this
very reason industrial development provides grounds for re-proposing in new ways the question
of human work. Both the original industrialization that gave rise to what is called the worker
question and the subsequent industrial and post-industrial changes show in an eloquent manner
that, even in the age of ever more mechanized "work", the proper subject of work continues to
be man.

4.6.2 Work in the Subjective Sense: Man as the Subject of Work

Man has to subdue the earth and dominate it, because as the "image of God" he is a person, that
is to say, a subjective being capable of acting in a planned and rational way, capable of deciding
about himself, and with a tendency to self-realization. As a person, man is therefore the subject
of work. As a person he works, he performs various actions belonging to the work process;
independently of their objective content, these actions must all serve to realize his humanity, to
fulfil the calling to be a person that is his by reason of his very humanity.

And so this "dominion" spoken of in the biblical text being meditated upon here refers not only
to the objective dimension of work but at the same time introduces us to an understanding of its
subjective dimension. Understood as a process whereby man and the human race subdue the
earth, work corresponds to this basic biblical concept only when throughout the process man
manifests himself and confirms himself as the one who "dominates". This dominion, in a certain
sense, refers to the subjective dimension even more than to the objective one: this dimension
conditions the very ethical nature of work. In fact there is no doubt that human work has an
ethical value of its own, which clearly and directly remain linked to the fact that the one who
carries it out is a person, a conscious and free subject, that is to say a subject that decides about
himself.

The ancient world introduced its own typical differentiation of people into classes according to
the type of work done. Work which demanded from the worker the exercise of physical strength,

46
the work of muscles and hands, was considered unworthy of free men, and was therefore given
to slaves. By broadening certain aspects that already belonged to the Old Testament, Christianity
brought about a fundamental change of ideas in this field, taking the whole content of the Gospel
message as its point of departure, especially the fact that the one who, while being God, became
like us in all things devoted most of the years of his life on earth to manual work at the carpenter's
bench. This circumstance constitutes in itself the most eloquent "Gospel of work", showing that
the basis for determining the value of human work is not primarily the kind of work being done
but the fact that the one who is doing it is a person. The sources of the dignity of work are to be
sought primarily in the subjective dimension, not in the objective one.

Such a concept practically does away with the very basis of the ancient differentiation of people
into classes according to the kind of work done. This does not mean that, from the objective
point of view, human work cannot and must not be rated and qualified in any way. It only means
that the primary basis of the value of work is man himself, who is its subject. This leads
immediately to a very important conclusion of an ethical nature: however true it may be that
man is destined for work and called to it, in the first place work is "for man" and not man "for
work". Through this conclusion one rightly comes to recognize the pre-eminence of the
subjective meaning of work over the objective one.

4.7 Need for labour rest37

Traditionally in our society Sunday has been a day of rest but over the last few years this has
changed considerably. Many people believe that whether people are religious or not, society needs
a publicly expressed day of rest and ‘re-creation’ such as the Christian Sunday has traditionally
provided. Sunday, which should be a day when people can relax, has become like any other day.
Some people are made to work in society’s endless obsession with buying, spending and acquiring
things. Christians argue that what really matters is not materialism and consumerism but improving
the quality of people’s lives, and a day of leisure can help to do this. Both work and leisure are
good and necessary.

Studies conducted in countries around the world demonstrate that people can actually work
themselves to death. Factors such as workplace stress and long hours contribute to the risk of death
from overwork. Workers’ priorities are changing, and more people are trading long work hours
and financial rewards for increased time for themselves, their families, and their leisure activities.
Some specialists believe that because of “always on, always connected” technology, work – life
has diminished as employees are continuously available, connected, and expected to work 24 hours
a day and for 7 days a week (24/7). There are some common excuses people give for working so
much such as, "I want to make sure I keep my job." The recession pushes some to work harder
than ever, but overextending yourself won't save your job, and it's unethical. Concerns exist that
work – life balance may be taking a back seat because of increasing pressures from global
economic competition, among other factors. Too much work has led to stress – induced errors and
high levels of worker burnout. “Work is made for man and not man for work”.

37
CHRISTINE W. GICHURE, Basic concepts in Ethics. p. 175.
47
Since all work requires effort, man’s physical constitution requires that he rests. Rest is not the
same thing as doing nothing, which is inactivity. Rather it consists in a change of activity so as to
give to the particular operative faculty time for relaxation and a renewal of energy. This means
that vacations and weekend rest are time to give to the body and to the mind some refreshment.
They thus become part of a person’s moral responsibility. Leisure time is a human need that should
neither be neglected nor abused.

4.8 The ethics of work

Work ethic is a set of values based on hard work and diligence. It is also a belief in the moral
benefit of work and its ability to enhance character. Work ethics include not only how one feels
about their job, career or vocation, but also how one does his/her job or responsibilities. This
involves attitude, behaviour, respect, communication, and interaction; how one gets along with
others. A work ethic may also include; honesty and accountability, being reliable, having initiative,
or pursuing new skills. Work ethics demonstrate many things about whom and how a person is.
Essentially, work ethics break down to what one does or would do in a particular situation. Work
ethics is not just hard work but also a set of accompanying virtues.

The work ethic is a cultural norm that advocates being personally accountable and responsible for
the work that one does and is based on a belief that work has intrinsic value. The term is often
applied to characteristics of people, both at work and at play. In sports, for example, work ethic is
frequently mentioned as a characteristic of good players. Regardless of the context, work ethic is
usually associated with people who work hard and do a good job.

Workers exhibiting a good work ethic in theory should be selected for better positions, more
responsibility and ultimately promotion. Workers who fail to exhibit a good work ethic may be
regarded as failing to provide fair value for the wage the employer is paying them and should not
be promoted or placed in positions of greater responsibility.

Work ethics is also about how you treat yourself at work and beyond. You're not being fair to
others and yourself if you haven't had a vacation in a long time, or if you force yourself to work
when you've got the flu. You're also not being fair to others and yourself if you spend so much
time being a good manager that you're not able to be a good parent, spouse, or friend. You can't
do your job to the best of your ability if you're thoroughly exhausted, and that's not fair to your co-
workers or your employer.

Work ethics, such as honesty (not lying, cheating, and stealing), doing a job well, valuing what
one does, having a sense of purpose and feeling/being a part of a greater vision or plan is vital.
Philosophically, if one does not have proper work ethics, a person’s conscience may be bothered.
People for the most part have good work ethic(s); we should not only want to do, but desire to do
the proper thing in a given situation. Work ethics are intrinsic; they come from within. A question
may involve where they came from, if they come from within. Philosophically, this may lead to
various perspectives; however, the truth about work ethics, and where they come from are
answered from a Christian worldview. Work ethics come from God the creator. God made humans
in His image, and His word proclaims these various work ethics honesty, integrity, etc.

48
The Christian worldview holds fundamentally to two central work ethics humility and the
treatment of others. Humility involves servitude, which emphasizes placing other peoples need
before one’s own. Treating others with decency and respect equate to the golden rule. The
treatment of others involves loving your neighbour, loving your enemy, doing good to those who
dislike you. It involves valuing others, and knowing they have worth.

In conclusion, work brings to light some fundamental aspects of man’s being: a being which is
gifted with body and spirit. In fact, work is the fruit of a hand and mind, a mind that is intelligent
and free. Work is a transformation which evidences the creative power of man. Work manifests
the social character of man which is evident in any form of work. Man does not only work for
himself, but also and above all for others. Finally, work reveals another aspect of man’s being: his
continual self – transcendence. Man is never satisfied with his work, or with his machinery. He
searches continually to better the modes of production.

Task: What is the relevance of work ethics in your respective profession or field – as an
Economist, a Business Administrator, a Public Relations Manager, etc.? Do we
need ethics at the workplace?

49
5 Family38

5.1 Meaning

The original and most fundamental natural society is the family, which is also known as domestic
society. Family is a bond, a long lasting relationship that holds a bond with each other. It’s a natural
society.

5.2. What makes family a natural society?

(a) Human beings are social beings.

(b) They have a natural aptitude, tendency, and the need for permanent union or
companionship with fellow beings.

These two aspects make family a society quite natural to human beings.

5.3 Types of families

In virtually all societies, we can identify two types of families: nuclear family and extended
family.39

5.3.1 Nuclear family

This consists of two adults living together in a household with their own or adopted children. In
most traditional societies, the nuclear family was part of the larger kinship network of some type.

5.3.2 Extended family

This is when close relatives other than a married couple and children live either in the same
household or in a close and continuous relationship with one another. An extended family may
include grandparents, brothers and their wives, sisters and their husbands, aunts, nephews, nieces,
cousins, etc.

5.4 Two Levels of Understanding of Family

5.4.1 Conjugal society

In its most elementary form, a family begins to exist through the conjugal relationship of husband
and wife united in marriage. This is the conjugal Society. Conjugal Society or Marriage is defined
as the permanent union, lawfully formed, of husband and wife for the procreation of children and

38
MILTON A. GONSALVESS: Fagothey’s Right and Reason, Ethics in Theory and Practice, p. 316-358
39
Giddens Anthony & Duneier Mitchell: Introduction to sociology, p. 335-339

50
their wellbeing. There is a horizontal relationship between husband and wife (the union of husband
and wife).

The dignity of the persons involved in this conjugal society demands that the union is a
PERMANENT and an EXCLUSIVE one. Otherwise, there is no scope for proper and complete
development of children. The primary end of marriage according to the traditional understanding
is procreation of children and their wellbeing.

5.4.2 Parental Society

Conjugal society’s natural extension is known as Parental Society. It comes into existence when
the spouses give birth to a child/children. It is the natural expansion of the conjugal society, with
the arrival of the child/children. There is a vertical component in family, that is, the union of
parents and children. The Primary End of family as a parental society is Good of the Child/Children
and the Secondary End is Happiness of All the Members of the Family.

The horizontal and vertical components are just two aspects of a family. Both the conjugal and
parental societies begin with marriage. To understand it better, we consider two aspects of
marriage.

5.5 Two Aspects of Marriage

5.5.1 Marriage is an Act:

As an act, marriage is a contract by which a man and a woman give and receive right over each
other for companionship and the performance of the generative/reproductive act.

5.5.2 Marriage is a State:

As a state, marriage is a society of lasting union (permanent) of a man and a woman, resulting
from such a contract.

5.6 Marriage as a Contract

5.6.1 Requirements of a Valid Contract

As a contract, marriage must fulfil the basic requirements of a contract.

Two conditions for a Valid Contract:

1. The contracting parties must be competent (capable) persons; i.e., in marriage, adult man
and adult woman (Competency).

2. The consent must be mutual, free, and in proper form (Consent).

51
 • There shall be no compulsion/force to marry any particular person, and marriage must be
entered by two persons through free consent.
• This consent must be true, internal, mutual, and manifested to each other. It should be a
Bilateral agreement (two sided).
• Error, force, and fear must be absent.

So, Marriage is (conditions for a valid marriage):

1. A union of opposite sexes (male and female), hence, morally, a marriage between
homosexuals/lesbians is not possible or permissible.

2. It is a permanent union, no divorce is allowed for that matter.

3. It is an exclusive union, no extra-marital relations are permitted.

4. Its permanence and exclusiveness are guaranteed by contract. Hence, civil and religious
ceremonies to solemnise the contract are called for and signature of both husband and wife are
required.

5.7 Marriage as a Natural Institution

 Marriage is not merely a human convention.

 Marriage has its foundation in the Natural Law. It is a natural institution.
 Natural Law as something grounded in the nature itself.
 Natural Law that governs rational creatures (human beings) is Natural Moral Law.
 Natural Moral Law is that of the rational creatures’ participation in the eternal law.
 Natural Law that governs the non-rational creatures (not human) is Natural Physical Law.

5.7.1 Aristotle and Aquinas:

According to Aristotle and Aquinas, the primary end of marriage is good of the offspring. The
secondary end is companionship. They assert that there are two essential properties of marriage.

5.7.2 Two Essential Properties of Marriage according to Aristotle and Aquinas

1. Unity – this is opposed to polygamy; and

2. Indissolubility – this is opposed to divorce.

5.7.2.1 The Unity of Marriage

The unity of marriage means that only one man be married to one woman simultaneously. This
promotes monogamy. Monogamy is the most accepted form of marriage in many societies.

5.7.2.2 Violation of the Unity of marriage

52
 1. Polygamy – the practice of a man being married to more than one woman at the same time.
[marriage with more than one spouse]
2. Polyandry – the practice of a woman being married to more than one husband at the same
time. It is a rare form of marriage practised within matriarchal societies such as Old Nair
families, Tibet, Himalayan societies, Eskimos, American-Indian cultures, etc. This is
meant to counter scarcity of land problem.
3. Polygyny – the practice of a man is married to more than one wife at the same time.
(getting more people to work at home!)
4. Homosexual and Lesbian Marriages – the practice of a man being married to a fellow
man or a woman being married to a fellow woman.

These forms frustrate the ends of marriage because they violate the natural law. Especially,
polyandry frustrates the primary end as, ordinarily, children cannot/do not know their real father
and secondary end as companionship is divided. Polygamy and Polygyny violate the secondary
end of marriage as the mutual companionship is adversely affected. Homosexuality and lesbianism
violate both primary and secondary end of marriage.

5.7.2.3 The Indissolubility of Marriage

Indissolubility is that essential property of marriage in virtue of which the conjugal bond between
husband and wife cannot be dissolved or broken by any human power during the lifetime of either
of the two partners. This means that marriage cannot be dissolved.

5.7.2.4 Violations of the indissolubility of marriage: Separation and Divorce

i) Separation

This is a temporary measure in which the two parties; husband and wife, cease to live together and
to discharge marital functions, but remain married. Temporary means probably to resolve some
issues; related to character, temperament, unjust conduct, disagreements on issues of religion,
career, family issues, etc. It is morally permissible since separation does not break the marriage
bond. There is hope that the two partners can reconcile within a given period.

ii) Divorce

This is the permanent dissolution of a marriage contract freely and mutually undertaken by a man
and a woman. Divorce dissolves the marriage bond. If morally acceptable, then parties should be
free to marry. However, divorce frustrates the adequate and intrinsic ends of marriage such as;
procreation, good of the children, and mutual companionship of marriage.

No human authority has the power to grant a divorce, from the perspective of Natural Law. Though
some countries have legalized divorce, this doesn’t make it morally right. Many things may be
lawful, but not useful. Divorce may not be harmful in individual cases; but it would be ruinous to
humankind at large especially children. Cases of home violence, distrust, street children, etc. may
result from divorce.

53
5.8 Marriage and sexuality
5.8.1 Meaning of marriage

Marriage can be defined as a socially acknowledged and approved sexual union between two adult
individuals known as husband and wife. Marriage is also a socially recognized and approved union
between individuals, who commit to one another with the expectation of a stable and lasting
intimate relationship. Marriage as an institution transcends the particular individual involved in it
and unites two families.

54
5.8.2 Meaning of sexuality

Sexuality is a theme found throughout society – places of work, in the mass media, and so on.
Sexuality is an important part of how we think about ourselves as well as how we evaluate others.
But, in spite of its importance, few people really understand sexuality. Throughout much of our
history, sex has been a cultural taboo, so, at least in polite conversation; people do not talk about
it.

Sexuality has a biological foundation. But, like all dimensions of human behaviour, sexuality is
also very much a cultural issue. Around the world, some societies restrict sexuality, while others
are more permissive. In some societies, for example, China and some African societies, societal
norms closely regulate sexuality, so that few people have sex before they marry. In other societies,
for example, the United States, however, sex prior to marriage has become a norm. Because
sexuality is an important dimension of social life, society regulates sexual behaviour. From a
biological point of view, sex allows our species to reproduce. But culture and social institutions
regulate with whom and when people reproduce. For example, most societies condemn married
people for having sex out of wedlock because it threatens family life and many societies condemn
sex between blood relatives (incest). This shows clearly that no society is willing to permit
completely free choice in sexual matters.

5.8.3 The relationship between marriage and sexuality

Sexuality is a basic dimension of our personhood; it is our self-understanding and self-expression,

our way of being in the world, as male or female. To be human is to be a sexual being. Human
Sexuality is also a general term referring to various sexually related aspects of human life,
including physical and psychological development, and behaviours, attitudes, and social customs
associated with the individual's sense of gender, relationships, sexual activity, mate selection, and
reproduction. Sexuality permeates many areas of human life and culture, thereby setting humans
apart from other members of the animal kingdom, in which the objective of sexuality is more often
confined to reproduction.

Sexuality permeates and affects to some extent all our emotions, thoughts, and actions. It includes
the culturally defined attitudes and characteristics that we make our own as masculine and
feminine. It also involves our affections toward and appreciations of those of the opposite sex
and/or same sex. Our attitudes toward our own bodies and those of others are rooted in our
sexuality.

Sexuality is a sign of our incompleteness as individuals and a means of calling us to interrelate

with other humans, to communicate and commune with them. The mystery of our sexuality is the
mystery of our need and yearning to reach out to other persons, to embrace them both physically
and spiritually. In this way sexuality serves to create and develop our personality by integrating us
as persons into human society.

Marriage regarded legally as an institution has its primary end i.e. the begetting and rearing of
children and as its secondary end the mutual love and help between the spouses. It is a kind of

55
completeness between the spouses. cf. Mark 10:6-7 “…God made them male and female… and
for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and unite with his wife, and the two will
become one…”

5.8.4 What is our attitude towards our sexuality?

5.8.4.1 Negative attitude (invalid)

People consider sexuality as a sin, not allowed, a law, an order and as a product made by man. We
need to remember that, sexuality is a responsibility because it is a gift from God. Considering
sexuality as a sin doesn’t correspond to the reality. Sexuality is not a sin; instead we need to
integrate the whole dimensions of body and heart.

5.8.4.2 Positive attitude (valid)

Sexuality is the fundamental aspect of human experience, i.e. being man and woman. It is a
personal attitude and must be respected in the whole dimension, the will, liberty, intelligence and
sexuality of others. The person is a mystery, and he/she understands himself/herself through the
other person, therefore through the relationship.

5.9 Selection of a marriage partner

Among practically all peoples, custom forbids the marriage of very near kin. Sexual relations
between parents and children and between brothers and sisters are known as incest. Most people
not only condemn sexual relations between members of the immediate family but forbid it between
other less closely related persons.

One rule shared by virtually all societies is the taboo (social prohibition) against incest – sexual
relations between two closely related individuals. Incest taboos are rules that determine acceptable
and non-acceptable marriage partners. Incest taboos always cover nuclear family members.
Marriage outside the immediate household means that family ties are extended throughout a larger
community. These ties reinforce community solidarity and provide support when needed.

Historically, parents have played a major role in choosing marriage partners for their children, and
the custom continues in the world’s developing countries today. Parental influence is greatest when
the parents have a large stake (personal involvement) in whom their child marries. Traditionally,
marriage has been regarded as an alliance between two families, rather than just between the two
individuals. Aristocratic families could enhance their wealth or acquire royal titles through a
child’s marriage. Marriage was also used as a way of sealing peace between former enemies,
whether they were kings or feuding villagers.

The most extreme form of parental influence is an arranged marriage in which the bride and groom
have no say at all. For instance, in traditional Chinese practice, the bride and groom meet for the
first time on their wedding day. In some upper-caste Hindu marriages, children are betrothed at a
very young age and have no voice in the decision. In a less extreme form of arranged marriage,
parents may do the matchmaking, but the young people can veto the choice. Some small cultures
56
scattered around the world have what social scientists call preferential marriage. In this system,
the bride or groom is supposed to marry a particular kind of person – for example, a cousin on the
mother’s or father’s side of the family.

Qn. What factors should one consider in choosing a marriage partner?

5.10 Marriage crises/dilemmas today

Marriage is in crisis, as everyone knows: high rates of divorce and illegitimacy have eroded
marriage norms and created millions of fatherless children. There is a high increase in the marriage
crises and dilemmas in marital life. Due to the increasing marriage dilemmas, today we have many
divorce and separation cases in marital life. As a consequence, many young men and women have
shunned marriage. And single parent families are on a rise.

5.10.1 Separation

A separation, sometimes called imperfect divorce, means that the two parties cease to live together
and to discharge marital functions, but remain married; the marriage bond remains intact so that
neither party is free to contract a new marriage. An agreement contract is entered into between
husband and wife by which they agree to live apart; or a judicial separation, a court decree that
separates the parties to the marriage and provides for their living apart. Separation does not
dissolve the marriage relationship. A separation agreement contains provisions for the custody and
support of minor children, as well as for the division of property between the parties. Such a
separation is sometimes necessary, but it should be undertaken only for the gravest of reasons,
such as the danger of a physical harm.

5.10.2 Divorce or dissolution

The term divorce is usually understood to mean perfect divorce, which is an attempt to dissolve
the marriage bond itself so that the parties are free to contract new marriages with other persons.
This is a legislatively created or judicially administered process that legally terminates a marriage
to no longer be considered viable by one or both of the spouses and that permits both to remarry.
However Divorce, like the marriage contract which it tries to dissolve, is regulated by ecclesiastical
and civil law. Divorce was legalized in November 2004. Many societies support marriage and
about 9 out of 10 people marry., half of today’s marriages end in divorce. The divorce rate (i.e. the
number of divorces per 1,000 married men and women) is increasing today. Indeed, divorce is
becoming an accepted part of our way of life, or so as it appears. At greatest risk of divorce are
young couples – especially those who marry after a brief courtship – with little money, and who
have yet to mature emotionally.

The chance of divorce also rises if a couple marries after an unexpected pregnancy or if one or
both partners have substance – abuse problems. People who are not religious are more likely to
divorce than those who are. Finally, men and women who divorce once are more likely to divorce
again, probably because problems follow them from one marriage to another.

57
Divorce may not be harmful in individual cases, but its widespread practice is a serious social and
moral evil i.e. a breakdown in social morality. The chief reason against divorce is the havoc it
works in the life of the child. The child is the one who pays for the parents’ failure. The child is
deprived of the environment in which it should grow.

The status of divorce in other nations varies, often depending on prevailing religious beliefs.
Among Roman Catholics throughout the world, the traditional attitude is that a true marriage (one
entered into as a religious sacrament) is indissoluble by legal means. Notwithstanding this strict
interdiction of divorce, many Roman Catholics procure divorces in the courts. The Roman Catholic
Church views such divorces as merely a form of legal separation, and remarriage is not permitted.
In countries where Protestantism is dominant, the doctrine that marriage is indissoluble has been
rejected. Philosophical theories and political theories generally maintain that marriage is pre-
eminently a civil contract and that therefore it is subject to dissolution. Divorce on various grounds
is recognized among Buddhists and Muslims as well.

Why should one be obliged to spend the rest of his/her life with a companion one has ceased to
love? Why can’t an unfortunate mistake be rectified?

Such questions only go to show what an important step marriage is. Those who enter it hastily
with no sense of its serious obligations must pay the price of their folly or thoughtlessness. A
contract for life is precisely that, a person is obliged to live up to his word. Accidentally divorce
may be better for this or that individual, but it is ruinous to mankind generally. Laws are made for
the common good and individuals are bound to cooperate for the common good, and individuals
are bound to cooperate for the common good even at personal disadvantage.

5.10.3 Causes or reasons for divorce40

Divorce has become much more common over recent years in today’s society due to several
reasons:

 Individualism
Today’s family members spend less time together. People have become more individualistic, more
concerned with personal happiness than with well-being of their families and children. Physical
distance and long separation between married people has also contributed to infidelity or
unfaithfulness among couples. There is also lack of truthfulness among some couples, hence,
leading to divorce.

 Women are less dependent on men

Women’s increasing participation in the labour force has reduced wives’ financial dependency on
husbands. As women become more economically dependent, marriage is less of a necessary
economic partnership. Greater overall prosperity means that it is easier to establish a separate

40
J. MACIONIS, Society, The Basics, Pearson Education, Inc, New Jersey, 6th ed.2002, p. 347. Cf. Giddens Anthony &
Duneier Mitchell: Introduction to sociology, p. 352-354
58
household in case of marital disaffection or not being satisfied. Thus, women find it easier to quit
unhappy marriages.

 Stressful marriages
With both partners working outside the home in most cases, jobs leave less time and energy for
family life. This makes raising children harder than ever. Children do stabilize some marriages,
but divorce is most common during the early years of marriage when many couples have young
children.

 Decline in romantic love

Because our culture bases marriage on romantic love, relationships may fail as sexual passion
fades. Many people end marriage in favour of a new relationship that promises renewed excitement
and romance. Some couples have failed to coexist due to individual differences.

 Divorce is more socially acceptable

Divorce no longer carries the powerful stigma it did a century ago. Family and friends are now
less likely to discourage couples in conflict from divorcing.

 A divorce is easier to get

In the past courts required divorced couples to demonstrate that one or both were guilty of
behaviour such as adultery of physical abuse. Today all states allow divorce if a couple simply
thinks their marriage has failed. The divorce reform movement of November 2004 has accelerated
divorce.
 Successful careers
Divorce is also more common if both partners have successful careers, perhaps due to the strains
of a two – career marriage but also because financially secure people do not feel compelled to stay
in an unhappy home.

 Parental divorce – people whose parents divorce are more likely to divorce.
 Premarital cohabitation – people who cohabitate before marriage have a higher divorce
rate.
 Premarital childbearing – people who marry after having children are more likely to
divorce.
 Marriage at an early age – people who marry as teenagers have a higher divorce rate.
 Childless marriage – couples without children are most likely to divorce.
 Low incomes – divorce is more likely among couples with low incomes.

What are the effects of divorce on the spouses themselves, children, and the society at large?

5.11 Annulment of marriage

In law, annulment of marriage is the determination by a court that a supposed marriage was never
legally valid. Annulment, also called nullity of marriage, is distinguished from divorce, which is
the action of a court in terminating a valid marriage. Marriages subject to annulment proceedings
are classified as “void” or “voidable.” A void marriage is one that is deemed invalid in all respects.
59
Examples of void marriages include those involving incest or bigamy, under aged or the insane or
a marriage procured by fraudulent (untrue) means. Sexual impotency existing at the time of
marriage also gives grounds for annulment. A void marriage may be annulled only in a lawsuit
brought by the aggrieved party directly against the guilty party. In practice, void marriages are
valid until annulled, and any children are legitimate.

5.12 Criteria for a happy marriage

i) A happy and successful marriage life begins and ends with God – a good wife/husband comes
from God.

ii) Communication
Good communication is one of the most important requirements in successful marriage. Poor
communication results in increasing anger, tension, and frustration in getting others to listen and
understand. Effective communication involves the ability to exchange ideas, facts, feelings,
attitudes, and beliefs so that messages from the sender are accurately heard and interpreted by the
receiver, and vice versa.

iii) Admiration and respect

One of the most important human needs is acceptance and appreciation. Partners who like, admire,
and support each other, are proud of each other, and build each other’s self-esteem are fulfilling
their emotional needs in a satisfying relationship. Partners who are able to respect each other are
usually emotionally secure people themselves.

iv) Companionship
Successful married couples spend sufficient and quality time together. They enjoy each other’s
company, share common interests and activities, and laugh together.

v) Spirituality
Shared spirituality contributes to marital success. Religiosity is the most consistent and strongest
predictor of marital adjustment. Religion contributes to marriage in a number of ways, including
social and emotional support, friends and activities to share, encouragement of marital
commitment, and increased intimacy as a result of sharing ones faith.

vi) Commitment
Successful marriage requires a high degree of motivation: the desire to make it work and a
willingness to expend personal time and effort. Marital success is more attainable if the
commitment is mutual. The commitment is threefold: to the self, to each other, and to the
relationship the marriage and the family. One of the hardest tasks is to balance commitment with
personal autonomy and freedom.

vii) Affection
One important expectation of most married partners is that they will meet each other’s need for
love and affection. However, needs vary. Both physical and verbal expressions of affection are

60
important. In successful marriages, love grows, but changes over the years with fewer components
of romanticism and stronger bonds of attachment and affection.

viii) Ability to deal with crises, stress

All couples experience problems and stress. Successful couples are able to solve their problems
and manage stress in a creative way. They also have a greater tolerance for frustration than do
unsuccessful couples.

ix) Responsibility
Responsibility involves being accountable for one’s own behavior within the context of the family.
Successful marriage depends upon the mutual assumption, sharing, and division of responsibility
in the family. In marriages in which couples report a high degree of satisfaction, two conditions
exist in relation to the division of responsibility: there is a fairly equal division of labour, and
gender-role performance matches gender-role expectations.

x) Unselfishness
Selfishness in marriage lessens each partner’s willingness to assume responsibility for the
relationship. The most successful relationships are based on a spirit of mutual helpfulness.

Paradoxically, the people who are the most self-centred and self-serving are less likely to feel
fulfilled and happy and are less often able to bring happiness to others.

xi) Empathy and sensitivity

Empathy means the ability to identify with the feelings, thoughts, and attitudes of another person.
Empathy is affective sensitivity to others and is important in a successful marriage. Affective
sensitivity develops in five steps: perception, experiencing, awareness, labeling, and stating.

xii) Honesty, trust, fidelity

Partners need to know that they can accept each other’s word, believe in each other, depend on
each other to keep promises, and be faithful to commitments that are made. They need to be honest
and sincere. Research on trust indicates that it is the degree of confidence people feel in their
relationship; it is the feeling that the other person is predictably dependable. People who trust
others are more dependable and trustworthy themselves.

xiii) Adaptability, flexibility, tolerance

Adaptable and flexible people recognize that people differ in the way they think, in their attitudes,
values, habits, and ways of doing things. They don’t insist that everyone be a carbon copy of
themselves. They recognize that life is not static, that people and circumstances change.
Adaptability and flexibility require a high degree of emotional maturity. The most difficult people
to deal with are perfectionists, who have only one rigid standard by which they judge everyone,
who have impossibly high standards, who fear criticism and rejection and so are always on the
defensive, and who inhibit self-disclosure and so are hard to communicate with.

61
5.13 Marriage and sexuality in an African context
Marriage and sexuality are decisive for the further development of life and therefore including
ethical development. Marriage in African context resembles a drama in which each person plays
an active role; hence marriage is an existential task to which all are summoned. One who refuses
to play his part will be reproached by the entire community, since this negative attitude is
understood as a contempt which contradicts the good law of the ancestors.41
Marriage is one of the fundamental elements which strengthen and reestablish the community, it
signifies solidarity with one’s ancestors, moreover, which ultimately achieves a communicative
fellowship that transcends death. All this also implies the idea of fertility and the transmission of
life, and this not only concerns the survival of the individual but also embraces the entire
fellowship: the living, the dead and the unborn. Each one who continues the transmission of life
through the covenant of marriage narrates the biography of his ancestors and writes his own
autobiography, there by conquering death on the level both of the individual and of the community.
Each child who enters the world keeps alive the memory of the ancestors and makes it present. At
the same time, the birth of a child is a sign that gives the future generation the chance to survive:
the newborn child is a sign that those not yet born are called to a visible existence in which they
will play a vigorous role within the community. Thus, children represent both the unborn and the
ancestors. In relation to the ancestors, they are a genuine memory, whose arrival they proclaim. 42
Marriage is a covenant and a place where the human person is realized in his totality, for the human
person is constituted in his entirety only in a union of the two genders. This uniting in marriage
likewise reestablishes solidarity with one’s ancestors and with the coming generation. Hence,
married life is a high and demanding ideal. One who tempts to attain this ideal must pass through
many, often painful experience which finally bring him to maturity. This allows us to grasp the
African attitude to celibacy: an unmarried person is inexperienced and immature. The African
understanding of marriage questions the Western understanding, where marriage is lived
individualistically and considered as nothing more than a private contract between two persons,
without consideration of the community. 43
5.13.1 Sexual life in the context of the community
African communities are interested in the sexual lives of all their members, since sexuality is not
a private matter. The goal of sexuality is to keep together the community entrusted to us by our
ancestors and to bestow ever new life on this community. It follows that the community must
prepare young people for a responsible sexual life, psychologically and physically. In a
psychological speaking, young people are to become so mature that they learn to refuse every
abuse of sexuality; physically, wise women and men teach them the correct relationship with their
own bodies. This takes place above all in the period of initiation, which is the best school for self-
control and is oriented to the future of the community.
In many ethnic groups, the entire clan fellowship is interested in the wedding night; discreet
questions aim to discover whether the newly married couple are satisfied and happy with their
sexual life, since it is on this not only on the ability to beget or give birth, that the future of

41
Cf. JOHN S. MBITI, African Religions and Philosophy (reprint, London/ Ibadan/ Nairobi, 1983), p. 26,133.
42
Cf. B. BUJO, Foundations of an African Ethics, Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi (Kenya), 2003, p. 57-59.
43
Cf. B. BUJO, Foundations of an African Ethics, Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi (Kenya), 2003, p. 58-59.
62
marriage, and hence the fate of the entire community, can depend. Sexuality aims at more than just
procreation due to the fact that in many regions particular events are to be sealed or celebrated by
sexual intercourse between the spouses, for example, the marriage celebrations of one’s children,
the appearance of the child’s first teeth, and also funeral rites. The goal of the sexual act is to
strengthen the bond between the family and the clan community, therefore to build the community.

5.13.2 The family in a social context

In the family each one has a role to play for the construction of a good family. Concerning
education the parents are the ones responsible, not only the direct parents, but also the whole
community, we can say all the society. Therefore we can see the importance of community in the
African way of life and ethical conduct. A child is not only for the individual but belongs to the
entire community.

The concept of ‘family’ varies greatly from culture to culture. The family is a universal human
institution. It is known by all people on earth since it is at the origin of all tribes and nations. It is
known by all human beings since all come from it. When we speak of the family, we all understand
that, it means “the group composed of father, mother and children”; or “the group of persons who
have common blood or a covenant links” including those without children.

Extended family systems are common and extensively widespread in Africa. Extended families
emphasise blood ties and trace descendants through paternal and maternal lines or bi-linear
depending on whether they are patrilineal or matrilineal societies. Most of African traditional
societies are patrilineal where by Authority lies with the male heads of families and decision-
making processes involved blood related male members.44 The family in Africa is mostly the
extended one, the eldest living direct paternal parent, is the head of the small family. As long as
the father is living, the children, however old they might be, are never fully independent, they are
still under his control.

The family is a place of growth whereby the first education is received. The main or basic
education is given in the family from parents to children, where by a boy is educated by the father
and for the girl is given by a mother. The main agent of education in Africa is a family; it is because
the parents take the first step to the growth of children mentally, physically and spiritually. It is
the education given by parents to children at their first life which helps them to befit in the society
in which they belong. Slowly the children are taught good manners, taboos and the duties they are
supposed to carry out in the community. Great emphasis is laid on obedience and respect for the
elders. The whole community is responsible for this type of education, it is the education of life,
because is a base for life.45

44
Cf. Z. AGNES P., “The Family in its African Socio-Cultural Context,” in R. PATRICK (ed.), The Model of Church-as-Family
Meeting the African Challenge, C.U.E.A., Nairobi 1999, p. 48.
45
Cf. J. R. BAITU, Traditional religious education among the Haya of Tanzania, Tabora 1976, p. 14.
63
5.13.3 The role of parents

In the African family, parents have a very important role and in the community too. It is in the
family that children obtain their human and moral education, and parents are the immediate people
who offer this to them. Education is given through the telling of stories, riddles, proverbs, sayings,
songs and mostly by lived examples. These methods are used because they help to assimilate
values without causing tension to the child. The education begins at the time of birth and ends with
death. The child has to pass through various stages of age groupings with a system of education
defined for every status in life.46 It is best for the child when he is educated by both parents, because
the father and mother have different roles to play, each is important and plays a necessary
complementary part in child education.47 Moreover, the community accompanies the child and
provides all the care he needs to mature. Its role is very important, for a child does not belong only
to his genital parents, but in his growth, the whole community is involved.

In many African societies the father is the head and the highest authority after the ancestors in the
family. He is the one who has to think about the solutions to the big problems of the family; he is
responsible for the welfare of the family. He stands for the family in front of society and protects
it from external enemies. The education of his sons is in his hands, particularly when the sons
passed from childhood to adulthood. He has to help them know their responsibilities, values,
discipline and prepare them for marriage and future life as a whole. He has to protect and give
assistance to the wife when expectant, to respect her and the new life growing in her. He remains
the one giving life to his family in that he is the main protector and supporting pillar of the family.
The father is the custodian of the discipline in the family. 48

A mother has an important role in running the family, in African traditional societies she is the real
base of family life and her motherhood goes beyond the boundaries of her household. When a baby
is being born, it does not only then open the mother’s womb but also her heart so that she may
have, in her heart, a place for every human child, the Africans would think. This is why one can
call ‘mother’ every African lady without any risk of ridicule. The mother in the family is the
flower, and the husband the fence around it; that is a Ghanaian saying very much applicable to any
family. The flower gives fruits, which are the children, while the husband cares for them together
with his wife.49 Being a mother, she disseminates love, care, tenderness, calm, and peace in the
family. Of all these duties and obligations, expected of parents and children, the stress is not on
the legality but on the togetherness, on communion, on respect and acceptance of what the tradition
has laid down in the course of time.

46
Cf. K. JOMO, Facing Mount Kenya, Kenway Publications, Nairobi 1992, p. 99.
47
Cf. F. ARINZE, “The greatest investment,” in The African Enchiridion, EMI, Bologna 238 (2005), Vol. I, n. 24.
48
Cf. B. BENEZET, The Ethical Dimension of Community, Pauline Publication, Nairobi 1993, p. 123-127.
49
Cf. M. JOHN, “Flowers in the Garden: Role of women in African Religion,” in Cahiers des Religions Africaines, vol. 22
(1988) n. 43-44.
64
5.13.4 The role of children in the family

In the family, the child is accepted from the moment the mother realizes that she is expectant. It is
known that the main purpose of marriage is to beget children. Children are greatly valued in
African life, for they are the seal of marriage. Once a marriage has produced children, it is very
rare to see it broken. On the other hand, if no child is born, the marriage could break up, though at
times arrangements could be made to preserve it, seeing to it that children come into the family by
other means.50 Children bring joy to the family, and are the glory of a marriage. The more children
the family has, the greater the glory. They add to the social status of the family and no one wishes
to die childless.

In the family, the children have their own duties to fulfil. They are to help their parents, respect
them, help with household chores, in the fields, and study for a better tomorrow. When parents
become old and weak, it is the duty of their children to look after them and to the other affairs of
the family. Children, by meeting the needs of their parents in their old age, prolong their lives and
through them the name of the family is perpetuated.51 Whatever the position of the child, he is
expected to treat the elderly with great respect and care, especially parents. 52

50
Cf. K. JOMO, Facing Mount Kenya, 183-185.
51
Cf. M. JOHN, Introduction to African Religion, Biddles Ltd, England 1991, 115.
52
Cf. I. JOSEPH, The Church as Family; a theological pastoral study with reference to the African Synod, Salette
community, Roma 1998, 115.
65