LESSON 1

• Ethics, generally speaking, is about matters

such as the good thing that we should
pursue and the bad thing that we should
avoid; the right ways in which we could or
should act and the wrong ways of acting.
• Ethics as a subject for us to study is about
determining the grounds for the values with
particular and special significance to
human life.
There are instances when we make value
judgements that are not considered to be part
of ethics.
Aesthetics – from the Greek word “aisthesis”
which means “sense” or “feeling” and refers to
the judgments of personal approval or
disapproval that we make about what we see,
hear, smell, or taste.
 Etiquette – concerned with right or wrong
actions, but those which might be considered
not quite grave enough to belong to a
discussion on ethics.
Technique/ Technical – from the Greek word
“techne” and refers to a proper way—(or right
way) of doing things
 The distinction between what belongs to
ethics and what does not is not always clearly
defined.
Recognizing the characteristics of aesthetic
and technical valuation allows us to have a
rough guide as to what belongs to a discussion
of ethics.
Therefore matters that concern life and death
such as war, capital punishment, or abortion
and matters that concern human well-being
such as poverty, inequality, or sexual identity
“Morals” may be used to
refer to specific beliefs or
attitudes that people have
or to describe acts that
people perform. We also
have terms such as “moral
judgment” or “moral
reasoning,” which suggest a
more rational aspect.
“Ethics” can be spoken of as
the discipline of studying
and understanding ideal
human behavior and ideal
ways of thinking. Thus, ethics
is acknowledged as an
intellectual discipline
belonging to philosophy.
Ethics – is the branch of philosophy that
studies morality or the rightness or
wrongness of human conduct. Morality,
speaks of code or system of behavior in
regards to standard of right and wrong
behavior.
• A descriptive study of ethics reports how people,
particularly groups, maket heir moral valuations
without making any judgment either for or against
these valuations
• A normative study of ethics, as is often done in
philosophy or moral theology, engages the question:
What could or should be considered as the right
way of acting? In other words, a normative
discussion prescribes what weoughtto maintain as
our standards or bases for moral valuation.
A situation that calls
for moral valuation
can be called a moral
issue.
When one is placed in a
situation and confronted
by the choice of what act
to perform, she/he is
called to make a moral
decision
When a person is an
observer making an
assessment on the
actions or behavior of
someone, she/he is
making a moral
judgment.
When one is torn between
choosing one of two
goods or choosing
between the lesser of two
evils, this is referred to as a
moral dilemma.
A. Only human beings are rational, autonomous,
and self – conscious.
B. Only human beings can act morally or
immorally.
C. Only human beings are part of the moral
community.
• What reasons do we give to decide or to judge that a certain
way of acting is either right or wrong?
• A person’s fear of punishment or desire for reward can
provide him/her a reason for acting in a certain way.
• The promise of rewards and the fear of punishments can
certainly motivate us to act, but are not in themselves a
determinant of the rightness or wrongness of a certain way
of acting or of the good or the bad in a particular pursuit.
• Beyond rewards and punishments, it is possible for our
moral valuation—our decisions and judgments—to be based
on a principle.
 • Choosing Moral Principles
- People follow different moral values (e.g., honesty, fairness, respect for life).
- The need to justify these principles with good reasons.

• Moral Theories & Frameworks

- Theories help explain why actions are right or wrong.
- Frameworks provide a structured way to evaluate morality.

• Plato’s Contribution
- A key philosopher in ethics.
- Founded the Academy in Athens.
- The Apology of Socrates emphasizes critical thinking in morality.
• Law - It is supposed that law is
one’s guide to ethical behavior.
In the Philippines, Filipinos are
constrained to obey the laws of
the land as stated in the
country’s criminal and civil
codes. The law cannot tell us
what to pursue, only what to
avoid.
 • Taking the law to be the basis of ethics has the benefit of
providing us with an objective standard that is obligatory
applicable to all.
• However, there are some problems with this. Can one simply
identify ethics with the law?
➢One point to be raised is the prohibitive nature of law. (the law
does not tell us what we should do; it works by constraining us
from performing acts that we should not do.)
➢Would we be satisfied thinking about ethics solely from the
negative perspective of that which we may not do, disregarding
the important aspect of a good which we could and maybe even
should do, even if it were not required of us by the law.
 • In line with this, we might find that there are certain
ways of acting which are not forbidden by the law,
but are ethically questionable to us.
For instance, a company that pads its profits by
refusing to give its employees benefits may do so within
the parameters of the law. The company can do so by
refusing to hire people on a permanent basis, but
offering them six-month contracts.
• In view of all this, perhaps one should think of ethics
in a way that does not simply identify it with the
obedience of the law.
• Religion - The divinity
called God, Allah, or
Supreme Being commands
and one is obliged to obey
his/her Creator (Divine
Command Theory).
 • Taking religion as a basis of ethics has the advantage of
providing us with not only a set of commands but also a
supreme authority that can inspire and compel our
obedience in a way that nothing else can.
• However, there are some problem with this. First, on the
practical level.
each faith demands differently from its followers which
would apparently result in conflicting ethical standards
• Second problem, on what may be called a more conceptual
level
Where one requires the believer to clarify her
understanding of the connection between ethics and religion.
• Our calling into question of the divine command
theory is nota calling into question of one’s belief
in God; it is not intended to be a challenge to one’s
faith. Instead, it is an invitation to consider
whether there may be more creative and less
problematic ways of seeing the connection
between faith and ethics, rather than simply
equating what is ethical with whatever one takes
to be commanded by God.
 • Culture
- Our exposure to different societies and
their cultures makes us aware that there
are ways of thinking and valuing that are
different from our own, that there is in
fact a wide diversity in how different
people believe it is proper to act.
Therefore, what is ethically acceptable or
unacceptable is relative to, or that is to
say, dependent on one’s culture. This
position is referred to as cultural
relativism.
• Taking cultural relativism as basis of ethical
standards teaches us to be tolerant of others from
different cultures, as we realize that we arein no
position to judge whether the ethical thought or
practice of another culture is acceptable or
unacceptable.
• However, there are problems in cultural relativism as
shown in a classic exposition by James Rachels. His
criticisms regarding to cultural relativism.
 • First, the argument of cultural relativism is premised on
the reality of difference.
-Because different cultures have different moral codes, we
cannot say that any one moral code is the right one.
• Second under cultural relativism, we realize that we are
in no position to render any kind of judgement on the
practices of another culture?
-What if the practice seems to call for comment?
-Are we in no position to judge any of this as wrong?
-Would we be satisfied with concluding that we cannot judge
another culture?
 • Third, under cultural relativism, we realize that we are in no
position to render judgement on the practices of even our own
culture.
If our culture was the basis for determining right and wrong, we
would be unable to say that something within our cultural practice was
problematic.
• Fourth, perhaps the most evident contemporary difficulty with
cultural relativism is that we can maintain it only by following
presumption of culture as a single, defined substance or as
something fixed and already determined.
It is always possible to find examples of a certain culture having a
unique practice or way of life but it is also becoming increasingly difficult
to determine what exactly defines one’s culture
Ethical Subjectivism
- the idea that our moral opinions are based on our
feelings and nothing more. On this view, there is no such
thing as ʺobjectiveʺ right or wrong.
A number of clichés familiar to us would echo this
idea:
“No one can tell me what is right or wrong”
“No one knows my situation better than myself”
“I am entitled to my own opinion ”
“It is good if I say that it is good”
 There is something appealing about these
statements because they seem to express a
cherished sense of personal independence. But a
close look at these statements may reveal problems
and in seeing these, we see the problems of
subjectivism.
They refer only to people’s attitudes, but not into
actual objective moral facts.
What is Egoism?
A doctrine that individual self-interest is the
valid end of all actions and all forms of
egoism require explication of “self-interest”
CUSTODIO, JUNNEL
MACABUHAY, KISSHA CASANDRA
MERCADO, RACHEL ANN S.
SILVESTRECE, XYRIEL R.
CINCO, JONAS
ALMADEN, JOHN WENNARD
CAING, JAY-R
SANTOS, BERNIE
By Group 1