LEARNING MODULE: GEC09- ETHICS

Prelims
SLSU Polillo Campus
Time Day
Rodrigo F. Dacillo
Instructor

Course Description:

This course discusses of an overview of philosophy its nature and its related branches and the
demonstration of how the various moral theories can be applied to contemporary moral issues. It
designed to help students develop their abilities to write and expressed themselves well about
their own position and think critically about moral issues. Case studies will be discussed in class
to illustrate major principles of ethics.

TOPIC 1: Orientation to the course WEEK 1-2

Introduction: Key Concepts
 Ethics: Definition
 The Art of Correct Living
 Ethic and the Filipino
 Ethics and Religion
 Ethical Norms and Law
 Ethical Approaches
 General and Special Ethics

What I Need to Know

At the end of this topic you should be able to:

 Define and know the aims of Ethics
 Recognize the importance of correct living
 Integrate moral standard of living as Filipino
 Differentiate Ethics and Religion
 Practice Ethical approaches
 Distinguish the General and Special Ethics

What is It

The word ETHICS:

“Ethics” is derived from the Greek “ethos” which means,”characteristic way of acting”,
“habit”or “custom”. The Latin equivalent is “mos”,”mores”, from which come the word moral
and morality’. Ethics studies the characteristics behavior of man as endowed with reason and
freewill.

The study of Ethics started with the Greek philosophers, notably Socrates, Plato, and
Aristotle. Socrates is regarded as the father of moral philosophy. However, it is Aristotle who has
greatly influenced ethical thinking with three important treatises – the Nicomachean Ethics, the
Eudemian Ethics, and the Magna Moralia. (Greek Ethics).

Definition:
Ethics is the science of the morality of human acts.

Human acts are actions done intentionally and freely, like walking, reading, working, playing,
shopping, joining a contest, or signing a contract. Human acts are differentiated from acts of man
which are instinctive, such as the physiological and psychological movements like breathing,
feeling happy, or falling in love. Ethics does not study the acts of man in themselves but as
factors affecting man’s judgment and volation.

Ethics is the study of man as moral being, one who is rationally able to distinguish between right
and wrong. It examines how man is accountable for his actions and its consequences. It proposes
how man ought to live his life – meaningfully.

Ethics is concerned with morality, the quality which makes an act good or evil, correct or wrong.
Ethics examines and explains the rational basis why actions are moral or immoral. In other
words, Ethics is concerned with the norms of human behavior.

THE ART OF CORRECT LIVING

Art provides for what is orderly and harmonious in artwork. Ethics is an art, “the art of correct
living”, because it teaches how we may put order and harmony in our lives. Thus, Ethics is a
practical science and differs from one that is purely speculative. Ethics is beneficial only when
its truths are put into practice as rules of conduct.

Every person is expected to be decent and trustworthy. And since moral integrity as attested
by people is the true measure of man’s greatness, some philosophers regard Ethics as “the only
necessary knowledge". Indeed, unless they are also morally upright, the rich, the famous and the
powerful live vainly.
Morality is not only necessary to a person but also to society. Bertrand Russell state that
“without civic morality, communities perish; without personal morality their survival has no
value”. When people do not accept the rule of law, society crumbles.

ETHICS AND THE FILIPINO

Filipinos believe in moral integrity as essential to life. They also believe in a just society.
However, the recent cheating in Board Exams of Nurses, as well as the many more similar
instances, show moral norms are easily ignored for personal interest.
Corruption in government, commercialism, overpopulation, the unequal distribution of wealth,
and lack of economic opportunities – all contribute to the weakening of the moral resolve of the
Filipinos.
People of some countries suffer as much, if not worst. But this is no consolation at all since we
should be looking up to the ideal. We speak of “living standard” we inevitably mean
“economic”, that is, higher salaries and low prices. Perhaps, we should think more of moral
standard as our priority.

ETHICS AND RELIGION

 Ethics and religion are both concerned with moral education, but they differ from each other.
Ethics is a science and relies on reasons for its conclusions. Religion is a system of beliefs and
practices based on faith and revelation, or truths revealed to man by God.
Ethics teaches the value of religion, presenting it as a duty of man towards Supreme Being.
Religion, on the other hand, as an organized church or institution, contributes to the development
of ethical thought. Thus, religion and ethics complement each other.

ETHICAL NORMS AND LAW

The laws of society sometimes legalize immoral acts, like gambling and divorce. Hence,
what is legal is not necessary moral. Also, human laws regulate external actions, but not thoughts
and feelings. Thinking of robbing a bank is not a crime until it is attempted.
Ethical norms, however, cover thoughts and feelings so that a person could sin because ot
what he thinks or desires. Thus, St. Paul says a man who lust after a woman is committing
adultery. Also, a moral norm require proper spiritual disposition towards what is lawful. It is not
sufficient to do good, one must be sincere in doing what is good.

ETHICAL APPROACHES

 Atheistic approach
 Theistic approach

A. ATHEISTIC approach: assumes that only matter exists and man is responsible only the State
since there is no God who rules the universe. Morality is an invention of man to suit his
requirement and preserve society. Moral truths are temporary and changeable depending on
situation. Accordingly, the concept of good and evil is relative. Some of its tenets are the
following:
1. Matter is the only reality.
2. Man is matter and does not have spiritual soul.
3. Man is free and must exercise his freedom to promote the welfare of society.
4. There is no life after death.
5. Man is accountable only to the State.

B. THEISTIC approach: which adhere, assumes that God is the Supreme Lawgiver. Everything
must conform to God’s Eternal plan of creation. Man must exercise his freedom in accordance
with God’s will. There are absolute principles of morality which are not changeable. Man is
accountable for his actions and deserves either a reward or punishment in this life or in next. Ita
tenets are:

1. God is the Supreme Creator and Lawgiver.

2. Man is free and must use his freedom to promote his personal interest along with that of
others.
3. Man has an immortal soul.
4. Man is accountable for his actions, both good and evil.
GENERAL AND SPECIAL ETHICS

General Ethics: is about the principles of morality. It explains the norms with which the moral
significance of the human act is determined.
Special Ethics: is the application of the principles of General ethics to the problems and issues
confronting a person on account of his circumstances in life, for instance, as citizen, neighbor,
worker, wife, husband, or child.
Specials Ethics includes the sub-branches of professional ethics, such as medical ethics, legal
ethics, biological and environmental ethics.

TASKS: Direction: Answer the following questions briefly.

1. What is the aim of Ethics?

2. What is the difference between Ethics and Religion?
3. Why is Ethics “the only necessary knowledge”?
4. How are moral norms different from civil laws?
LEARNING MODULES: GEC09- ETHICS

TOPIC 2: Fundamental Concepts

1. Morality
2. Norm of Morality
3. Human Acts

What I Need to Know:

At the end of this topic you should be able to…
 Know the fundamental concepts of Ethics
 Differentiate Human acts and Acts of Man
 Recognize the morality of human actions
 Integrate these fundamental concept in life

What is It

MORALITY

Morality refers to that quality of goodness or badness in a human act. Morality is not an
imagined quality merely supposed to be found in human acts.
Every day we pass judgment on the morality of human actions:
“What he did was right. What he did was wrong, he behaved well, he should not have done it, he
is not morally justified in doing the act, etc.”
This shows that there is a fundamental and objective distinction of right and wrong, which we
call moral in human actions. While there is difference in opinion as to the nature of morality, all
are agreed that there are some actions that are good and some actions that are bad.

NORM OF MORALITY

Right and wrong, good or bad, high or low, just and unjust, presuppose a basic or a standard,
criterion, test, rule, principle, or law by which one is distinguished from the other. In the case of
human actions, this basis of distinction between right and wrong is called norm of morality. By
norm of morality we mean therefore:
1. The standard of right and wrong in human acts
2. The reason why certain acts are morally right and why certain actions

HUMAN ACTS

Ethics deals with the study of man and particularly with his actions. But not every act which
proceeds from man is a human act, as used and understood in ethics.
By human acts in ethics, we mean:
1. The (free) voluntary acts of man.
2. Acts done with knowledge and consent
3. Acts which are proper to man as man; because, of all animals, he alone has knowledge and
freedom of will.
4. Acts which, we are conscious are under our control and for which we are responsible.
 5. Human acts are those of which man is master, which he has the power of doing or not
doing as he pleases.
Acts, therefore, in order to be truly human, must be done knowingly and willfully. Without
knowledge and consent, there can be no human act, properly called.
Only human acts have moral significance.

Attribute of Human Act

Those perform by a person who is acting knowingly, freely, and willfully are the human acts.
These actions are deliberately, intentionally, or voluntary. In contrast with acts of man which are
instinctive and are not under the control of the will.
Act is considered human act, when it done knowingly, freely, and willfully.
1. Done knowingly: when the doer is conscious and aware of the reason and the
consequences of his action.
2. Done freely: when the doer acts by his own initiative and choice without being forced
to do so by another person or situation.
3. Done willfully: when the doer consents to act, accepting it as his own, and assumes
accountability

Kinds of Human acts

There are two kinds of human act either elicited or commanded.

1. An ELICITED acts: those performed by the Will but are not bodily externalized such as the
following:
A. Wish: the tendency of the Will towards an object, without considering whether it is
attainable or not. The object of wishing includes the impossible, or that which remotely possible.
B. Intention: the tendency of the Will towards an object which is attainable, without
necessarily committing oneself to get it.
C. Consent: the acceptance of the Will to carry out the intention.
D. Election: the selection of the Will of those means necessary to carry out intention.
E. Use: the command of the Will to make use of the means elected to carry out intention.
F. Fruition: the enjoyment of the Will due to the attainment of the intention.

2. The Commanded acts: the mental and bodily actions performed under the command of the
Will. It is either Internal or External actions.
Internal actions: those performed mentally, such as reasoning, recalling, imagining, and
reflecting.
External actions: those performed bodily, such as walking, dancing, talking and writing.
All external actions derive themselves from the internal acts, since every deliberate act is first
thought of and decided mentally.

THE MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACT

An act under the control of the intellect and will of the person is a voluntary act. However, there
are factors that may influence the intellect and the will so that the actions are perfectly voluntary.
It is called modifiers of human act. Since, they interfere with the application of the intellect and
will, they either reduce or increase accountability
The moral axiom of Panizo, states that: “The greater the knowledge and freedom, the greater the
voluntariness and therefore, the accountability”.
The modifiers of human act are as follow:

1. IGNORANCE
It is the absence of knowledge which the person ought to possess. For instance, a lawyer
is expected to know the law; doctor, the cure of illnesses, the manager, his business operations.
In the domain of morals, a normal person who attained the age of reason, approximately seven
(7) years old is expected to know the general norms of proper conduct and behavior.
Ignorance is either VINCIBLE or INVINCIBLE.
a. Vincible ignorance: is one which can easily be corrected through ordinary diligence. For
example, not knowing the time or the name of a seatmate is vincible ignorance.
b. Invincible ignorance: is one which is not easily remedied, since the person is either not
aware of his state of ignorance, or being aware of it, does not have the means to remedy such
ignorance.
A vincible ignorance which intentionally kept in an effort to escape responsibility is called:
affected ignorance.

Principles:
1. Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A person is not morally liable if he not aware
of his state of ignorance.
2. Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens the voluntariness and the corresponding
accountability over one act.
3. Affected ignorance, though it decreases voluntariness, increases the accountability of an act.

2. PASSIONS or CONCUPISCENCE
A psychic response, either tendencies towards desirable objects, or tendencies away from
undesirable objects. Persons have positive emotions such as: love, desire, delight, hope, and
bravery, while a negative emotions such as: hatred, horror, sadness, despair, fear, and anger.
In relation to human actions, passions are either ANTECEDENT or CONSEQUENT.
An antecedent passion comes as a natural reaction to an object or stimulus without being aroused
intentionally. It precedes any act, thus it is called antecedent.
Consequent passion is the result of an act which causes it to be aroused.
In itself, passion is not evil, but because it predisposes the person to act, it needs to be
subjected to the control of reason.

Principles:
1. Antecedent passions do not always destroy voluntariness, but they diminish accountability
over on act.
2. Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, and may even increase accountability.

3. FEAR
It is the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by a danger to himself or
loved one.
Acting with fear and Acting out of fear, is different from each other.
An experience, such as embarking on a long trip, being left alone in the dark, speaking in
front of a crow, make some people nervous and fearful, these actions are done with fear.
To jump from the top floor of a burning building, is acting out of fear, a fear causes a person
to act.

Principles:
1. Acts done with fear are voluntary and are accountable.
 2. Acts done out of fear, however great, is simply voluntary although it is also conditionally
voluntary.

4. VIOLENCE
Any physical force exerted on a person by a free agent for the purpose of compelling said
person to act against his will.
For example: insults, torture, isolation, starvation, and mutilation

Principles:
1. External or commanded acts, performed by a person subjected to violence, to which
reasonable resistance has been offered, are voluntary and not accountable.
2. Elicited acts, or those done by the will alone, are not subject to violence and are therefore
voluntary.

5. HABITS
The readiness, born of frequently repeated acts, for acting in a certain manner is called
habits. It is acquired through the repetition of an act over a period of time. They are either good
or bad. It becomes like a second nature, moving one to do something with relative ease without
much reflection which is difficult to overcome.

Principle:
Actions done by force of habit are voluntary in cause, unless a reasonable effort is made to
counteract the inclination.

The Sources of Morality

The sources or principles of morality which are to be discussed are the determinants of the
human acts in connection with their moral character. Human reason evaluates the goodness and
wrongness of a human act by taking into consideration the object, the end, and the circumstances
of the act. These are the three elements composing the morality of a particular action performed
by a free agent.

1. The Object
The first quality describing the human act is the object. It is the basic factor of morality, the
substance of the moral act. St. Thomas said, the primary and specific goodness or badness of an
act is derived from the object which the act naturally and directly tends as to its term or name.
“The object is not the matter of which (a thing is made) but the matter about which (something is
done); and stand in relation to the act as the form, as it were, giving it the species”.
St. Thomas teaching on the essence of morality center on the object as it summarized by:
1. A good or moral action is a perfect action because it has the fullness of being.
2. An action has the fullness of being when it is in accordance with its species i.e. nature or
essence.
3. The nature or essence of an action is given by the object about which the action is. The
fundamental goodness or badness of an action depends on the object.
4. An object is good when it is in conformity with ita nature or the purpose for which it was
made. Otherwise an object is bad or evil.
5. In the moral order, an object is good when it is in conformity with reason, when it is suitable
to reason. Otherwise it is evil.

2. The Motive
 The purpose or intention is that for the sake of which something is done. It is the reason
behind our acting. Man usually puts an act as a means to accomplish an end, different from the
act itself. Because the end or intention is ordinarily present in all human acts, it becomes integral
part of morality. “The end” says Aristotle,“is the object of the internal act of the Will”.

The end or intention can modify human actions in four ways:

a). An indifferent act may become morally good or evil. (Ex. To study medicine is itself an
indifferent action. It becomes good when inspired by the thought of alleviating human sufferings
or making decent living. It becomes bad ir intend to perform illegal or immoral operations.)

b). An objectively good act may become morally evil. (Ex. When a person gives alms to a poor
girl with the intention of seducing her.)

c). An objectively good act may receive more goodness. (Ex. A person may give alms not only to
help the poor but also for the love of God.)

d). An objectively evil act can never become good in spite of the good motive. (Ex. To steal
money with the good intention of giving to charitable institutions or to the poor.)

3. The circumstances.
The morality of human acts depends not only on the object or act itself and the motive of the
moral agent but also on circumstances present in the development of the action.
Circumstances are conditions modifying human actions, either by increasing or by diminishing
the responsibility attending them.
The circumstances affecting the morality of our actions are seven:

1. WHO_ is the subject or the person who does or receives the action. Persons are different in
many ways: superiors, rulers and subjects, priests and laymen, parents and children, rich and
poor, married and single, educated and illiterate, etc. There are also physical persons or
individuals, and moral persons such as corporations, companies, institutions, business firms, etc.

2. WHERE_ is the setting or place of an action.

A crime committed in a church is more serious than a crime perpetrated in a secluded spot
because of a flagrant disregard of religion. An immoral act committed in a public place involves
scandal, etc.

3. WHAT_ is the object intended.

4. BY WHAT MEANS_ although man’s intention may be morally good, if the means attaining
the end are illicit or unlawful, his acts are immoral. “The end does not justify the means.”

5. WHY_ is the intention or the motive that moves the agent to an action.

6. HOW_ this circumstance involves different conditions or modalities suc as voluntariness,

consent, violence, fear, ignorance. We say, for example, that the action was performed during “a
moment of rage”, “in a cold blood”, etc.

7. WHEN_ is the time of the action performed.

How circumstances Affect Morality.
Principles:
a). Circumstances may increase or diminish the goodness or badness of an action.
Ex. To kill one’s parents is not only a crime but parricide. To steal a working animal from the
poor farmer is a worse act than to steal it from a rich man.

b). Circumstances may change a good or indifferent into a punishable one. Ex. To sleep is an
indifferent act. But a sentry sleeping at his post during wartime will be sentenced by a military
court to capital punishment.

Summary: A human act, in order to be morally good must be perfect, according to three
elements: object, end, and circumstances. Any deficiency will make a human act morally evil.
“Bonum ex integra causa; malum ex quocumque defecto” _ The good results from whole
perfection; the evil from any defect”.

TASK
1. What is the connection of our action to morality? Why, give your reason/s.
2. Why is it important to cultivate moral sensibility?
3. Knowing what human act is, “should a drunken man be made accountable if he were to
accidentally burn a house?” Explain/elaborate your answer.
4. How would you evaluate the action of a person, what elements should be considered to see if
his/her action is morally good?
5. Is a drug addict still morally responsible for his acts over which he has no more control?
Explain your answer.
.