REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NORTHERN NEGROS STATE COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY
OLD SAGAY, SAGAY CITY, NEGROS OCCIDENTAL
(034)722-4169/www.nonescost.edu.com

COLLEGE OF
BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT
BACHELOR OF ARTS IN ENGLISH

COURSE MODULE IN

ETHICS
st
1 Semester, AY 2023-2024
COURSE FACILITATOR: Jacinto L. Garganera
FB/MESSENGER: Jacinto L. Garganera
Email: jacinto.garganera@deped.gov.ph
Phone No:09185292022

This document is a property of NONESCOST

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only)
2
Module 2 | Page 1
Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 MODULE 2
18 (Hrs)

LESSO
N

1 Reason and Impartiality and the 7 –

Step Moral Reasoning Model
7
HOURS
What does it mean to be impartial? How can reason aid us in giving impartial moral
judgments? Let’s find that out in this Lesson.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:

1. Define Reason and Impartiality;
2. Recall immediate responses to moral dilemmas;
3. Differentiate responses based on reason and those based on feelings;
4. Analyze feelings in personal moral experiences;
5. Discriminate reasonable and emotional responses; and
6. Reflect on real-life cases through the 7-step model.

MOTIVATION

Activity No. 1 The Arguments

Directions: Read these arguments. Are these based on reason? Defend your answer.
1. "You didn't even finish high school. How could you possibly know about this?"
2. I am filing for reconsideration of the offenses complained about. Since I am a well-
known athlete, I can make your University great again.
3. Ok, Officer, there's no reason to give me a traffic ticket for going too fast because I
was just on my way to the hospital to bring blood bags to my dying child. They are
needed in a few minutes.
4. After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation
system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman
who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.
5. Linus Pauling, winner of two unshared Nobel prizes, one for chemistry, another for
peace, stated his daily medication of Vitamin C delayed the onset of his cancer by
twenty years. Therefore, vitamin C is effective in preventing cancer.
6. "UFOs are not real, because the great Carl Sagan said so." You haven't held a
steady job since 1992. Worse than that, we couldn't find a single employer who'd
provide you with a good reference."
7. "People like you don't understand what it's like to grow up in the slums. You have no
right to argue about the gang violence on our streets."
8. "Well, it's not like you graduated from a good school, so I can see why you wouldn't
know how to properly grade a writing assignment.

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 2

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 9. "You're clearly just too young to understand."
10. "How can you make a decision about someone having marital problems if you've
never been married yourself!

Based on the arguments above, answer the following questions below.

1. Which arguments are attack on the personality of the source of the argument?

2. Which are arguments are an appeal to pity?

3. Which arguments is/are appeal to authority?

4. Are these arguments based on reason?

This lesson talks about how an individual should be impartial in making judgment
through the use of reason. The 7 steps of moral reasoning is presented to you as a guide
for you to make impartial decisions. How feeling affect our moral reasoning is also
presented.

TEACHING POINTS

Reason and Impartiality

The minimum requirements of morality are reason and impartiality. "Moral judgments
must be backed up by good reason and impartiality. "Morality requires the impartial
consideration of each individual's interests." Moral judgments, or resolving a dilemma of
moral judgments must be backed by good reason.
Reason and impartiality refer to a mental activity following the basic principle of
consistency, the lack of contradiction between one idea and another. It is a process of
deriving necessary conclusion from premises, avoiding all forms of deception or fallacy of
reasoning. It avoids ad hominem, by not attacking the personality of the opponent and
instead directing one's argument against one’s idea. Examples of argumentum ad hominem
are # 1, 4, 8 and 9 in the Activity phase of this Lesson. Reason avoids ad misericordiam,
appeal to pity, since appearing miserable does not improve an argument. Reason does not
resort to ad verecundiam, appeal to authority, one's power and influence cannot make a
wrong right. Examples of argumentum ad verecundiam are # 2. 5. 6. 7 and 10. In other
words, good reasons include consistent and coherent reasons.
A logical, impartial, objective reason avoids ambiguities like equivocation, circular
reasoning, amphibology, etc. Coherent reasoning is needed to establish truth and
meaningfulness of moral judgments. "Morality requires impartial consideration of each
individual's interest." In arriving at a sound moral judgment you must listen to everyone
trying to speak. Biases and prejudices must be placed between brackets, suspended.
Everyone's message, silent or verbal, should be allowed to be unveiled. Everyone has
always something to tell. No one has a monopoly of the truth. A moral subject must be
seen from various perspectives and standpoints.
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 3
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
7 Steps of Moral Reasoning

The following are sample methods of arriving at an ethical or moral decision, the 7
steps of Scott Rae's moral reasoning (1996) and a 7 steps of moral reasoning model
developed the Josephson Institute of Ethics.
First, gather the facts, information. "The simplest way of clarifying an ethical
dilemma is to make sure the facts are clear. Ask: Do you have all the facts that are
necessary to make a good decision? What do we know? What do we need to know?"
Second, determine the ethical issues, similar to “statement of the problem.” “....
The competing interests are what create the dilemma. Moral values and virtues must
support the competing interests in order for an ethical dilemma to exist. If you cannot
identify the underlying values/ virtues then you do not have an ethical dilemma. Often
people hold these positions strongly and with passion because of the value/virtue beneath
them.”
Third, determine what virtues/principles have a bearing on the case. This is
similar to identifying the relevant factors internal and external). “In an ethical dilemma
certain values and principles are central to the competing positions. Identify these.
Determine if some should be given more weight than others. Ask what the source for the
principle is - constitution, culture, natural law, religious tradition... These supplement biblical
principles.”
Fourth, list the alternatives or develop a list of options. “Creatively determine
possible courses of action for your dilemma. Some will almost immediately be discarded
but generally the more you list the greater potential for coming up with a really good one. It
will also help you come up with a broader selection of ideas.”
Fifth, compare the alternatives with the virtues/principles. “This step eliminates
alternatives as they are weighed by the moral principles which have a bearing on the case.
Potentially the issue will be resolved here as all alternatives except one are eliminated.
Here you must satisfy all the relevant virtues and values - so at least some of the
alternatives will be eliminated (even if you still have to go on to step 6). Often here you
have to weigh principles and virtues - make sure you have a good reason for each
weighing.”
Sixth, consider the consequences or test the options. “If you disclose the
information directly possible consequences include; - family feel alienated, cultural values
have been violated - family may take patient to another hospital - patient may 'give up' -
patient might be happy they are finally being told the truth.” If you continue withholding
information possible consequences include; - patient continues to be fearful and anxious
about the treatment - patient finds out somehow and trust is compromised - family are
happy cultural values are being respected.
In general, the following may be used to test the options: (Davis, 1999)
 Harm test: Does this option do less harm than the alternatives?
 Publicity test: Would I want my choice of this option published in the newspaper?
 Defensibility test: Could I defend my choice of this option before a congressional
committee or committee of peers?
 Reversibility test: Would I still think this option was a good choice if I were
adversely affected by it?
 Colleague test: What do my colleagues say when I describe my problem and
suggest this option as my solution?
 Professional test: What might my profession's governing body for ethics say about
this option?
 Organization test: What does my company's ethics officer or legal counsel say
about this?
Seventh, make a decision. "Ethical decisions rarely have pain-free solutions - it might
be you have to choose the solution with the least number of problems/painful
consequences. Even when making a "good" decision you might still lose sleep over it!"

The second model was developed by the Josephson Institute of Ethics:

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 4
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 1. Stop and Think. Ethica decision are important that we need to avoid giving rash
answers; this prepares us for more thoughtful discernment, and can allow us to
mobilize our intellectual discipline.
2. Clarify Goals. Before choosing any decisions, we need to clarify first our short-term
and long-term aims. It is necessary to determine which of our many wants and don't
wants” are affected by the decision (are they the most important?)
3. Determine Facts. Be sure you have adequate information to support an intelligent
choice. In order to determine the facts, first resolve what you know, then what you
need to know. One must be opened and prepared for additional information and to
verify assumptions and other uncertain information. In addition to this, one must:
a. Consider the reliability and credibility of the people providing the facts;
b. Consider the basis of the supposed facts. If the person is giving you the
information says that person personally heard or saw something, evaluate
that person in terms of honesty, accuracy, and soundness of memory.
4. Develop Options. Once you know what you want to achieve and have made your
best judgment as to the relevant facts. If it is really an important ethical concern, talk
to someone you trust so that you can broaden your perspective and think of new
choices. If you can think of only one or two possible solutions, you are probably not
thinking hard enough.
5. Consider the Consequences. Filter your choices to determine if any of your
options will violate any core ethical values, and then eliminate any unethical options.
Identify who will be affected by the decision and how the decision is likely to affect
them.
6. Choose. Make a decision. If the choice is not immediately clear, try:
a. Talking to people whose judgment you respect.
b. Think of a person of strong ethical/moral character that you know or know of,
and ask yourself what they would do in your situation.
c. If everyone found out about your decision, would you be proud and
comfortable?
d. Follow the Golden Rule: treat others the way you want to be treated, and
keep your promises.
7. Monitor and Modify. Ethical decision-makers monitor the effects of their choices. If
they are not producing the intended results, or are causing additional unintended
and undesirable results, they re-assess the situation and make new decisions.

Having uphold reasoning and impartiality in morality, we can now identify what criteria
moral judgments should meet to be considered adequate. Although there is no complete
list of adequacy criteria or moral judgments, moral judgments should be logical, based on
facts and based on valid moral principles. If one is lacking from these features, a moral
judgment is less than ideal.
1. Moral Judgment Should Be Logical. This implies several things. First, our
judgments should follow from the evidence. The connection between 1) the
standard, 2) the behavior or policy, and 3) the moral judgment should be such that 1
and 2 logically entail 3. Forming logical moral judgments also means ensuring that
our moral judgments are consistent with our other beliefs.
2. Moral Judgment Should Be Based on Facts. Adequate moral judgments cannot
be made in a vacuum. We must gather as much relevant information as possible
before making them. The information supporting the moral judgment, the facts,
should be relevant, that is, actually relate to the judgment; complete, or inclusive of
all significant data; and accurate or true.
3. Moral Judgments Should Be Based on Valid Moral Principles. We know that
moral judgments are based on moral standards. At the highest level of moral
reasoning, these standards embody and express global moral principles. Sound
moral judgments are based on valid moral principles. Valid here refers to qualities
that give the principle inner strength and a capacity to resist challenge or attack.

Moral Courage
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 5
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Most of us have the basic understanding of moral courage as the ability to take action
for moral reasons despite the risk of adverse consequences. Courage is required to take
action when one has doubts or fears about the consequences of such an act. The concept
of courage, therefore, involves deliberation or careful thought.

We relate moral courage with our concept of courageous people as those who perform
courageous acts, but we can raise the question, what makes an act courageous? In James
Donald Wallace’s book Virtues and Vices (1986), Wallace defines courageous acts by
using six conditions, each of which is necessary, and which taken together are sufficient,
that is, to recognize an act as courageous.
1. The person believes that it is dangerous to do the act.
2. The person believes that doing the act is worth the risks it involves.
3. The person believes that it is possible for an individual to do or not to do the act.
4. The danger the person sees in doing the act is sufficiently formidable that most
people would find it difficult in the circumstances to do it.
5. The person is not coerced into doing the act by threats of
punishment
6. The person is under self-control, at least in the sense of not
being in a frenzy, stupor, or intoxication.
After analyzing the six conditions provided by Wallace, Mike W.
Martin, in Everyday Morality (2007), added another condition.
7. The people at least believed they were doing well, and we
admire them for their effort to pursue what is good.
Martin gave as an example Field Marshal Rommel (the desert Field Marshal Erwin Rommel aka “The
Desert Fox” (1891 – 1944)
fox) who was a fearless soldier for Hitler's side during World War II. https://www.history.com/news/8-
Martin concluded that though Field things-you-may-not-know-about-
erwin-rommel
Marshal Rommel was mistaken in believing his acts were good,
there was no doubt that he believed it was his duty as a soldier to act as he did.

Critique: Creative Responsibility

When a moral problem comes one's way, which may be communicates as a silent or
verbal message, or through a happening or an incident, the serious response would be a
process of moral reasoning. One may use the aforementioned reasoning models. One may
automatically apply classic or traditional frameworks or norms. One may be legalistic or
situationist But one significant guide to the moral reasoning process is what ethicist like Fr.
Gorospe (1974) termed as "creative responsibility," which has the following characteristics:
.... First, a creative and fitting response involves some form of positive human action...
Second, to give a fitting human response in some form of positive action inevitably
means "create" a response. The creative responsibility is something to be discovered
and created and is best envisioned in concrete cases....
Third, a creative response means one has to choose from among many possible
fitting responses. It is impossible to find only one possible fitting response to a human
situation....! Fourth, in order that creative response of the individual be authentic that
person must be in constant dialogue with the community and culture in which that
individual lives. Creative responsibility is not only individual but collective; it is co-
responsibility.
Creative responsibility is responding silently or verbally to a call and address an ethical
problem creatively by considering all possible points of view, thinking outside the box, using
relevant frameworks. There are always available norms or rules to follow, but one should
apply them creatively apply them in the light situations and conditions and be ready to bend
the rule where there is no other remedy in sight. It is easier to understand this concept from
a wider point of view, like that of a ruler or government. For instance, the response of
government to the problem of drugs, like adopting the policy of killing (murdering) the drug
addict, upon the assumption that the individual is dangerous and useless being, is
uncreative and irresponsible

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 6

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 One technique of coming up with a creative response is applying the phenomenological
method of suspending judgment, placing former knowledge, biases, prejudices, etc.
between brackets, letting the thing to show itself as itself.

Feelings in Decision-making

Feeling. In general, is an emotional state or reaction,

experience of physical sensation like feeling of joy, feeling of
warmth, love, affection tenderness, etc. How do they affect moral
decision-making? “Several studies conclude that up to 90
percent of the decisions we made are based on emotion. We
use logic to justify our actions to ourselves and to others.”
Researches also show that "actual emotional states can
influence the process of moral reasoning and determine moral
judgment."
Feelings are instinctive and trained response to moral
dilemma. They can be obstacles to making right decisions but
https://askanydifference.com/ they can also help in making the tight decisions.
difference-between-feelings-and-
emotions/ Are there advantages of emotional decision making?
According to recent research, feelings or emotions have
positive effects on decision making. Some are identified as follows:
 A totally emotional decision is very fast in comparison to a rational decision. This is
reactive (and largely subconscious) and m be useful when faced with immediate
danger, or in decisions of minimal significance.
 Emotions may provide a way for coding and compacting experience, enabling fast
response selection. This may point to why expert's “gut" level decisions have high
accuracy rates.
 Decisions that start with logic may need emotions to enable the final selection,
particularly when confronted with near equal options.
 Emotions often drive us in directions conflicting with self-interest.

Emotional decision making can also come with a number of negatives.

 We make quick decisions without knowing why, and then create rational reasons to
justify a poor emotional decision.
 Intensity of emotions can override rational decision-making in cases where it is
clearly needed.
 Immediate and unrelated emotions can create mistakes by distorting and creating
bins in judgments. In some cases this can lead to unexpected and reckless action.
 Projected emotions can lead to errors because people are subject to systemic
inaccuracy about how they will feel in the future

It may be said that an analogy between legal and moral statement may be made to
show that moral statements may treated like a factual statement. In criminal law, the
allegation that "Juan's act of stealing is wrong" may be established by evaluating the act in
the light of the elements of the crime of stealing under the law. For instance, the law
provides that stealing is taking the property of another without the latter's consent. So if
there is an evidence that Juan has taken a property, that the property belongs to someone
else, that the taking is without consent, then it can be decided that a crime of theft is
committed; in other words, the statement has been verified.
What then would prevent one in applying the same procedure in establishing the
truth or falsehood of a moral statement? For instance, the moral principle or rule is "stealing
is wrong" that it is explained by moral or ethics teachers that the statement is meant to be
referring to an act of taking someone else property without the owner's consent. May not

Moral statements as expressions of feelings

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 7

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Are moral statements or values mere expressions of feelings or as claimed by the
linguistic philosophers? According to some linguistic philosophers called (emotivists) the
statement “stealing is wrong” is not a statement of fact, it is an expression of a desire or
emotion. The rule or maxim “Stealing is wrong" means “I desire that you do not steal." An
emotional statement is not verifiable like factual statement. “Pedro stole my car” is
verifiable, can be established by evidence. But “Pedro's act of gating my cat is morally
wrong” which is equivalent to "I desire that Pedro should not steal“ is not verifiable. The
following explains this ethical thery:

Emotivism… is the view that moral judgments do not function as

statements of fact but rather as expressions of the speaker’s or writer’s feelings.
According to the emotivist, when we say “You acted wrongly in stealing that
money,” we are not expressing any fact beyond that stated by “You stole that
money.” It is, however, as if we had stated this fact with a special tone of
abhorrence, for in saying that something is wrong, we are expressing our feelings
of disapproval toward it. Emotivism was expounded by A. J. Ayer in Language,
Truth and Logic (1936) and developed by Charles Stevenson in Ethics and
Language (1945). The emotivist thus goes further by saying that ethical statements
being emotional expressions are not verifiable. Emotional expressions are not
assertions of what is true or false. They are like expressions of tastes. There is no
dispute or there can be no dispute on matters of taste. “De gustibus non
disputandum est.” One cannot argue with one’s taste, emotion.

It may be said that an analogy between legal and moral statement may be made to
show that moral statements may treated like a factual statement. In criminal law, the
allegation that “Juan’s act of stealing is wrong” may be established by evaluating the act in
the light of the elements of the crime of stealing under the law. For instance, the law
provides that stealing is taking the property of another without the latter’s consent. So if
there is an evidence that Juan has taken a property, that the property belongs to someone
else, that the taking is without consent, then it can be decided that a crime of theft is
committed; in other words, the statement has been verified.
What then would prevent one in applying the same procedure in establishing the
truth or falsehood of a moral statement? For instance, the moral principle or rule is “stealing
is wrong” that it is explained by moral or ethics teachers that the statement is meant to be
referring to an act of taking someone else property without the owner’s consent. May not
someone’s act of stealing be verified by finding out if the actor has indeed taken someone’s
property with the latter’s consent? And that, therefore, one’s act may be judged as wrong?
The emotivist will still argue that such argument only proves that a certain individual
act has characteristic that can be described as stealing. It does not make the statement
“stealing is wrong” as a factual statement, which is correct, since all maxims or rules are
non-factual and only the particular instances evaluated on the basis of these rules would be
considered as factual.

Managing Feelings
Aristotle wrote: “Anyone can get angry – that is easy – to do this to the right person,
to the right extent, at the right time with the right motive, and in the right way, that is not for
everyone, nor is it easy. (Book II, Nicomachean Ethics). In other words your anger should
not be displaced. The moral person manages their feelings well.

. Activity No. 2 Reasons and Feelings

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 8
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 1. One sticker in a truck says: “If it feels good do it.” What does this mean? Is this always
right? (10 pts)

B. Here are some statements from a Filipina OFW in the USA. Read then answer the
questions below.

“I will never be able to forgive myself if I won’t fly home to be with my family in my
father’s death. I may not be able to talk to him anymore, you may find it impractical and
unreasonable but I have to fly home. If I don’t, I will not feel whole at all.”
If you were the Filipina nurse, would you decide and act the same way? Why? (10 pts)

3. Recall a moral decision you made. Did you consider your feelings? Did you end up doing
the right thing or the wrong thing? If you ended up wrongly, why? Any lesson learned?
(10pts)

4. Take us to your memory lane. Recall a moment when you made a decision which you
think is the most reasonable decision and a decision borne out of emotional responses. (10
pts)

Activity No. 3 Case Analysis

Direction: Read, understand, and reflect on the moral dilemma below. If you were
Dolores, what would you do? Make use of the 7-step model of reasoning to arrive at a
decision. (40 pts)

U02: Story of Humbert & Dolores – Ethical Workplace Dilemma

Humbert was the blue-eyed boy of the senior management. Everyone in the
organization knew that he was a coding-ninja, and a company that was largely reliant on
its technological know-how, he was a real asset to the organization. Everyone was
offered the first glimpse of his brilliance, when within a couple of months of his joining,
the team faced the daunting task of finding a bug in a 30,000 line code. What made
matters worse was the paucity of time within which the error was to be rectified, since the
client was a large international bank and the error was making it impossible for some
users to access their bank accounts. When the senior developers in the team gave an
estimate of at least 12 hours before the bug could be spotted and removed, Humbert
requested if he could have a look and corrected the code within a mere 40 minutes!
Everyone was in awe, but Humbert played it down, congratulating everyone on a great
team effort and crediting the senior developers for giving him the right direction and
entrusting him with the task.

That was part of what made Humbert so likable. It wasn’t just his technical skills;
he was a real charmer, a genuinely nice guy and he had a good sense of humor too.
Very soon, he was the apple of everyone’s eye. Humbert had joined the team as a part of
recent hires, who were all added to the work force as a part of the company strategy
under which the company wanted to bring in ‘fresh blood’. A total of 12 young graduates
were hired during this period, all very skilled at their job, but only Humbert was able to
make the mark with the senior management. Humbert’s good friend from his school,
Dolores, was also a part of this team. Dolores and Humbert got along well swimmingly
and used to spend to a lot of time together, both at work and outside of it.

A few months into the job when everyone had settled in their roles, the company
was in a steady state, serving its existing clients, and was operating as a ‘fine-tuned
machine’. Humbert being extremely skilled at his job, was able to finish his work within a
few hours everyday and this afforded him the luxury of free time at work. Realizing that
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 9
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 he had extra time at hand, he would often finish his work early on in the day and then
spend his time reading about video games (he was an avid gamer). However, he soon
found out that he could make more ‘productive’ use of this time, and started taking on
freelancing jobs that he would do during his working hours. He never compromised his
work for his freelancing job; he would diligently make sure all his work was done before
he took on anything else. His bosses were still very happy with his performance at work.

Dolores noticed her friend’s ‘extracurricular’ activities at work and didn’t feel very
comfortable with his conduct. She wanted to tell him that he is doing the company a
disservice by spending work hours on freelancing jobs, but wasn’t sure if it will sour their
friendship. Also, given the fact that everyone was so happy with Humbert’s work, she
wasn’t sure if there was a need for taking any action at all. But then, was it her
responsibility to report any such behavior to the appropriate authority within the
company?
Source: https://sites.psu.edu/psy533wheeler/2017/02/24/u02-story-of-humbert-dolores-
ethical-workplace-dilemma/

1. Gather the facts, information. (Summarize)

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

2. Determine the ethical issues, similar to “statement of the problem.”

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

3. Determine what virtues/principles have a bearing on the case.

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

4. List the alternatives or develop a list of options.

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

5. Compare the alternatives with the virtues/principles.

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

6. Consider the consequences or test the options.

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________

 Harm test:
 Publicity test:
 Defensibility test:
 Reversibility test:
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 10
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
  Colleague test:
 Professional test:
 Organization test:
7. Make a decision.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

Rubric
Indicators Expert (40) Accomplished Capable (20) Beginner (10)
(30)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present

ASSESSMENT

DIRECTIONS: Read and analyze the questions. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.

Indicators Expert (4) Accomplished Capable (2) Beginner (1)

(3)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Wrong
subject matter
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Wrong
concepts to the
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present

1. Define reason and impartiality and relate it to a particular experience in which you used
reason and impartiality when you made a certain decision in that situation? (10 pts)

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 11

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
2. Explain. Moral courage is especially good when it contributes to the well-being of other
people. (10 pts)

3. How have you applied creative responsibility in your approach to a moral problem? (10
pts)

4. In logic, there is a fallacy on “appeal to the pity” (argumentum as misericordiam). What

does this tell you regarding the roles of feeling and reason in making moral decision? (10
pts)

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 12

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 LESSO
N

2 REASON AND WILL

3
HOURS
Is reason dictated by will or vice versa? Let’s find out in this Lesson.

At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:

1. Differentiate knowing and executing a good moral decision; and
2. Judge one’s moral behavior in terms of a case analysis.

MOTIVATION

Activity No. 1 Go Up!

Directions: Watch the music video of “Go Up” by SB19. The YouTube link is provided
below. Answer the questions that follow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRfhzWaiQvk

1. What does it say about a person’s will to succeed even though failures may come
along the way? (25 pts)

2. What does the song tell us about the role of “will” in our decision making? (25 pts)

This lesson tackles the vital roles reason and will play in decision making. It also
discusses the concept of free will as the capacity of rational agents to choose a course of
action from among various alternatives.

TEACHING POINTS

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 13

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
Reason and Will

The moral person is endowed with an intellect and will. The will is what "disposes"
what the "the intellect proposes." Reason conducts the study, research, investigation, and
fact-finding. It uses logic, the principle of consistency, avoids fallacious reasoning to come
up with a truthful and accurate proposition. In a research study, the product or work of
reason is the body of facts gathered, organized, synthesized and evaluated. The job of the
will is to make a decisive conclusion.
The will is the faculty of the mind that is associated with decision making. It's the
one that says yes or no. This author says this, that author says that, all others are saying
the same thing. Now, decide with your will what you yourself should say or think.
Decision making which is an activity of the will can be developed. Early in life, like
children, one should already be given the opportunity to exercise one’s will, like being
trained to make choices from alternative. Do you want to eat or not? Rice or bread? Coffee
or tea? This is true of societies where a culture of choice give opportunities for the
development of the will. A culture of spoon feeding does not develop the will. Banking
education, a method of teaching where the teacher simply deposits facts and concepts and
withdraw the same periodically during quizzes and tests without encouraging the students
to think and reflect, does not promote the development of the will.
Jean Paul Sartre, the French Philosopher, and the most popular existentialist was
saying that an individual person is nothing until that individual person starts making
decisions. What ultimately constitutes who a person is are that person’s decisions. The
essence of being a person equals an individual’s bundle of decisions. Apparently, the mark
of the maturation of culture is manifested through the development of a culture of moral
strength or virtue, or will power, its free will.
"Free Will" is the "capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from
among various alternatives." Free will is the ability to choose between different possible
courses of action unimpeded, the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants. It is
the power of self-determination. When the will is free, there is freedom.
To Hornedo (1972), the stuff of the free will is a multi-dimensional power, energy, or
strength. People are free to the degree that they have energy, that physically free to the
degree that they are physically strong; materially or economically free to the degree that
they are materially or economically strong, and so on.
Emphasis is made on what freedom is, and not on what it is not. To say that one is
free when there is an absence of obstacle is to give a picture of a weak person who cannot
walk to get out one’s room despite an open door. Freedom must not only be understood as
the absence of obstacle; it must be an autonomous energy. It is useless talking about being
free to
move, walk, if you have not strength to move or walk. It is useless saying you are free to go
to Manila by bus, if you have no money for your fare. Freedom implies power, energy, and
strength in all human dimensions, as the stuff of freedom. A free person is one who is
physically healthy and strong, psychologically normal, financially stable. It is useless
shouting in the streets for "economic freedom" if one is economically weak. In terms of
morality, moral strength is moral freedom. Morally strong people would not allow a tyrant to
thrive or last long. In the words of Jose Rizal is the statement, "there can be no tyrants
where there can be no slaves."

The Courage To Be

“Purity of heart is to will one thing,” says Kierkegaard. But to "will one thing" needs
courage. According to Paul Tillich (1952), “courage is self-affirmation 'in-spite-of,' that is in
spite of that which tends to prevent the self from affirming itself.” Courage is “the
affirmation of being in spite of non-being.” This implies affirming, accepting oneself in
spite of one's defects, lack, or imperfections, affirming the world we live in in spite all that it
lacks. In specific terms, courage is affirming, allowing the drug addict or drug dependent to
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 14
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
live in spite of one’s drug addiction. “Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising
every time we fall.” Courage is not giving up because of setbacks and failures. It is
keeping right on keeping on. In politics, courage is affirming or accepting one's people in
spite of their ignorance, poverty. Political will means the courage to promote the greatest
good of the greatest number in spite of their selfishness, greed, and unruly behavior.
Commitment, engagement, fidelity, authentic existence are all forms of “affirmation of being
in spite of non-being." Courage is affirming the world in spite of its tragedies. The last line in
Desiderata says it so, “with all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful
world.”

Activity No. 2
1. In a 3-5 sentence essay, interpret Robert Frost’s immortal lines in the context of making
moral decisions. (15 pts)

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I–

I took the one less travelled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Rubric
Indicators Expert (15) Accomplished Capable (8) Beginner (4)
(12)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present

Activity No. 3 Reflection

In a 3 paragraph essay, answer this question: How did I decide and what did I
actually do during my most important experience in the past year? (30 pts)

Rubric
Indicators Expert (4) Accomplished Capable (2) Beginner (1)
(3)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 15

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
extraordinary style style and voice; gives some new information
and voice; very somewhat information but and very poorly
informative and informative and poorly organized organized
well-organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors.
errors errors is present

DIRECTION: Read and analyze the questions. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.

Indicators Expert (15) Accomplished Capable (8) Beginner (4)

(12)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an extraordinary in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
style and voice; style and voice; gives some new information
very informative somewhat information but and very poorly
and well- informative and poorly organized organized
organized organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors errors.
is present

1. St. Paul said: “I know the good to do but why is it that I do that opposite of the good that I
know?”

a) Do you experience that same? Does this means unity of the intellect and will or lack of
unity? Exlain. (15 pts)

2. Distinguish the roles of intellect and free will. (15 pts)

3. Like St. Paul have you also experienced knowing the good to do but ended up doing the
opposite of the good that you know? What have you been doing to strengthen your will?
(15 pts).

LESSO
N
MORAL THEORIES AND
3 MENTAL FRAMES
This document is a property of NONESCOST
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only)
Module 2 | Page 16
Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
8
HOURS
 It is good to understand what an ethical framework is before studying the 5 most
common ethical frameworks in detail. These ethical frameworks were already metioned in
passing in previous modules and are again introduced in this lesson.

At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:

1. Explain the role of mental frames in moral experience;
2. Classify dominant mental frames;
3. Articulate the content of Virtue Ethics and Rights Theory;
4. Compare and Contrast a legal from a moral right;
5. Critique Virtue Ethics by writing a Reflection paper; and
6. Make use of Virtue Ethics and Right Theory through an Interview.

MOTIVATION

. Activity No. 1 Match Me!

Directions: Match the items in Column 1 with Column 2. Repeation of answer is allowed.
Column 1 Ethical Statement Column 2 Ethical Frameworks
___1. The ethical person develops good A. Virtue on Character Ethics of
character. Aristotle
___2. An act is ethical if it is an obligation B. Natural Law or Commandement
expected of every person. Ethics of St. Thomas
___3. An act is ethic if it is an obligation expected C. Deontological and Duty
of every person. Framework of Immanuel Kant
___4. That which is right follows the rule “do good D. Utilitarian, Teleological and
and avoid evil.” Consequentialist
___5. That which is ethical is that which has good E. Love and Justice Framework
consequences.
___6. An act is ethical if one gives the other more
than what is due.
___7. To act ethically, one must act in a way that
people wish others to act in the same way.
___8. An act is ethical if it brings about the
greatest good for the greatest number of
those affected by the act.
___9. What is good is written in a person’s very
being.

The activity above is on various ethical frameworks. Based on the activity that you just did,
what do you think is the meaning of ethical framework?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 17

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

PRESENTATION

This lesson introduces you to the basic concepts of the leading ethical frameworks.
An ethical framework guides an individual in answering these two questions: "What I ought
to do?" and “Why I ought to do so"? So ethical frameworks serve as guideposts in moral
life.
As you read along the lessons below, try to figure out what ethical framework you
adhere to, if there’s any.

An ethical framework is a set of codes that an individual uses to hide a person’s

behavior. It is just another term for "moral standards" as discussed in the early part of this
text. It is what people use to distinguish right from wrong in the way they interact with the
world. It is used to determine the moral object of an action. An ethical framework guides an
individual in answering these two questions: "What I ought to do?" and “Why I ought to do
so"? So ethical frameworks serve as guideposts in moral life.
The various dominant mental frames may be classified as follows:
1) virtue or character ethics of Aristotle;
2) natural law or commandment ethics of St. Thomas and others;
3) deontogical and duty framework of Immanuel Kant;
4) utilitarianist, teleological and consequentialist approach; and
5) Love and justice framework.
They will be introduced here but will be discussed more in detail in the succeeding
lessons.

Virtue or Character Ethics of Aristotle

Virtue ethics asks, who is the ethical person? For Aristotle, the
ethical person is virtuous, one who has developed good character or has
developed virtues. One attains virtues when an individual actualizes that
individual’s potentials or possibilities, the highest of which is happiness,
Happiness is the joy of self-realization, self-fulfilment, the experience of
having actualized one's potentials.

Aristotle
Retrieved from
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/wo
rld/europe/greece-aristotle-tomb.html
Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St. Thomas
For St. Thomas, what is right is what follows the natural law, the
rule which says, “do good and avoid evil.” In knowing the good as distinguished from evil,
one is guided by the Ten Commandments which is summed up as loving God and one's
fellowmen.

Deontological and Duty Framework of Immanuel Kant

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 18

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Kant's framework is deon or duty or deontological framework. Deontology centers on
“the rights of individuals and the intentions associated with particular behavior... equal
respect... given to all persons.” The "deontological approach is based on universal
principles such as honesty, fairness, justice and respect for persons and property." It is
based on the categorical imperative, that is, people must act such that their maxim will be
the maxim of all. This acting based on a maxim that can be the maxim of all is a duty, an
obligation of every individual. Acting out of duty (deon) is acting out of good will or
intentions. Treating man as an end, not a means to an end
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is acting with good will or intentions. Kant also maintained
https://thegreatthinkers.org/kant/introduction/ that each person has worth or dignity that must be
respected.

Utilitarianist, Teleological and Conceptualist Framework

The utilitarianist teleological approach focuses on consequences. “The decision
maker is concerned with the utility of decision. What really counts is the net balance of
good consequences over bad.” The rightness of an action depends on the said net balance
of good consequences.

Love and Justice Framework

What is ethical that which is just and that which is loving.
Justice is giving what is due to others (justice) while is giving even
more that what is due to others.
https://jeremyberg.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/
essay-love-justice-in-search-of-a-kingdom-ethic/

Aristotle: Mean Between Two Extremes

Virtue or character ethics

Imagine a person who is always knows what to say, can diffuse a tensed situation,
deliver tough news gracefully, confident without being arrogant, brave but not reckless and
generous but never extravagant. This is the type of person that everybody wants to be
around and and to be like. Someone who seems to have mastered the art of being a
person. This may sound like an impossible feat, but Aristotle believed that, while rare, these
people do exist. And they are what we all should aspire to be: virtues. How?

The following excerpts clarifies what virtue ethics is:

An ethical act is the action that a virtuous person would do in the same circumstances.
Virtue ethics is person-based rather than action-based. It looks at the virtue or moral
character of the person carrying out an action rather than at ethical duties and rules or
the consequences of particular actions.

Virtue ethics does not only deal with the rightness or wrongness of individual actions. It
provides guidance as to the sort of characteristics and behaviors a good person will
seek to achieve. In that way, virtue ethics is concerned with the whole of a person's life,
rather than particular episodes or actions. A good person is someone who lives
virtuously - who possesses and lives the virtues.

Virtue ethics uses the following as a framework for ethical decision making. This is how it is
done:

In the Virtue framework, we try to identify the character traits (either positive or
negative) that might motivate us in a given situation. We are concerned with what kind
of person we should be and what our actions indicate about our character. We define
ethical behavior as whatever a virtuous person would do in the situation, and we seek
to develop similar virtues.
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 19
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Obviously, this framework is useful in situations that ask what sort of person one
should be. As a way of making sense of the world, it allows for a wide range of
behaviors to be called ethical, as there might be many different types of good
character and many paths to developing it. Consequently, it takes into account all
parts of human experience and their role in ethical deliberation, as it believes that all
of one's experiences, emotions, and thoughts can influence the development of one's
character.

Stated similarly, virtue ethics is "the ethics of behavior" which "focuses on the
character of the persons involved in the decision or action. The person in question has
good character, and genuine motivation and if the intentions, an individual is behaving
ethically." The rightness or wrongness of one’s action, or the goodness or badness of one's
personality depends on the individual character, motivations and intentions.
Virtue ethics, "is an ethics whose goal is to determine what is essential to being a
well-functioning or flourishing human person. Virtue ethics stresses an ideal for humans or
persons. As an ethics of ideals or excellences, it is an optimistic and positive type of
ethics."

Basic Types of Virtue (Excellence)

Aristotle gave two types of virtue. These are 1) intellectual virtues and 2) moral
virtues. Intellectual virtues refer to excellence of the mind while moral virtues refer to a
person's dispositions to act well. Intellectual virtues include ability to understand, reason
and judge well while moral virtues dispose a person to act well.
In the context of Aristotle, virtue is an attained, actualized or self-realized potential or
possibility. It can serve as a moral framework. When people has the potential or possibility
of becoming a musician, they try to train and study to become a musician following a
musician's virtue as a framework.
Aristotle (384-323 BC) posited an ethical system that may be termed “self
realizationism.” In Aristotle's view, when a person acts in accordance with an
individual’s nature and realizes one’s full potential, that person do good and be
content. At birth, a baby is not a person, but a potential person. To become a "real"
person, the child's inherent potential must be realized. Unhappiness and frustration
are caused by the unrealized potential of a person, leading to failed goals and a
poor life. Aristotle said, "Nature does nothing in vain." Therefore, it is imperative for
people to act in accordance with their nature and develop their latent talents in
order to be content and complete. Happiness was held to be the ultimate goal. All
other things, such as civic life or wealth, are merely means to the end. Self-
realization, the awareness of one's nature and the development of one's talents, is
the surest path to happiness.

The material world is in state of actualizing, realizing what it is potential for.

Everything has its potency for something, its nature. Nature unfolds naturally, it has no
obligation to be so. It has no intellect and will. But a person has an obligation to be what
they meant or in potency to be. It’s their obligation to develop their talent and virtues. The
highest good or end, telos, of a person is the fullness of their self-development or
actualization. The concomitant result of this development or actualization of their potentials
is what Aristotle termed as happiness or the experience of happiness. In short, virtue
means excellence and virtue ethics is excellence ethics.

Virtue as a Mean
For Aristotle, virtue is the Golden Mean between two extremes. The virtue of
courage is a mean between two extremes of deficiency and extreme, namely, cowardice
and foolhardiness, respectively. Too little is cowardice and too much courage is
foolhardiness

Virtue Ethics in Other Traditions

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 20

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Confucius emphasized two virtues, jen (or ren) and li Jen means humaneness,
human-heartedness and compassion. Li means propriety, manners or culture.
Hinduism emphasizes five basic moral virtues: non-violence, truthfulness, honesty,
chastity, freedom from greed. It also emphasizes mental virtues: calmness, self-control,
self-settledness, forbearance, faith and complete concentration, hunger for spiritual
liberation. (George, V,2008)
Buddhism also has its intellectual and moral virtues. From the eight-fold path are the
intellectual virtues of right understanding and right mindfulness and the moral virtues of
right speech, right action and right livelihood.
Jesus Christ preached the virtues of love, mercy and compassion, hunger for justice,
patience, kindness, gentleness, self-control. St. Thomas Aquinas taught the theological
virtues faith, hope and love. Christian tradition teaches four cardinal moral virtues, namely:
prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude.
St. Thomas being an eclectic philosopher, integrated into the former’s own
philosophy anything that is good conceived by Aquinas’ predecessors like Aristotle. But St.
Thomas enriched his thoughts with his own insights or learning. The attainment of the
highest good, which is happiness, includes its diffusion. “Bonum difusivum est.” Goodness
as goodness necessarily diffuses itself. A person's virtue diffuses itself in a right action.
Goodness shares itself, like a light that shines before all human beings.
One more point regarding various potentials of people which when actualized
becomes virtues is Hans George Gadamer's re-interpretation of Aristotle definition of man
as a "homo logos," a speaking animal. In other words, in the light Aristotle's wisdom, the
virtue of being human is being a speaking animal, meaning, and a person’s attainment of a
meaningful, refined, and civilized language. Gutter language is vice; beautiful, meaningful
and refined language is virtue. One who has a virtue of a refined language speaks
rightfully.
The virtuous person did not inherit their virtues. Neither were these virtues simply
passed on to an individual automatically. An individual’s personhood of virtue is a product
of deliberate, consistent, continuous choice and practice of living the virtue or virtues.

Questions Raised About Virtue Ethics

Here are some questions raised about virtue ethics:

1. How do we determine which traits are virtues and whether they are virtues in all
circumstances, Are the virtues for the Christian culture, the Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu
cultures?
2. Mac Intyre, a contemporary philosopher, believes that virtues depend the same with
those of at least partly on the culture of society. A warlike society will value heroic
virtues whereas a peaceful society may think of generosity as a more important virtue.
3. Who is more courageous - the person who wants to run away does not or that one who
does not even want to run away? This be something to do with the degree of effort and
discipline required to be virtuous.

St.Thomas Aquinas: Natual Law

Aquinas thought morality was important for everyone, and that being a good person
was a vital part of God’s plan for each of us. But Aquinas also knew that not everyone had
been exposed to the Bible, or had even heard of God. How could people follow God’s
moral rules – also known as divine commandments – if they didn’t even know about the
person who made the commandments? So Aquinas theorized that God made us pre-
loaded with the tools we need to know what’s Good. This idea became known as the
natural law theory.

Meaning of Natural law and Other Laws

Based on the phrase "natural law ethics," what is ethical is what the natural law
says. What is natural law? Natural law is the "ordinance of Divine Wisdom, which is made
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 21
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
known to us by reason and which requires the observance of the moral order." It may also
be defined to be “The eternal law as far as it made known by human reason.” By the
eternal law we mean all that God necessarily decrees from eternity. That part of the eternal
law which reason reveals as directive of human acts, we call the natural law…
Eternal law is what God wills for creation. We are part of God's creation and so we
are part of Gods eternal law. We may not be able to understand the eternal law fully given
our limitations. However, by reason we have a grasp or a sense of the eternal law. This is
natural law.
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote: ...
There is in people an inclination to good, according to the
nature of one’s reason, which nature is proper to that individual;
thus a person has a natural inclination to know the truth about
God, and to live in society; and in this respect, whatever pertains
to this inclination belongs to the natural law; for instance to shun
ignorance, to avoid offending those among whom one has to
live, and other such things regarding the above inclination.
(Summa Theologica, l-2 Question 94, Article 2)
Thomas Aquinas (1225
– 1274), a Catholic Let us relate natural law to other kinds of law:
philosopher of
the Middle Ages,
Rev. Charles Coppens, SJ. explains the various kinds of law
revived and developed according to St. Thomas:
the concept of natural
law from ancient Greek
philosophy. A law decreed by Almighty God is a divine law: one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Thomas_Aquinas established by people is a human law. Those laws for human
conduct which God, having once decreed creation, necessarily
enacts in accordance with that decree, constitute the natural law: those which God or
man freely enacts are positive law Now, between the natural law und positive laws,
there are these four points of difference: I. The natural law unlike positive laws,
does not depend upon the free will of God: its requirements flow from the intrinsic
difference between right and wrong, which ix determined by the very essences of
things. Hence, under this law, certain acts are not evil primarily because they are
forbidden, but they are forbidden because in themselves they are evil. 2.
Consequently, the natural law is the same at all times, in all places, and for all
persons; but this is not true of positive laws, which may be changed with changing
circumstances, or, if the law-giver so wills it, even without change of circumstances.
3. The natural law emanates from God alone; but positive laws may be enacted by
men. 4. The natural law is promulgated through the light of reason: positive laws
require for their promulgation a sign external to man.

In summary, we have an eternal law, God's law for the whole creation, which we
cannot fully grasp given our limitation. But with our gift of reason we have a grasp of that
eternal law, that is natural law, Divine law is decreed by God while human law is decreed
by man.

Natural Law as a Universal Formula

As an ethical framework, the natural law or maxim may be applied as implicitly

illustrated in the following:
A universal formula which contains in brief an expression of the whole natural
law is this: "Keep the moral order," or "Observe right order in your actions." Some
writers state it simply as. “Do good and avoid evil.” Now, the right order of human
acts consists evidently in their proper direction to man’s last end, which is,
subjectively, one’s perfect beatitude and, objectively, God Himself. God must direct
His free creatures to their last end, hence God commands them to observe the
moral order and forbids them to depart from it…

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 22

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 So what is natural and ethical for a human person is to “keep the moral order,” to
“observe right order,” to “do good and avoid evil” to preserve one’s being. Suicide and
murder work against preservation of human life, therefore, are a violation of the natural law.
St. Thomas Aquinas grounded the directedness of nature in God. All of creation is
directed toward their final end, God Himself. To direct us to God, the LORD gave the divine
law. The divine law given to us in the Ten Commandments of the Old Testament and the
new commandment of “love God...” and “love your neighbor...” by Jesus Christ in the New
Testament in which St. Thomas synthesized faith and reason. Aquinas believed that natural
law is part of the divine law, that the “natural law shares in the eternal law.” All of creation is
directed
Analogous to logical reasoning, it may be applied as follows: Premise: Stealing is
immoral and an evil to be avoided. Second Premise: The act of taking people’s property
without their consent is stealing. Conclusion. Therefore, the act of taking someone's
property, which I actually intend to do, is immoral and an evil to be avoided, which I should
do avoid.

Law Defined

St. Thomas explained that the natural law is promulgated through the light of reason.
Positive laws require for their promulgation a sign external to man. Laws that are enacted
are called positive laws. St. Thomas defined law in general as “an ordinance of reason
which is for the common good, and has been promulgated by one having charge of the
community.” For a law to be a law, it must have the four requisites, namely, a) ordinance
(order, command) of reason, b) for the common good, c) promulgation, and d) by one
who has charge of the community. Based on the definition, an unreasonable law is not
law; a law that favors one to the prejudice of another or does not equally protect all is not a
law; a law that is not promulgated or published or made known to all, is not a law; and a
law that is enacted by unauthorized persons is not a law.
A law must be a product of reason not purely of emotion. When the heart rules the
mind, we can be highly unreasonable. A law is promulgated for the common good because
we are meant to be social, we belong to a community. A law that favors the male gender at
the expense of the female gender cannot be a law. A law must be promulgated by one
whose primary task is to care for the people, the community. The primary task of our
lawmakers is to care for and protect their people by legislating laws for the common good.
The law must be made known or communicated to all people to ensure correct
understanding and compliance. A law that is promulgated does not take effect immediately.
In the Philippines, laws take effect after fifteen days following the completion of the
publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation unless it is
otherwise provided.
(https://batasnatin.com/law-libraray/civil-law/persons-and-family/82-effectivity-of-laws.html,
Retrieved 6-18-19)

Kant and Right Theories

While the natural law theory as advanced by Thomas Aquinas states that morality
comes from us but only because we were made by God, who preloaded us with moral
sensibilities, many other thinkers have argued that humanity’s moral code doesn’t come
from some supernatural force. Eightenth century German philosopher Immanuel Kant, for
one, thought religion and morality were a terrible pairing, and if anything, the two should be
kept apart. Instead Kant argued, in order to determine what’s right, you have to use reason.

Kant's Deontological Ethics

Kant's Ethics is now referred to as deontological. The term deontological has its root
from the Greek “deon” which means “duty:” Hence deontological ethics focuses on "duty,
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 23
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
obligation, and rights" instead of consequences or ends. An act that proceeds from the will
which wills it because it can be the will of all is a right action. Willing and doing the will of all
is a duty, regardless of the consequences. The following clarifies Kant's duty-based
approach:

The duty-based approach, sometimes called deontological ethics, argued that

doing what is right is not about the consequences of our actions ultimately have no
control) but about having the proper intention in performing the action. The ethical
action is one taken from duty, that is, it is done precisely because it is our obligation
to perform the action. Ethical obligations are the same for all rational creatures (they
are universal), and knowledge of what these obligations entail is arrived at by
discovering rules of behavior that are not contradicted by (something over which we
reason.
Kant's famous formula for discovering our ethical duty is known as the
“categorical imperative.”It has a number of different versions, but Kant believed they
all amounted to the same imperative. The most basic form of the imperative is:
“Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law.” So, for example, lying is unethical because we
could not universalize a maxim that said “One should always lie.” Such a maxim
would render all speeches meaningless. We can, however, universalize the maxim,
“Always speak truthfully,” running into a logical contradiction. (Notice that the duty-
based approach says nothing about how easy or difficult it would be to carry out
these maxims, only that it is our duty as rational creatures to do so.) In acting
according to a law that we have discovered to be rational according to our own
universal reason, we are acting autonomously (in a self- regulating fashion), and
thus are bound by duty, a duty we have given ourselves as rational creatures. We
thus freely choose (we will) to bind ourselves to the moral law. For Kant, choosing to
obey the universal moral law is the very nature of acting ethically. (Mackinon, B. and
Fiola A., 2015)

The example, borrowing money with no intention to pay back, cannot be universalized
and therefore cannot be ethical. If this becomes universalized, there will be no more
lenders and all banks will close.

The Duty Framework

Correspondingly, the duty-based approach can be applied as a framework for ethical
decision making:
In the Duty framework, we focus on the duties and obligations that we have in a
given situation, and consider what ethical obligations we have and what things we
should never do. Ethical conduct is defined by doing one's duties and doing the right
thing, and the goal is performing the correct action.
This framework has the advantage of creating a system of rules that has
consistent expectations of all people: if action is ethically correct or a duty is
required, it would apply to every person in a given situation. This even-handedness
encourages treating everyone with equal dignity and respect.
This framework also focuses on following moral rules or duty regardless of
outcome, so it allows for the possibility that one might have acted ethically, even if
there is a bad result
Therefore, this framework works best in situations where there is a sense of
obligation or in those in which we need to consider why duty or obligation mandates
or forbids certain courses of action. However, this framework also has its limitations.
First it can appear cold and impersonal, in that it might require actions which are
known to produce harms, even though they are strictly in keeping with a particular
moral rule. It also does not provide a way to determine which duty we should follow if
we are presented with a situation in which two or more duties conflict. It can also be
rigid in applying the notion of duty to everyone regardless of personal situation.

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 24

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
Kant’s theory of right
According to Kant, the “universal principle of right” is that “an action is right if it can
coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the
freedom of choice of each can coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a
universal law” (6:230). In other words, your exercise freely whatever rights you have on
your property but only in accordance with universal law. Universal law means a maxim that
can be the maxim of all. You can use, dispose, enjoy its fruits, but only in such a way that
you do not violate the rights of others. This exercise of a right bearing in mind the obligation
to respect the right of others is tantamount to good faith or good will.
Kant also offers direct contrasts between right and virtue. He thinks both relate to
freedom but in different ways: right concerns outer freedom and virtue concerns inner
freedom (being master of one’s own passions). Right concerns acts themselves
independent of the motive an agent may have for performing them, virtue concerns the
proper motive for dutiful actions. In another formulation he says that right concerns
universality as a formal condition of freedom while virtue concerns a necessary end beyond
the mere formality of universality, thus appearing to tie the distinction to the first two
formulas of the categorical imperative in the Groundwork.

Legally and Morally Right

It appears that in Kant, what is legal must be at the same time moral. An action is
legally right if it is at the same time in accordance with universal law, that is, in accordance
with the categorical imperative. In another context, what is legal is not necessarily moral.
For instance, what is legal is limited to compliance with law, be it laws of a state or country;
but being moral may not be just following the law, but doing more than what the law
requires like responding to the need of another. Paying employees their minimum wage is
legal; but paying more than their minimum wage because of care and concern of their
needs is more than what is legal.

Good will
Kant says, “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the
world, or even out of it, which”can be called good without
qualification, except a good will.” Kant's criteria or framework
of what is right or wrong is “good will”. An act is said to be right
or wrong depending on whether it is done with or without good
will. The rightness or wrongness of an action depends on
one's good will or intentions. The usual criticism, or weakness
cited, regarding this concept is that “The road to hell is paved Retrieved from
https://theflossopher.com/the-highest-
with good intentions.” Is good will enough? good-respect-for-humanity

Categorical Imperative
Kant holds that the fundamental principle of our moral duties is
a categorical imperative. It is an imperative because it is a command addressed to agents
who could follow it but might not (e.g., “Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.”). It
is categorical in virtue of applying to us unconditionally, or simply because we possesses
rational wills, without reference to any ends that we might or might not have. It does not, in
other words, apply to us on the condition that we have antecedently adopted some goal for
ourselves.
To serve the will as a principle Kant has two (2) versions of the categorical
imperative. The first version states “I ought never to act except in such a way that I could
also will that my maxim should become a universal law.” If one cannot wish or want that a
certain rule or maxim becomes the maxim of all, that it is not right to follow it. For instance,
one cannot will that "thou shalt steal" becomes a rule to be followed by all because others
may ultimately and steal one’s property. One cannot wish that “killing” becomes the maxim
of all because one would not of course wish that someone will come to kill that person. This
is the principle which motivates a good will, and which Kant holds to be the fundamental
principle of all of morality.

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 25

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 The second version is as follows: “Always treat humanity, whether in your own
person or that of another, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an
end.” Treating the another merely as a means to an end means equating an individual to a
mere instrument, a tool, an object which is cast aside after use, or can be sold or
exchanged when no longer needed, or has value only for as long as it is useful. Such act
makes one a "user." In contemporary philosophy, like Marcel or Buber's term, it is treating
the other as an IT, a thing. That's why they call the act as “thing-ization.” In the parable of
"Hope for the Flowers" by Trina Paulus, Stripe's climbing the caterpillar's pillar to reach to
top, where all that could be seen as a reward of climbing are other caterpillar's pillars, was
no other way than stepping on other caterpillars as a means of moving up higher.
Ought implies can. This means that If and only if we can or are free to act in certain
ways can we be commanded to do so. This is one more moral principle ascribed to Kant,
derived from two passages in one’s works. One is stated as follows: "For if the moral law
commands that we ought to be better human beings now, it inescapably follows that we
must be capable of being better human beings." Another one states as follows:
“The action to which the ‘ought’ applies must indeed be possible under natural conditions.”
The Situation Ethics author, Joseph Fletcher, used this maxim several times to illustrate
one’s situationism. In full statement the saying would be, “If I ought to do something, then I
can do it.” By way of logical analysis, the statement means, one's ability to do something is
a necessary condition for a person’s being obliged to do it. In Fletcher's terms, “you are
obliged to do only what you can where you are.”
“I can” may also be interpreted to mean one's degree of freedom, if by freedom we
understand as what Hornedo said about it, “the autonomous energy of being.” Since the
degree of one's freedom is the degree of one's responsibility. Hornedo says, the stuff of
freedom is energy or strenght. It follows that the degree of one's obligation is also the
degree of one's freedom. One can no more be responsible than what one can freely, and
voluntarily do.

Activity No. 2 Reflection Paper

Reflect on the principles set forth by Virtue ethics of Aristotle and the Rights theory
opined by Kant. Which mental frame would you follow and why? (25 pts.)

Rubric
Indicators Expert (25) Accomplished (18) Capable (12) Beginner (5)

Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs

subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written in Piece was written in Piece had little style Piece had no style
an extraordinary an interesting style and voice; gives or voice; gives no
style and voice; and voice; some information new information
very informative somewhat but poorly and very poorly
and well-organized informative and organized manner organized
organized
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical errors.
grammatical errors grammatical errors
is present

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 26

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
Activity No. 3 Interview: Virtue Ethics and Right Theory

Death is an inevitable part of human existence that all people must face, and for
most of us, the time and place of this death is unknown. But what if someone did know the
time and place? What if that someone was a doctor or a nurse, or the very person that was
going to experience death? Is euthanasia the way to go? Take for example an elderly,
eighty-year-old woman who was suffering from dementia. The woman was sent to a
nursing home and had expressed a want to possibly be euthanized when she thought the
time was right. Would her action be ethical if we judge it based on the frameworks of Virtue
Ethics and Right Theory?
To answer the question, you must select 5 adults and take their on the case
above. You formulate your question/s to elicit the needed responses. Educate them if you
must about virtue ethics and right theory for them to properly respond on your questions.
Present your findings via Powerpoint presentation. It is important that the answer of the
respondents must reflect the principles set forth by Virtue Ethics and Right Theory. Follow
the format below in presenting your output
I. Introduction – The introduction contains a topic sentence, a thesis statement,
then three to five reasons, details and/or facts supporting your research followed
by a conclusion. It should be relatively brief, concise and clear.
II. Analysis – This part contains the assertions (our points of view), examples
(evidence that supports these points of view), explanations (justifications of these
points of view), and significance (discussions of why these points of view matter).
This is not the transcript of the interview.
III. Summary – A summary states the main point of the text/interview as you see it.
A summary is written in your own words.
IV. Conclusion – This part contains the topic sentence. Fresh rephrasing of thesis
statement. Supporting sentences. Summarize or wrap up the main points in the
body of the essay. Explain how ideas fit together. Closing sentence. Final words.
Connects back to the introduction. Provides a sense of closure.
V. Proof of Interview – Show your evidence that you interviewed whether face to
face or through chat. Transcript of the interview must be presented as well.

Use the rubric as your guide.(50 pts)

Rubric
Indicators Expert (50) Accomplished Capable (25) Beginner (10)
(38)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an extraordinary in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
style and voice; style and voice; gives some new information
very informative somewhat information but and very poorly
and well-organized informative and poorly organized organized
organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical errors.
grammatical errors grammatical errors
is present

Activity No. 4 Legal Vs Moral right

In a 4 paragraph essay, compare and contrast a legal from a moral right. (20 pts)

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 27

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
Rubric
Indicators Expert (20) Accomplished Capable (10) Beginner (5)
(15)
Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
subject matter Improvement
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs
concepts to the Improvement
question
Quality Writing Piece was written Piece was written Piece had little Piece had no style
in an extraordinary in an interesting style and voice; or voice; gives no
style and voice; style and voice; gives some new information
very informative somewhat information but and very poorly
and well-organized informative and poorly organized organized
organized manner
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical
grammatical errors grammatical errors errors.
is present

DIRECTION: Read and analyze the question. Express and substantiate your thoughts
through a 3 to 5 – sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.

Indicators Expert (10) Accomplished (7) Capable (4) Beginner (2)

Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Wrong

subject matter
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Wrong
concepts to the
question
Quality Writing Piece was written in Piece was written in Piece had little style Piece had no style
an extraordinary an interesting style and voice; gives or voice; gives no
style and voice; and voice; some information new information
very informative somewhat but poorly and very poorly
and well-organized informative and organized manner organized
organized
Grammar Usage Virtually no Few spelling, A number of So many spelling,
and Mechanics spelling, punctuation, or spelling, punctuation, or
punctuation, or grammatical errors punctuation, or grammatical errors.
grammatical errors grammatical errors
is present

Case Analysis
Identify what ethical action a moral agent should do using the frameworks from
Natural Law of St. Thomas, Duty Ethics of Kant, and Value Ethics of Aristotle. (10 pts for
each ethical framework) Express and substantiate your thoughts through a 3 to 5 –
sentence essay. Use the rubric as your guide.

Indicators Expert (15) Accomplished (10) Capable (5) Beginner (2)

Discussion of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs Improvement
subject matter
Application of the Very Clear Clear Acceptable Needs Improvement
concepts to the
question
Quality Writing Piece was written in an Piece was written in an Piece had little style Piece had no style or
extraordinary style and interesting style and and voice; gives some voice; gives no new
voice; very informative voice; somewhat information but poorly information and very
and well-organized informative and organized manner poorly organized
organized

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 28

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Grammar Usage and Virtually no spelling, Few spelling, A number of spelling, So many spelling,
Mechanics punctuation, or punctuation, or punctuation, or punctuation, or
grammatical errors grammatical errors grammatical errors is grammatical errors.
present

Situation 1. Death Penalty by lethal injection (15 pts)

More than 70% of the world’s countries have abolished capital punishment in law or
practice. However, the death penalty continues to exist in many parts of the world,
especially in countries with large populations and those with authoritarian rule. In recent
decades, there has been a clear trend away from capital punishment, as many countries
have either abolished the death penalty or discontinued its use. (Source:
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international)
In the Philippines, it is a case of imposing death penalty, then abolishing it until the present
when the bill reinstating the death penalty stalled in the Senate in April 2017, where it did
not get enough votes.
What is an ethical stand on death penalty?
Aristotle’s Value
ethics

St. Thomas
Aquinas’ Natural
Law ethics

Kant’s Duty Ethics

Situation 2 – Organ Trade and Organ Trafficking (15 pts)

Here is a comment from a man who traded his kidney: “I can barely provide for my
wife and children,” “I just wanted to earn some money and give it to them.” He said he was
promised 120, 000 pesos, or about $2,800, for his kidney.

Was selling his kidney ethical?

Aristotle’s Value
ethics

St. Thomas Aquinas’

Natural Law ethics

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 29

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
 Kant’s Duty Ethics

Situation 3 – Abortion (15 pts)

Julie is 21 years old. She was impregnated by her boyfriend. If here parents come to know
of this, she claims they will disown her. She is expected to graduate at the end of the year
which is exactly the month of her expected delivery. Her boyfriend has abandoned her and
refuses to accept responsibility. Julie plans to have abortion which she thinks is the only
solution to her problem.

Is her plan of abortion ethical?

Aristotle’s Value
ethics

St. Thomas Aquinas’

Natural Law ethics

Kant’s Duty Ethics

Situation 4. Same sex marriage (15 pts)

James and Martin fell in love with each other. They planned to marry each other next year
in Thailand if the pandemic is over.

Is same sex marriage also known as gay marriage ethical or moral?

Aristotle’s Value
ethics

St. Thomas
Aquinas’ Natural
Law ethics

Kant’s Duty Ethics

This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 30

Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT
This document is a property of NONESCOST Module 2 | Page 31
Unauthorized copying and / or editing is prohibited. (For Classroom Use Only) Prepared by: Jude V. Tuanzon, LPT