Republic of the Philippines

Laguna State Polytechnic University

Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited

LSPU Self-Paced Learning Module (SLM)

Course Ethics
Sem/AY Second Semester/2023-2024
Module No. 3
Lesson Title Chapter III : Frameworks and Principles Behind Our Moral Frameworks
Week
11-13
Duration
Date April 9 – 26, 2024
This module discusses the meaning of ethical framework as well as the different principles in
Description
ethics. Considering different aspects, this will consider every decision. Ethical obligations are
of the Lesson
the same for all rational creatures and knowledge of what this obligation entails.

Learning Outcomes

Intended Students should be able to meet the following intended learning outcomes:
Learning 1. Distinguish among five ethical frameworks.
Outcomes 2. Cite some criticisms or question against virtue ethics
3. Differentiate what is legally right from what is morally right

Targets/ At the end of the lesson, students should be able to:

Objectives • Discuss the meaning of Ethical Framework
• Differentiate the different Virtues and Laws of Ethics
• Entail Love and Justice in decision making

Student Learning Strategies

Online Activities A. Online Discussion via Google Meet

(Synchronous/ You will be directed to attend in a 1-hour class discussion. To have Access to the
Asynchronous) online discussion, refer to this link: _______________

B. Learning Guide Questions:

1. What is Ethical Framework?
2. How do theories differentiate from one another in terms of ethics?
3. Why do we need to consider Ethical Framework?

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
Note: The insight that you will post on online discussion forum using Learning Management System (LMS) will
receive additional scores in class participation.

Lecture Guide

FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL

FRAMEWORKS

I. The Meaning of Ethical Framework

An ethical framework is a set of codes that an individual uses to guide his or her
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 do I ought
to do?" and Why do I ought moral life to do so"? So ethical frameworks serve as
guideposts in

The various dominant mental frames may be classified as follows: 1) virtue or

character ethics of Aristotle, 2) natural law or ethics of St. Thomas and others, 3)
Offline Activities deontogical and duty framework of Immanuel Kant, 4) utilitarianist, teleological and
(e-Learning/Self- consequentialist approach and 5) Love and justice framework. They will be
Paced) 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 he/she actualizes his/her potentials possibilities, the highest of which is
happiness. Happiness is the joy of self-realization, self-fulfillment, the experience of
having actualized one's potentials.

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

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, one must act such that
his/her maxim will be the maxim of all. This acting based on a maxim that can be the

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
maxim of all is a duty, an obligation of every man or woman. Acting out of duty
(deon) is acting out of good will or intentions. Treating man as an end not a means to
an end is acting with good will or intentions.

Utilitarianist, Teleological and Consequentialist 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 is that which is just and that which is loving. Justice giving what is
due to others (justice) while is giving even more than what is due to others.

II. Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics

Virtue or character ethics

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.

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

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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. If the person in question
has good character, and genuine motivation and intentions, he or she is behaving
ethically." The rightness or wrongness of one's action, or the goodness or badness of
one's personality depends on his 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 of 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 one has the potential or
possibility of becoming a musician, he tries 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 his nature
and realizes his full potential, he will 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 he/she is meant or in potency to be. It his/her obligation to develop his/her
talent and virtues. The highest good or end, telos, of a person is the fullness of his/her
self-development or actualization. The concomitant result of this development or

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
actualization of his/her 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 courage is cowardice and too much courage is
foolhardiness (MacKinnon, et al 2015)

Virtue Ethics in Other Traditions

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 his own philosophy
anything that is good conceived by his predecessors like Aristotle. But he enriched
their 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 men.

One more point regarding various potentials of man 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 man is being a speaking animal, meaning, his 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.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
The virtuous person did not inherit his/her virtues. Neither were these virtues simply
passed on to him automatically. His being a person of virtue is a product of deliberate,
consistent, continuous choice and practice of living the virtue or virtues

III. St. Thomas Natural Law Ethics

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
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 man an inclination to good, according to the nature of his reason, which
nature is proper to him; thus man 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 Theologiae 1-2 Question 94, Article 2)

Let us relate natural law to other kinds of law:

Rev. Charles Coppens, S.J. explains the various kinds of law according to St. Thomas:

A law decreed by Almighty God is a divine law; one established by man 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 laws. Now, between the natural law and
positive laws, there are these four points of difference: 1. 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 is 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

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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, his perfect beatitude and,
objectively, God Himself. God must direct His free creatures to their last end, hence
He commands them to observe the moral order and forbids them to depart from it...

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 his/ her 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, God Himself. To direct us to Himself, He 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 and in the we were St. Thomas synthesized
faith and reason. He 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 avoided. Second Premise: The act of taking someone's
property without his 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

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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 his/her 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)

IV. Kant’s Deontological Ethics: The Duty Framework

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, 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 (something over which we
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
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

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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,"
without 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 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 an 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.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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.

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
an employee his minimum wage is legal; but paying more than his minimum wage
because of care and concern of his 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 with good
intentions." Is good will enough?

Categorical Imperative: To serve the will as a principle Kant has two (2) versions
of the categorical imperative. The first version states "I never to act other than so that
I could 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 his property. One cannot wish
that "killing" becomes the maxim of all because he would not of course wish that
someone will come to kill him.

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 him to a mere

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
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 his 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 his 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 his 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 strength. 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 he can
knowingly, freely, and voluntarily do.

V. Utilitarianism : The Consequentialist Ethical Framework

Origin and Nature of the Utilitarianist Framework

Two British philosophers, namely, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, are known
to be the original advocates of utilitarianism, the former being considered the founder.
Bentham (1789), described this moral philosophy as follows:

Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and
pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do... By the principle of
utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action
whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the
happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other
words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and
therefore not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of
government.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
Similarly, John Stuart (1861) Mill's What Utilitarianism Is, opens with the following
paragraph:

The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals "utility" or the "greatest
happiness principle" holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote
happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is
intended pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of
pleasure.

In brief, utilitarianism as a moral principle is "the principle of utility or the greatest

happiness principle." It is also phrased as the principle of "the greatest good of the
greatest number." This is the quality (greatest good) and quantity (greatest number)
criteria. Among various options, that which is objectively good in quality and most
like by a majority is possibly the greatest good for the greatest number. An illustration
may be the passage of a minimum wage law. The quality of the law, its determination
as the greatest good, the best among other bills, is arrived through the debates and
discussions in Congress. Once the best version of the law is forged, it is put into a
vote. The vote may reflect whether or not it will be accepted and will benefit the
greatest number. Utilitarianism is a "form of consequentialism," focusing "on the
consequences of action." in contrast with deontology.

There are two versions, namely, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. "Act
utilitarianism: consider the consequences of some particular act such as keeping or
breaking one's promise." "Rule utilitarianism: consider the consequences of some
practice or rule behavior for example, the practice of promise-keeping or promise-
breaking." (p. 101) Whichever, whether act or practice of rule, if they produce good
consequences, the act or the practice of the rule would be right.

Simply put, what is ethical according to the consequentialist, utilitarianist ethical

framework? That which is ethical is that which gives pleasure and happiness as a
consequence. That is what the song "In heaven there is no beer; that's why we drink
beer here" implies. That which is unethical is that which gives pain and unhappiness.
That which is ethical is that which produces the greatest good (happiness) for the
greatest number.

The Consequentialist Framework

The following describes the application of the consequentialist framework:

In the Consequentialist framework, we focus on the future effects of the possible

courses of action, considering the people who will be directly or indirectly affected.
We ask about what outcomes are desirable in a given situation, and consider ethical
conduct to be whatever will achieve the best consequences. The person using the
Consequences framework desires to produce the most good.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
For Bentham and Mill, avoid pain, pursue pleasure. That is what it means to be ethical.
What kind of pleasure is morally preferred? Mill asserts intellectual pleasure. So it is
not physical pleasure as expressed by the song of the alcoholic "In heaven, there is no
beer; that's why we drink beer here." Mill wrote:

It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates

dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig is, of a different opinion,
it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the
comparison knows both sides. (Mill, 1907)

VI. The Love and Justice Framework

The principle of love

There are three well-known concepts of love originating from the Greeks, namely,
agape or charity, erotic or passionate sexual encounter, and philia, the affection
between friends. Love as a moral framework is the agapeic. Agape is the love
principle preached by Jesus Christ. What Christ did as narrated in the New Testament
are all acts of love. Feeding the hungry, giving drinks to the thirsty, healing the sick,
rendering service to those in need. In general, as 'St. Thomas defined it, agape is
"willing the good of another." It is the act of sharing, or giving more than what is just
because justice is just the minimum of love. In the language of contemporary thinkers,
this is love as "affirmation of the other's being," "being-with-others," "being
conscious of the other's presence."

In Joseph Fletcher's situation ethics, agapeic love is absolute norm, the absolute
framework for the determination of the right thing to do or wrong to avoid. In moral
reasoning, it is asked, is it an act of loving? Fr. Bernard Haring, the advocate of ethics
of personalism, was also quoted as saying, "(t)he heart of moral life is charity to one's
neighbor."

Justice and Fairness: Promoting the Common Good as a Moral Framework

a. Social Justice

Social justice is equal access to wealth, opportunities, and privileges within society.
Hence, promotion of social justice is equivalent to promotion of the common good. It
may also be said that promotion of the common good is promotion of social justice.
The common good is explained as follows:

In ordinary political discourse, the "common good" refers to those facilities whether
material, cultural or institutional that the members of a community provide to all
members in order to fulfill a relational obligation they all have to care for certain
interests that they have in common. Some canonical examples of the ommon good in
a modern liberal democracy include: the road system; public parks; police protection

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
and public safety; courts and the judicial system; public schools; museums and
cultural institutions; public transportation; civil liberties, such as the freedom of
speech and the freedom of association; the system of property; clean air and clean
water; and national defense. The term itself may refer either to the interests that
members have in common or to the facilities that serve common interests. For
example, people may say, "the new public library will serve the common good" or
"the public library is part of the common good."

In other words, it may be said that when the government improves public property
and services, and develops the natural resources, it simultaneously promotes equal
access to wealth, opportunities and privileges within society. Farm to market roads,
expressways, railways, etc. will allow every individual the opportunities to bring their
products to the market. Free public schools will allow all children the opportunity to
go to school. This means social justice.

For Plato, justice means giving what is due by doing one's own function. In Plato's
Republic, there are three classes of people, namely, the craftsmen, soldiers and rulers
or guardian. The virtues expected to be inherent in each class are correspondingly
temperance, courage and wisdom. Each member of its class must acquire and
maintain the virtue in their class. Craftsmen should be temperant in all aspects of their
lives, temperant in acquiring, using and keeping their wealth; temperant in their
ambition. If they become ambitious and hypocritical by aspiring to become soldiers
and pretending to be soldiers, injustice arises because they won't be able to secure the
country. A policeman is just when he does his job, providing security of his people
with courage. He becomes unjust when instead of patrolling the streets to drive bad
elements, he is going around soliciting tongs. When he does not do his job by sleeping
while on duty, then a lot people will suffer from the unrestrained criminalities. A
guardian is a philosopher king. He possesses all the virtues of temperance, courage
and wisdom. He has the duty of wisely studying and identifying solutions to the
problems of peace and order, equitable distribution of wealth, etc. If he is not
temperant, i.e. he is number one in graft and corruption, if he is a coward and has no
will power, or political will to introduce what is best for the people, and if he is not a
wise president, then injustice results and the people suffer.

b. Justice as the Minimum Demand of Love

William Luijpen, referred to justice as "the minimum demand of love." To do justice

is already an act of love, the minimum demand of love. Which means that love is
more, gives more than what is just. Mathematically, if love is 100 percent of being
for others, then justice may just be only 10 percent. A just employer pays the
minimum wage to employees, a loving employer, pays more than the minimum wage,
even when it hurts. If there are two people lost in the cold and one has two jackets
and the other has none, justice demands that one should share the other his other
jacket, the least that he can do, but that is just the minimum demand of love.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
c. Distributive Justice

Distributive justice is "justice that is concerned with the distribution or allotment of

goods, duties, and privileges in concert with the merits of individuals, and the best
interests of society." The following have features of distributive justice:
a) Egalitarianism is the doctrine of political and social equality. "No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall any person
be denied the equal protection of the law." This is not equalization in terms of
quantity; it is equalization in terms of entitlement to due process of law and equal
protection of the law..

b) Capitalist and free-market systems let the law of demand and supply follow its
course. Ideally it is a self-regulation process. It lets any excess of demand be regulated
by the limits of supply, and lets any excess of supply be regulated by the limits of
demand. This means no artificial control or regulations. It is supposed to arrive
naturally at its own equilibrium. Free market is supposed to be an equalizer. During
waiting time for natural course of things, public necessities or utilities may demand
immediate intervention which should be more of an exception than the rule.

c) Socialists follow the rule, "from each according to his ability, to each according to
his needs." This requires collective ownership of the means of production, distribution
and exchange with the aim of operating for use rather than for profit. Possible
downside of this system is there is no motivation for expansion and growth.

d) Taxation is government's getting a part of what its people earn in order have money
to spend for public services, operating and maintaining public places or properties,
for people's use. It is practically demanding from taxpayers a minimum of justice, to
make the enjoyment of the wealth at least more equitable although not equalizer. It is
a government interference with private property, more or less compelling people to
give a share from the fruits of their labor, a way of compelling diffusion of wealth.

e) Protection and Preservation of Public Welfare - The government has

constitution-granted power to govern, to make, adopt and enforce laws for the
protection and preservation of public health, justice, morals, order, safety and security
and welfare. The Constitution also gives a government the right to take private
property for public use under the doctrine of eminent domain.

f) Property for Public Use-The government has a Constitution granted power to take
private property for public use with just compensation. Citizen's ownership of
property is not absolute. For the sake of the public, the government exercises this
power to equitably distribute opportunity for the use enjoyment of wealth or property.

Justice as moral framework, be it social or distributive justice, states that

whatever promotes justice is the morally right thing to do.

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
The Better Moral Framework: Garner and Rosen's Synthesis

Richard T. Garner and Bernard Rosen (1967) tried to identify the most acceptable
criterion of the rightness or wrongness of action, the goodness or badness of character
or of personal life. For these authors, the best framework is a synthesis of the
teleological and deontological framework. The rightness or wrongness of action
and the goodness or badness of character or trait is a function of (meaning it
depends on) not only the end, object, or consequences of applying a rule (rule
utilitarianism) or doing an act (act utilitarianism), but also other bases like one's
sense of duty and good will (rule or act deontology). This means one arrives at an
assessment of the rightness or wrongness of an act, goodness or badness of a character
or trait by considering not only the consequences (affecting not only the self but also
others) of applying a rule or doing an act, but also considering other factors like the
situation or conditions involved

In summary, what is ethical based on the various ethical frameworks? What are the
questions to ask? Will it actualize my potentialities, my abilities? (Aristotle's virtue
ethics). Is the act in accordance with Natural Law? (St Thomas). What are the
consequences of doing the act? (Utilitarianism). Will it benefit myself (egoistic
utilitarianism) or others (altruistic utilitarianism). Do I see it as my duty or obligation?
(deontological). Is it my duty to follow the rule (rule deontology) or is it my duty to
do the act (act deontology). Is it a rule I can follow or an act to do to the limits of my
ability where I am at a particular time? (situation ethics). Does my principle of love
demand a creative response requiring me to go beyond the limits sacrificing myself
even unto death? (Love ethical framework) Does it promote justice, the common
good? (Justice ethical framework).

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
ENGAGING ACTIVITIES

Engaging Activity 1

Answer the following questions.

1. What is ethical or who is an ethical person according to Aristotle’s virtue
ethics?
2. Cite virtue ethics-based actions taken by parents, teachers, and other persons
in authority in support of children’s moral development.

Engaging Activity 2

To which kind of pleasure has your life been directed? Were there times when
you had to embrace pain for something you considered more important? Do you
regret having gone through this pain?

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited

Performance Tasks

Performance Task

Take a look on 5 ethical frameworks - Aristotle (virtue ethics), St. Thomas Aquinas (natural law), Kant
(deontology, duty) Bentham and Mill (utilitarianist, consequentialist), love and justice. Identify what is
ethical to do in a given situation below from the point of view of the ethical framework that was
discussed.

Situation 1- Abortion

Julie is 21 years old. She was impregnated by her boyfriend. If her 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?

From Aristotle's Value ethics group
From St. Thomas' Natural law ethics group
From Kant's Duty ethics group
From Stuart's and Mill's utilitarianist and consequence ethics group
From the love and justice group

Situation 2 – Is same sex marriage also known as gay marriage ethical or moral?
From Aristotle's Value ethics group
From St. Thomas' Natural law ethics group
From Kant's Duty ethics group
From Stuart's and Mill's utilitarianist and consequence ethics group
From the love and justice group

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME
 Republic of the Philippines
Laguna State Polytechnic University
Province of Laguna
ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Level I Institutionally Accredited
Understanding Directed Assess

Learning Resources

Part 5. References
a. Ruben A. Corpuz, Brenda b. Corpuz (2020), ETHICS, Lorimar Publishing Inc.
b. Bulaong, Oscar. B., M.J. T. Calano, A.M. Lagliva, M. N.E. Mariano, J.D. Z. Principe (2018).
Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation. REX Book Store, Quezon City, Philippines
c. Mackinnon, Barabara & Andrew Fiala. (2015). Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues,
Concise. Eight Edition, Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning
d. Reyes, Ramon C. (2003). The Relation between Ethics and Religious Belief: The Moral
Dimension: Essays in Honor Ramon Castillo Reyes: Office of Research & Publications,
Ateneo De Manila University, Quezon City, Philippines

e. Singer, Peter. (2016). One World Now: The Ethics of Globalization. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press

ETHICS – J.UNIFORME