Module 2 Readings

 4 Basic and Key Concepts in Ethics

B.1. What is Ethics

Ethics is derived from the Greek word “ethos,” which means a
characteristic way of acting which also refers to the principles or standards
of human conduct. Ethics is also called moral philosophy that involves
systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong
behavior; thus, ethics is sometimes referred to as the study of morality. It
is said to be a science insofar as it is a body of systematized knowledge
arranged with its accompanying explanation. In terms of content, it is not
to be classified as a course in science. Ethics as a practical science means
that it consists of principles and laws that are applied in daily living. In this
sense, ethics is not a course taken for the sake of contemplation; rather, it
is a study taken for application in a person’s everyday course of action.
Ethics then is an applied knowledge.

As a philosophical science, ethics is not a technical course or a

laboratory study. Devoid of human experience, it presents and deliberates
its subject matter “in the light of its deepest principles by means of human
reason alone.” There are various ways of defining and discussing Ethics: 1)
Ethics is a subject matter with content. It is a discipline with a body of
knowledge; 2) Ethics is a process of decision-making because it is a
thinking skill leading to actions that we perform coupled with
accountability; 3) Ethics refers to well based standards of right and wrong
that prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights, obligations,
benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. It refers to standards that
impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder,
assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that
enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. Ethical standards
include values relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to
freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are
adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent
and well-founded reasons; 4) Ethics refers to the study and development
of one's ethical standards. Since feelings, laws, and social norms can
deviate from what is ethical, it is necessary to constantly examine one's
standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-founded. It is a
continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct
and striving to ensure that we live up to standards that are reasonable
and solidly-based; and, 5) Ethics involves the study and application of
“right” conduct. When people ask themselves, “What ought I to do?” they
are concerned of their actions that might be wrong or are having difficulty
working through the moral or values dimensions and from these, they are
asking an ethical question.

B.2. What Ethics is Not

Before we understand the moral from the non-moral standards, it is
important to look into some misinterpretations and misconceptions of
what Ethics is all about. Such misinterpretations and misconceptions can
obliterate the real essence of Ethics as an important branch of Philosophy.
Raymond Baumhart, a sociologist, asked some people, "What does ethics
mean to you?" Among their replies were the following: "Ethics has to do
with what my feelings tell me is right or wrong;" "Ethics has to do with my
religious beliefs." "Being ethical is doing what the law requires;" "Ethics
consists of the standards of behavior our society accepts;" and, "I don't
know what the word means." These replies might be typical of our own.
The meaning of ethics is hard to pin down, and the views that some
people have about ethics are shaky and dangerous.

Ethics is not the same with psychology but is a companion to it.

Ethics is not merely attributed to observations and scientific interpretations of
behaviors like what psychology does. The ethicists dig deeper on the reason why an
action is such without necessarily quantifying and measuring human behaviors.
However, psychology admits that it developed and progressed in the course of time
due to the contribution of philosophy, a companion to its scientific investigations of
human behaviors.

Ethics and Feelings

Like Baumhart's first respondent, many people tend to equate ethics
with their feelings. But being ethical is clearly not a matter of following
one's feelings. A person following his or her feelings may recoil from doing
what is right. In fact, feelings frequently deviate from what is ethical.
Several students fall into the trap of engaging in pre-marital sex because
they allow their feelings or emotions to dominate their rationality.

Ethics and Religion

Most religions, of course, advocate high ethical standards. Yet if ethics
were confined to religion, then ethics would apply only to religious people.
But ethics applies as much to the behavior of the atheist as to that of the
saint. Religion can set high ethical standards and can provide intense
motivations for ethical behavior. Ethics, however, cannot be confined to
religion nor is it the same as religion.

Ethics is not the same with religion but speaks about it. While
religion seeks the meaning of human existence through spiritual nourishment with
Creed, Code and Ceremonies, ethics dwell on the reason or existence of religion. This
explains why we have philosophy of religion. However, since religion uses reason to
explain faith like theology, then

Ethics and Law

Being ethical is also not the same as following the law. The law often
incorporates ethical standards to which most citizens subscribe. But laws,
like feelings, can deviate from what is ethical. What is legal is not
necessarily ethical; but what is ethical is necessarily worth legalizing. For
instance; gambling, divorce, abortion, and the like can be legalized in
some nations, but they do not necessarily mean that they are ethical.

Ethics and what Society accepts:

Being ethical is not the same as doing "whatever society accepts." In
any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical. But
standards of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical. An entire
society can become ethically corrupt. Nazi Germany before, particularly
during the time of the holocaust, is a good example of this. If being ethical
were doing "whatever society accepts," then to find out what is ethical,
one would have to find out what society accepts. To decide what I should
think about abortion, for example, I would have to take a survey of
American society and then conform my beliefs to whatever society
accepts. But no one ever tries to decide an ethical issue by doing a survey.
Finally, the lack of social consensus on many issues makes it impossible to
equate ethics with whatever society accepts. Some people accept abortion
but many others do not. If being ethical were doing whatever society
accepts, one would have to find an agreement on issues which does not,
in fact, exist.

Ethics is not the same with morality but is closely linked to it. While
moral standard or norm of action is fixed and already set, ethics dwells on
the use of reason. It is because we cannot limit philosophy from mere
norms of conduct. However, ethics is identical to moral science or moral
philosophy based from the Latin term mos (nominative) or moris (genitive)
which also means custom, or “traditional line of conduct.” It is from this
root word that the word moral or morality is derived. The term morality is
synonymous with the word ethics in etymological meaning; however,
ethics deals more on the principles and laws on the morality of human
acts by providing the person knowledge that s/he may know, what to do
and how to do it. In other words, ethics provides the guides to the
performance of an act.

Ethics is not the same with culture but is closely connected to it.
Ethics is not only about etiquette or manners like the GMRC (Good Manners and Right
Conduct) we used to learn. Learning variety of cultural norms is not a guarantee of
ethical evaluation. This explains why ethics is not only researches in cultural
anthropology or sociology that studies behaviors of a social group, an organization or
a community. However, in studying society and culture, we have social philosophy to
explain the

B.3. Importance of ethics

For some people, the importance of ethics only comes as a result of
encountering unethical conduct. But if Ethics is inculcated into one’s
system, it is being carried into one’s bloodstream and to the day-to-day
activity of the individual. Ethics is an important requirement for human
existence. It is our means of deciding a proper course of action. Without it,
our actions would be aimless and not properly rooted. When a rational
ethical standard is taken, we are able to correctly organize our goals and
actions to accomplish our most important values. Any blunder in our
ethical values will reduce our ability to be successful in our endeavors.

Ethics is important because of the following reasons: 1) It serves as a

guide towards our goals, rather than just allowing our lives to be
controlled by self-serving motives, accidental occurrences, customs,
feelings, or our impulses; 2) It helps us deepen our reflection on the
ultimate questions of life and help us think better about the concerns of
morality; 3) It offers us a wider perspective on how to live our life to the
fullest, taking into consideration that we do not have the luxury of eternal
time in this world; 4) It reminds us of our duties, responsibilities, and
accountabilities to ourselves, to our fellowmen, to our society, to our
nation, and to the world in general; 5) It encourages us to examine our life
and honestly evaluate how we are responding to the challenges and
demands of this contemporary time; 6) It increases our capacity to
perceive and be sensitive to relevant moral issues that deserve
consideration in making our choices that will have significant impact on
ourselves and on others; 7) It polishes, strengthens and brings out to the
fore our value priorities in life which will make us better and happy
individuals; and, 8) It helps us realize and become what we ought to be
in this challenging, yet beautiful, world.

B.4. Recognizing Terms in Ethics

There are ethical terms to be distinguished in relation to human acts:
It is important to consider Moral, Amoral, and Immoral actions.

Moral actions or events are those which require the goodness of the
object chosen, the intention or the end in view, and of the circumstances
together. Moral actions are deemed to be good as one performs the moral
rules or codes of the society.

Immoral actions or events are those actions or areas of interest where

moral categories do apply and are considered to be evil, sinful, or wrong
according to the code of ethics. For examples: consciously telling a lie;
graft and corruption; cheating during examinations, gluttony, taking a sip
of water fully aware that there is hemlock in it (suicide), and many more.

Amoral actions or events are those actions or areas of interest exhibiting

indifference. At times, these are manifested in the absence of knowledge,
freedom and voluntariness on the part of the acting agent. For examples:
a young child who speaks bad words, an Aeta who just came from the
mountain obstructs a city traffic, a person innocently taking a sip of water
but the water contains a hemlock, or a man accidentally entering the
ladies comfort room.

C. Moral versus Non-Moral Dilemmas

A moral dilemma is a situation in ethics where the human person is to
choose between two possible alternatives and the options become limited.
In decision-making, even when you do not want to choose to act in a
situation, that is still considered a choice. It is impossible then that there is
no possible option. Thus, whatever is the decision a person makes, it is
expected for that person to stand and be responsible with the decision
s/he takes whatever the consequences could be. To decide is to be
responsible. Moral dilemma happens when we cannot make a distinction
between what is a good act from an evil act. When we encounter question
of ethics like, is it moral to attend my class even if I am sick? Is it
necessary to avoid killing someone when my life is in danger? Is waking up
early necessary when am always late in going to school? Is it important to
maintain my diet even if my doctor advised me not to? To avoid moral
dilemma, it is important to distinguish the good act from a bad act.

A morally good act requires the goodness of the object chosen, of the
intention, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the
action, even if the object is good in itself like for instance in the case of
praying and fasting in order to be seen by men. The chosen object can by
itself vitiate or destroy an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts,
such as bribery, robbery, fornication, and the like, which are always wrong
to choose, because choosing them entails an evil act.

It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by

considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances
which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves,
independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit
by reason of their object; such as blasphemy, murder, adultery, and the
like. One may not do evil so that good may result from it. According to St.
Thomas Aquinas, an evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good
intention. A good intention does not make the action or behavior that is
intrinsically disordered, good or just. The end does not justify the means.
Thus, the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a
legitimate means of saving the country.

D. Distinction of Action:
Human acts are the fundamental foundation of morality. These acts
which are under the control of the will and therefore done knowingly and
willingly; not acts which happen by accident, as falling, or by nature, as
growing, but acts performed by choice, that is, after deliberation and
decision. They are imputable to their human author to the extent that he
has knowledge of his own activity and its import, and to the extent that he
has freedom of election. The moral or ethical character of the human act
lies in this, that it is freely placed with knowledge of its objective
conformity or nonconformity with the law of rational nature.

As elaborated by ethicists, human acts are characterized by the following:

1) Acts which are free and voluntary; 2) Acts done with knowledge and
consent; 3) Acts which are proper to man as man; because of all animals,
he alone has knowledge and freedom of the will; 4) Acts which are under
man’s control, and for which he is responsible for its consequences; and,
5) Acts which man is the master and has the power of doing or not doing
as he pleases. On the other hand, human acts should be differentiated
from ordinary ‘acts of man’. Acts of man are bodily actions performed
without deliberation and in the absence of the will. For instances, the
blinking of our eyelids, our breathing patterns, sneezing, and the like are
considered as acts of man. In many ways, we are accountable to our
actions but somehow our responsibility is lessened unlike human acts that
absolutely require moral obligation and responsibility.

Human Act requires moral responsibility that is derived from a person.

If responsibility is a coined term of “response” and “ability” then the
ability to response is important in ethics because “no one can give what
s/he does not have.” It is expected for young people studying ethics to
respond to the problems of society today based on their capacities. As
such, we can apply the old saying, “if there’s a will, there’s a way.” For
example, the right to vote in local and national election, participate in any
assembly, joining school organizations, becoming choir members of the
Church, joining professional associations, and other organizing activities,
are simple ways that young people can do to become responsible
individuals. If a person achieves an ethical attitude, it presupposes that
s/he takes moral responsibility to society. A personal conviction of what is
“right and wrong” becomes a social duty and such duty must be put into
action. This makes ethics an axiology, or what philosophy calls praxis,
the emphasis on the practical application of ethical ideas.

There are two significant considerations of ethics; the Ethics of Being

and the Ethics of Doing. In the Ethics of Being, the emphasis is on the
“character development” which involves the integrations of virtues, values
and personhood; it is looking into the foundation of actions who is the
“good person” while the Ethics of Doing focuses not only the goodness of
the person but on the ability of the person to put into action his/her ethical
conviction (Fr. Ramon Coronel & Fr. Paul Van Parijs, CICM, Bioethics,
1996). It is not enough simply to be contented in believing to be a good
person while forgetting to do good actions; on the other hand, it also not
good just to think that you are doing good while you forget that you are
first and foremost a good person. There is the need to harmonize the two
considerations of ethics; hence, you do a good act because you believe
and think that you are a good person capable of doing good. Both
considerations are inseparably related to be better person – intellectually
mature, psychologically stable, socially involved, spiritually nourished and
economically well-off; and, to do good acts.

Our ethical responsibility is reflected in the following scheme:

The fundamental bases of morality start with the use of reason,
exercise of human freedom, willful, voluntariness, and deliberate act.
Ethical principles and theories are guidelines for human actions for which
we can only talk about moral responsibility. It is because we cannot be
totally responsible to our actions that we are not aware of. We can only be
responsible to our actions that we are aware of, freely acting on them, and
voluntarily responding to the circumstance we are engaged in. With our
moral conviction arises our moral responsibility.

E. Three-fold Elements of Human Acts

There are three essential elements to consider any action to be a
human act. Without one of these elements, the action cannot be
considered as a human act. These are knowledge, freedom of the will,
and voluntariness.

Knowledge is awareness or being conscious of one’s actions including

its possible
consequences. The act of knowing is always consciousness of something
which is inevitably linked to the subject, who is the knower. For example,
an insane person and a three-year old child are not liable for their actions
since they are not capable of acting with proper knowledge. Their actions
can never be considered as immoral. College students and professionals
are expected to be possessors of knowledge; thus, they cannot claim
excuses for their immoral actions. They are liable for the consequences of
their actions. According to Aristotle, knowledge is the first element of
ethical practice. This knowledge provides a framework for
deliberating about the most appropriate technique(s) by which
the good can be attained. But, it should be noted that; although,
knowledge is a requirement for considering an act to be a human act,
being knowledgeable or being aware of what is ethical or moral is not a
guarantee that the person is already considered as an ethical or moral
person. It is not enough for an individual to know what is good.
What really count are his good acts.

Freedom of the Will. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, this is the

power which human beings have in determining their actions according to
the judgment of their reasons. This always involves a choice or an option
of whether to do or not to do a certain action. Without this freedom of
choice, then responsibility and/or liability on the part of the individual
would be meaningless. Insane people who have no control of their minds
and children who have no idea of what they are doing or are not free to do
or not to do, are not responsible for their actions. Matured people, college
students and professionals are expected to be free from doing or not
doing; thus, they are responsible or liable for their actions.

Voluntariness. This is an act of consenting or accepting a certain

action whether it is done whole-heartedly, half-heartedly, or non-
heartedly. According to Aristotle, the moral evaluation of an action
presupposes the attribution of responsibility to a human agent; thus,
responsible action must be undertaken voluntarily (Nicomachean Ethics
III). Agapay presented four modes of voluntariness. These are perfect,
imperfect, conditional, and simple voluntariness.

Perfect Voluntariness is actualized by a person who is fully aware

and who fully intends an act. The person, under perfect voluntariness, is
fully convinced of his action including its consequences. A politician who,
in his right mind, engages in graft and corruption is considered to be
acting with perfect voluntariness. Imperfect Voluntariness is seen in a
person who acts without the full awareness of his action or without fully
intending the act. A drunken person who, acting irrationally, jumps from a
ten-storey building is said to be exhibiting an imperfect voluntariness.
Conditional Voluntariness is manifested by a person who is forced by
his circumstances beyond his control to perform an action which he would
not do under normal condition. A freshman college student who is forced
by his parents to enroll in a course which is against his will is showing a
conditional voluntariness. Simple Voluntariness is exhibited by a person
doing an act willfully regardless of whether he likes to do it or not. It can
either be positive or negative. It is a positive simple voluntariness when
the act requires the performance of an act. For examples: Studying one’s
lesson; participating in class discussions; engaging in sports, and so on. It
is a negative simple
voluntariness when the act does not require the performance of an act.
For examples: Remaining silent or choosing to be alone; deciding not to go
to a drinking spree; avoiding to take illegal drugs; and so on.

F. Determinants of Morality
Freedom makes man a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, man
is, so to speak, the master of his acts. Human acts, that is, acts that are
freely chosen in consequence of a judgment of conscience, can be morally
evaluated. They are either good or evil. The morality of human acts
depends on the object chosen; the end in view or the intention; and the
circumstances of the action. These are the factors to consider in making
ethical judgement in determining the morality of human acts.
Object Chosen: This is a good toward which the will deliberately
directs itself. The chosen object resides out the acting subject. The object
chosen morally specifies the act of the will, insofar as reason recognizes
and judges it to be or not to be in conformity with the true good. Examples
of Good Chosen Objects: nutritious foods; hard-earned money or wealth;
educational books and films; and the like. Examples of Bad Chosen
Objects: Forbidden drugs; Pornographic materials; Leakages for
examinations; and others.

The Intention: This is a movement of the will toward the end. It is

concerned with the goal of the activity. The end is the first goal of the
intention and indicates the purpose pursued in the action. It aims at the
good anticipated from the action undertaken. Intention is not limited to
directing individual actions but can guide several actions toward one and
the same purpose; it can orient one's whole life toward its ultimate end.
For example, a service done with the end of helping one's neighbor can at
the same time be inspired by the love of the Divine Being as the ultimate
end of all our actions. One and the same action can also be inspired by
several intentions, such as performing a service in order to obtain a favor
or to boast about it. The intention resides in the acting subject as contrast
to the object chosen. Because it lies at the voluntary source of an action
and determines it by its end, intention is an element essential to the moral
evaluation of an action.

The Circumstances: These, including the consequences, are

secondary elements of a moral act. They contribute to increasing or
diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human acts. For instances: the
number of people killed; the amount of money being stolen; the number of
trees cut by loggers; the regularity of the graft and corruption done by
politicians; the number of times a lie is spoken; or, the number of times a
student cheated. They can also diminish or increase the agent's
responsibility. For examples: acting out of ignorance or fear of death; acts
done because of habit; choosing between two or more evils in a certain
situation; being forced to do something against one’s will; and so on. It
should be noted that circumstances of themselves cannot change the
moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an
action that is in itself evil.

In Summary: A morally good act requires the goodness of the object,

of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the
action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting "in
order to be seen by men"). The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an
act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that
it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of
the will, that is, a moral evil. It is therefore an error to judge the morality
of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the
circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.)
which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves,
independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit
by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and
adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it. The object,
the intention, and the circumstances make up the three "sources" of the
morality of human acts. The object chosen morally specifies the act of
willing accordingly as reason recognizes and judges it good or evil. "An evil
action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention" (cf. St. Thomas
Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). A morally good act therefore requires the
goodness of its object, of its end, and of its circumstances together. There
are concrete acts which are always wrong to choose, because their choice
entails a disorder of the will, i.e., a moral evil. One may not do evil so that
good may result from it.