ETHICAL THEORIES AND

PRINCIPLES
 Define Utilitarianism
and Deontological
Theory..

Discern moral actions

using Utilitarianism and
Deontological Theory.
Key Learning Competencies: Justify moral actions in
sample situations using
the theories.
 Deontological
Theory vs.
Utilitarianism

20XX presentation title 3

What is the measure of a
morally good act? Is it good
because it satisfies rules? Or it
depends on the consequence of
an action?
From the basic definitions of important
terms in Ethics down to the role of culture
in regulating and influencing our moral
norms, we begin this module by
discussing two of the most often-
conflicting ethical theories, namely,
Deontological theory and Utilitarianism.
One measures good act on how well
one follows rules based from reason
and how the dignity of human person
is respected while the other is
grounded on the benefits of the
consequences of a taken course of
action.
Activity

Directions: The following are Moral Dilemmas, these

are situations in which a difficult choice has to be made
between two courses of action, either of which entails
transgressing a moral principle. Answer as honest as you
can, explain your choice and justify why you think your
course of action is morally permissible.
1. THE TROLLEY PROBLEM (MRT VERSION)
• Suppose you are at MRT Station and you notice that a train
is on the loose and is about to hit the five workers who are
unaware of what is about to happen. You find yourself near
the lever that will divert the train on another track to save
the five workers. However, you get caught of the sight of
one unaware worker who will be directly hit should you
ever pull the lever. Will you save the five workers at the
expense of the life of one?
Explain your answer and your considerations for making
that choice.
2. THE TROLLEY PROBLEM WITH A TWIST
• You are on a footbridge over the trolley tracks and you can see that the
one approaching the bridge is out of control. On the track back of the
bridge there are five people; the banks are so steep that they will not be
able to get off the track in time. You know that the only way to stop an
out-of-control trolley is to drop a very heavy weight into its path. But the
available sufficiently heavy weight is a fat man, also watching the trolley
from the footbridge. You can shove the fat man onto the track in the path
of the trolley, killing the fat man; or you can refrain from doing so and
thus, letting the five men die.
• Explain your answer and your considerations for making that choice.
3. SHOULD BATMAN KILL JOKER?
As the Caped Crusader, Batman is a hero
or a vigilante for some, who possesses a
moral compass. He never kills his villains.
One of his greatest opponent is Joker,
who, no matter how many times Batman
beat him and confine him in the Arkham
Asylum, he always finds ways to escape
and kill as many people as he could. As
long as he is alive, he will never stop
killing. Batman, for so many times had his
chances within his power to stop the Joker.
He did everything but not killing him.
Does Batman morally responsible for the
killings done by Joker? Is he “morally
pure because he does not kill? Or morally
dirty because he refused to do what needs
to be done?”
If you are thinking of sacrificing the life of one
person for the sake of many, you are perhaps
going to the direction of being a utilitarian. But
if you think that one life is equally valuable to
the others thereby making it difficult for you to
decide whose life you are going to save and
sacrifice, perhaps you are adhering to the
deontological ethical theory.
oThese are just some of the examples that you will
encounter as the course progresses. The challenge to make
the ethical choice in matters of life and death situations or
any difficult instances is never easy. Having the
understanding of the ethical theories is not a guarantee that
we will come up with the right choices all the time but it
will give us ways of evaluating the rightness and
wrongness of the course of actions we have done and what
we are about to do.
Deontological Theory
oTwo of the most conflicting moral theories are
Deontological Ethics and Teleological
Ethics. Deontology comes from the Greek
word “deon” meaning “duty”. As an ethical theory, it
claims that moral actions are based on our duties and
obligations from independent rules.
oObedience to these rules is morally acceptable
while non-adherence means immoral behavior
of the moral agent. The rightness and
wrongness of the act are independent of its
results which is why this theory is also known
as “non-consequentialism”. 
oOne of the champions of this theory is the
philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804).
In his Kantian Ethics, this German
philosopher primarily believes that
morality is a constant to humanity
regardless of culture or religions that have
varied interpretations of ethics.
o. For him, knowing what is right or wrong is a
by-product of reason and not by any other
influence such as a divine being. He primarily
believes in goodwill as the highest form of
good and it is goodness in itself as dictated by
reason independent from desires, feelings, or
any end goal in mind.
oA person of goodwill is the one who acts with the sense of
duty or obligation and with autonomy, meaning
voluntarily and not by impulse, follows moral maxims or
general moral principles generated by reason regardless of
how difficult a situation is, and with high regard to humanity
itself.  Thus, for an act to be moral, it must be with
proper reasoning, acted out with autonomy, and by always
keeping respect to the persons themselves (Alexander &
Moore,2021)
oTo explain further his point, Kant stated two
imperatives from the maxims of human conduct.
Imperatives are to be understood as a command
of reason as to why a person should or ought to
act. These imperatives are the Hypothetical
Imperative and the Categorical Imperative.
oThe Hypothetical Imperative refers to non-
moral actions to which our reason orders one
to achieve its ends or results intended. Being
hypothetical, the person’s actions are directed
towards the desired ends conditionally
(Kerstein, 2013).
oSuch that if one wishes to pass the exams, one
must study. If one wishes to be the best gamer,
then, s/he must practice. Notice the “if” and
“then” in the statements of hypothetical
imperatives. This means only that you do things
under the condition of achieving particular
goals.
oMeaning, you may or may not do it. The choice is
yours. Another thing, in hypothetical imperative,
Kant, being a non-consequentialist, argues that
actions such as “studying” or “practicing” are
accepted not because of its possible results but
because the actions are prudential or reasonable ways
as a rule for “passing” or becoming the “best gamer”.
oBut even if one did not pass the
exams or did not become the best
gamer, the value of “studying” and
“practicing” remains acceptable.
oIn contrast, the Categorical Imperative is never
conditional. In morality, according to Kant, an
ethical action must be done unconditionally, in all
circumstances and at all times and it is done for
the sake of a morally good maxim in accordance
to Categorical imperative (Vleeschauwer,2016).
But first, one must determine if the maxim or the
principle behind the action is morally good.
Hence, he proposed the following formulations:
       1. The Principle of Universalizability

oThis states that one should “Act only on that maxim

through which you can and at the same time will that
it should become a universal law” (Kolb,2008).Thus,
before we do something, we should think first “What
will happen if everyone should do what we are about
to do?”
For instance, you failed to study before a major exam and
you think of cheating as your course of action. You are
about to act in the maxim “Better to cheat than to repeat”.
Such maxim will not pass the categorical imperative
simply because reason can tell us that if everybody
cheats in the class, learning, honor, and integrity are
defeated contrary to the value of the teaching-learning
process. Not to mention, cheating is a form of deception
(daya!) which makes it immoral. What will happen then if
“dayaan” will become the universal maxim and everyone
is required to follow it?
2. “The End-in-itself”.
o This formulation states that one should “Act to use humanity, both in
your personal and on the person of every other, always at the same time
as an end, never simply as a means”. This means that one should not
reduce another person as mere objects as a means for a certain purpose.
Respect the other with dignity fit to a human person. Thus, for Kant, one
should always keep in mind that to act morally is to keep the other
person’s honor and dignity intact. Do good to others for the sake of the
person himself and not for his or her practical value for you to satisfy
your selfish intent (1980). 
oThus, this is what Kant means when we talk about
an act to be moral, it must be with proper
reasoning, acted out with autonomy, and by
always keeping respect to the persons themselves
at all times and circumstances. 
Teleology: Principle of
Utilitarianism
oTeleology, from the Greek word “telos” which means “end” refers
to a moral system that determines the value of a moral act based on
its consequences. Also known as consequentialism, this theory
holds that an action is right if its consequences are beneficial and
wrong if it produces more harm than benefits. In contrast to Kant,
this theory rejects the nature of the act or the duty behind it as
determinants of moral action(Britannica,2008).
oThe most influential of this theory is Utilitarianism. It
states that the moral value of an action depends on how
users are its consequences. If the results are favorable, it is
moral and if it is damaging it is immoral. Rather than sheer
reasoning, the utilitarians believe that the grounds for the
moral value of our action must be something intuitive,
hence, from the desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain
(Driver,2014).
oHedonistic by principle, utilitarianism equates pleasures to
goodness and the ultimate inclination of all is happiness.
We do all things, ultimately, for the sake of happiness as
pleasurable and we ought to avoid what inflicts pain.
However, this theory is not egoistic or self-seeking but one
that is “other-regarding” which maximizes overall
happiness for the greatest number of people.
 oTo put it simply “Everyone should act always to produce the
greatest good for the greatest number of people”, though
sometimes it means lesser happiness for you than others
would have. This is known as the Principle of Utility. The
two greatest proponents of this are Jeremy Bentham and John
Stuart Mill.  Bentham is a quantitative utilitarian for he
measures the worth of pleasures and quantifies them
according to their intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity,
fecundity, purity, and extent where pain and pleasure are
shared (p.128) also known as the “Hedonistic Calculus”. 

20XX presentation title 33

oWhile John Stuart Mill is a qualitative hedonist or
utilitarian as he proposed a distinction between higher
and lower pleasures. Lower pleasures are mostly physical
satisfactions while the higher pleasures are pursuits of
happiness via intellectual capacity. Thus, happiness is not
just physical pleasure and absence of pain but could be as
deeper and truer as intellectual pleasures could
give.  There are two types of utilitarianism: Act
Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism 
o Act Utilitarianism “is when the Principle of Utility is
applied directly to every alternative act in a situation of
choice. The right act is then defined as the one which
brings about the best results, or, the least amount of bad
results.”(pp.127) For instance, in the movie “Imitation
Game”, Professor Allan Turing, the father of the digital
computer, was able to invent together with his colleagues,
the first-ever digital computer that was capable of
predicting the next attacks of the Nazis.
oBut then, they did not stop all of the attacks to prevent
the Nazis from suspecting they have solved the
Enigma, their machine that holds codes for their next
attacks. Turing and his colleagues prevented the
attacks that would strategically win and ended the war.
In turn, lives were sacrificed. They practically “played
like gods” on deciding who was going to live and who
were to die. 
oWhile Rule Utilitarianism is when the principle of
utility is used to decide the validity of rules of
conduct. For instance, if the death penalty is seen as
beneficial to the greatest number of people as a
punishment to prevent corruption and promulgated as
a law, saving the life of a corrupt politician can be
seen as immoral for it will be against the rule of law.  
                “End Justifies the Means”
vs. “End does not Justify the Means”

o These two ethical theories are the two conflicting theories that have
sparked debates in the study of morality. On one hand, those who
adhere to the Deontological theory focus on the “means” as the
ethical barometer of a particular moral act experience. No matter how
good are the results of your action, if the “means” to attain its “ends”
are rationally and intrinsically unethical and against the laws and
duties of the human person, it will remain as morally unacceptable.

20XX presentation title 38

oThus, the “end does not justify the
means”( Laakasuo & Sundvall,2017) . While on the
other hand, the utilitarian’s focus is on the ends of
the means. Regardless of how the means are, what
matters are the perceived good results of the human
actions beneficial to the person or group. Thus, the
“end justifies the means”. 
oA classic example of this is the case of
Robin Hood or at least those people who
act just like him. He steals money from
the rich people and corrupts the
government and distributes them to the
poor.
o For a deontologist, the act remains unethical. But for a utilitarian, justice is
served to the people. Another example is when students preferred to cheat
than study for the exams as they think of it as a more practical and more
efficient way of obtaining passing results. If cheating was not caught and
yielded passing results, then, the action was morally acceptable. It will only
become unacceptable when, after all of the cheating sprees, the students
still failed and got caught eventually. So, what are you? A Deontolgist? Or a
Utilitarian?  
o 
 Virtue Ethics and
Circular Relationship
of Act and Character
20XX 42
 o           Virtue (Birtud in Filipino) is excellence of
moral character. As mentioned, a moral character can
only be developed through the consistent practice of
good habits. It is not just habits such as drinking tea
or eating fruits but actions with dispositions and
mindsets proper to the nature of goodness from a
particular virtue.

20XX presentation title 43

 oTo develop a virtue is a “matter of
degree” which involves the consistency
of repeating the particular acts towards
the perfection of a virtue, the assent to
reason, and mastery over one’s emotion
(Hurthouse, Et.al, 2018).
20XX presentation title 44
 oThis is why virtuous people are praiseworthy
because virtues are “(1) difficult to develop, (2)
corrective of natural deficiencies, and (3)
beneficial both to self and society” (pp.93).
Thus, the person who is honest for selected
occasions, because it is the “best policy” or
afraid to get caught by authorities cannot be
considered virtuous.

20XX presentation title 45

 oA virtuous person is someone who avoids cheating and
dishonesty because s/he believes and values the truth
and displays this disposition over time. Base on these
perspectives, Virtue Ethics then, defines a moral person
as someone who develops virtues. The ancient Greeks
considered wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice as
the four “cardinal virtues”. While Christianity teaches
faith, hope, charity, and love. 

20XX presentation title 46

 o Aristotle(384-322 BC).in his Nicomachean Ethics, he
stated that rather than the Ideal Form of Good, the
ultimate end/ the summum bonum or the supreme good of
the human person is Eudaimonia or happiness (well-
being and human flourishing). This can only be achieved
by living a virtuous life. Rather than adhering to any
rules, a person is moral and virtuous if s/he remains good
and exercises good deeds. But what does being virtuous
mean?

20XX presentation title 47

 oBeing virtuous means doing the right thing at all
times. Aristotle believes that if a person possesses
virtue (good habits), being good comes out
naturally even in the cruelest situations. A virtuous
person reasonably acts neither excessively nor
defectively but in the middle. This is his so-
called The Golden Mean where anything in excess
or lack is considered a vice. 

20XX presentation title 48

EXCESS (VICE)---VIRTUE/GOLDEN MEAN---DEFICIENT (VICE)

20XX presentation title 49

oFor instance, the virtue of courage. What would a
virtuous person do if s/he encounters a person being
robbed? For Aristotle, a virtuous person would assess
the situation if it is favorable in his ability and power to
stop the robber without putting his life (and others) in
danger. To dive into the situation without thinking is
recklessness (excess) but to ignore the situation is
cowardice (deficient).
20XX presentation title 50
oThus, a person of courage would either help the
person immediately in favorable conditions and
would seek assistance from authorities in
unfavorable situations but never do anything.
Courage is finding the right way to act. 

RECKLESSNESS (EXCESS) -----COURAGE-------COWARDICE (DEFICIENT)

20XX presentation title 51

 Consequently, honesty is finding the right way, to tell the truth.
It is in the middle of brutal honesty and failing to tell the truth. It
means knowing how to tell hard truths, break bad news gently or
render constructive criticisms. Likewise, being generous is in the
middle of miserliness and extravagance. It is not generosity
when you give drugs to an addict or treating your friends using
the money for more important purposes. Thus, it is giving while
you can and when to realize when you cannot. 

20XX presentation title 52

 These and other virtues can only be learned if doing good
becomes a skill or a way of living. Guided
by phronesis or practical wisdom, a virtuous person is guided
to know what is in excess or deficient and decide the right
amount of action to do. This can only be developed through
consistent practice, training, and the cultivation of virtues.
Knowing and avoiding what is deficient and excessive and
doing what is moderate is practical and applicable.
20XX presentation title 53
THOMAS AQUINAS A 13th-century Catholic saint, he
was the most prominent figure of philosophy and
theology in the Medieval Ages and the one responsible
for Christianizing the Virtue theory of Aristotle. He
believed, like Aristotle, that the ultimate end is happiness.
However, as a theologian, ultimate happiness is not
something achievable in this life but with the next in the
presence of God.
20XX presentation title 54
Aquinas believed that all actions are directed towards
immediate ends which points to happiness as the ultimate
end. Like Aristotle, this is only achievable through
consistent practice of virtue. Virtues are either acquired
or infused. Acquired virtues are those which are
willfully chosen and practiced consistently while Infused
virtues are divine gifts instilled to us naturally by God.

20XX presentation title 55

He mentioned at least two kinds of infused virtues
– Moral Virtues and Theological Virtues. The
Moral Virtues are Prudence, Fortitude,
Temperance, and Justice. To make all of these
virtues directed towards God and eventually
achieve happiness, they are complemented by the
Theological Virtues of Faith, Hope, and Love.
20XX presentation title 56
While Aquinas’ Thomistic Ethics is anchored to the
Aristotlean Virtue Ethics, he departs from his
predecessor when he founded his ethical theory on the
grounds of Natural Law which makes morality objective
and universal. He also provided the fundamentals for the
ethical evaluation of ethical action such as the object/act,
the intention, and the circumstance.

20XX presentation title 57

oHe emphasized that the goodness or badness of
the act lies in the intention, the character of the
act itself, and its consequences. In addition, he
provided the rationale foundations for theological
virtues which guide human moral conduct to
holiness and in a deep relationship with God.

20XX presentation title 58

Overall, the Virtue Theory of these philosophers emphasizes the
effects of good and bad actions on one’s person and character.
The question “Anong ginagawa ng ginagawa mo sa iyo?” can be
answered given the ethical theories posited by these
philosophers. For Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, actions turned to
habits and virtues or vice lead to the development of moral
character. For Aquinas, this could go as far as holiness and
sanctification which leads to a relationship with God, the
ultimate end, and happiness. 
20XX presentation title 59
Overall, the Virtue Theory of these philosophers emphasizes the
effects of good and bad actions on one’s person and character.
The question “Anong ginagawa ng ginagawa mo sa iyo?” can be
answered given the ethical theories posited by these
philosophers. For Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, actions turned to
habits and virtues or vice lead to the development of moral
character. For Aquinas, this could go as far as holiness and
sanctification which leads to a relationship with God, the
ultimate end, and happiness. 
20XX presentation title 60
 The Circular Relationship of Act and Character
oLet us begin by defining the word “character” which is from the
Greek term “charakter” which was usually mean as a “mark
impressed upon a coin”(Homiak,2019). Eventually, it was used as
a distinct mark to distinguish one thing from the other as well as
combinations of qualities that define a person or simply put
“personality” in our age. Usually, it pertains to patterns of
behavior or gestures that mark the person’s identity and
eventually becoming known for those actions. (De Guzman & Et
al.,p.38)
20XX presentation title 61
 oTo speak of moral character is to speak of a
person’s morally admirable “blend of
qualities”. More specifically, moral character
refers to “having or lacking moral virtue”.
The lack of virtue of a person could mean
possessing vices, negative habits which
hampers the person to attain moral excellence,
or simply put “bad moral character”.
20XX presentation title 62
 oUnlike psychological and personality traits,
moral character entails the moral responsibility of
the agent. The moral actions by which the agent
develops as moral excellence (or moral vices) are
subject to evaluative dimensions of normative
judgments. In simplest terms, moral actions as
excellence must be subjected to the measure of
moral development or human flourishing. 
20XX presentation title 63
 oNobody becomes morally excellent or decadent
overnight. It is a product of the consistent
practice of moral actions. It is not a one-time
big-time act nor an occasional or selective
situation. For instance, if one says “Patience is a
virtue”, a person cannot be said as someone who
possesses the virtue of patience if s/he easily
gets mad or annoyed by unfavorable situations.
20XX presentation title 64
 oThus, the key to developing moral excellence, or acquire
moral decadence, is the consistency of repeated
particular action that develops consequently as a habit.
If the person develops good habits, s/he acquire virtue,
vices if bad. Either way, the person’s combination of
possessed virtues or vices will constitute his character.
Notice the importance of the act to develop one’s moral
character. A consistent practice of a moral or immoral
act creates the person’s moral character. 
20XX presentation title 65
 oReciprocally, moral character empowers
the person to act in situations that demand
to be virtuous or vicious. Such that on one
hand, a “patient man” acts patiently with
ease and chooses the right courses of action
in line with the virtue of patience.

20XX presentation title 66

 While on the other hand, a person who did not
exercise acts under the virtue of patience finds
being patient with difficulty under the
circumstances that demands him/her to be so.
Hence, the person either s/he has good or moral
character, developed in his/herself a kind of moral
disposition to do either virtuous or vicious actions
with “regularity and reliability” (p.39)
20XX presentation title 67
 With continuous and consistent practice to develop
good habits, our moral character is strengthened and
fortified to be fit in conditions where our moral
compass is tested. But we can only do that if we have
the Moral Courage to perform or translate into
actions what we know as a morally good act “even at
the risk of inconvenience, ridicule, punishment, loss
of job or security or social status, etc.”(p.75).

20XX presentation title 68

 Knowing the good rational moral act is different from
executing it. It takes an amount of “willpower” to
practice a morally upright act consistently regardless
of the present situation and foreseen negative results.
Both moral courage and will empower us to the right
action which may include listening to our conscience,
the inner voice that speaks to us which affirms or
denies our moral decisions and actions.

20XX presentation title 69

 We must develop and strengthen our
moral courage and willpower by the
discipline of the mind, consistent
practice of good acts, and avoiding
occasions that could hinder our
moral development.
20XX presentation title 70
 In this time where most of the people turn their focus on
“one time big time”- “post na yan” acts to be famous
and create a superficial image in the cyber world, we
are being reminded to turn our gaze on moral actions in
our real world that needs real attention beginning from
small acts of charity consistently within our homes and
social community. In this way, we will truly develop
genuine moral character from simple, moral, and
rational acts that matter. 
20XX presentation title 71