GE1705

The Moral Agent

Culture in Moral Behavior

I. Culture: Some Definitions

It is commonly said that culture is all around us. Practically, culture appears to be an actual part of our
social life as well as our personality. For some, culture is a quality that some people have more than others:
how ‘cultured’ somebody depends on some factors like status, class, education, taste in music or film, and
speech habits. By attending symphonies, plays, operas, and poetry readings, some show that they
“appreciate culture” more than others. Sometimes, people visit places like museums or art galleries to
increase their so-called “cultural awareness.”

Culture refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs, values, attitudes, meanings,
hierarchies, religion, notions of time, roles, spatial relations, concepts of the universe, and material objects
and possessions acquired by a group of people in the course of generations through individual and group
striving.

Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols,
constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups, including their embodiments in artifacts; the
essential core of culture consists of traditional ideas and especially their attached values; culture systems
may, on the one hand, be considered as products of action, on the other hand, as conditioning influences
upon further action.

Culture is the sum total of the learned behavior of a group of people that are generally considered to be
the tradition of those people and are transmitted from generation to generation.

Culture in its broadest sense is cultivated behavior; that is the totality of a person's learned, accumulated
experience which is socially transmitted, or more briefly, behavior through social learning.

Culture is symbolic communication. Some of its symbols include a group's skills, knowledge, attitudes,
values, and motives. The meanings of the symbols are learned and deliberately perpetuated in a society
through its institutions.

Culture includes all the things individuals learn while growing up among particular group: attitudes,
standards of morality, rules of etiquette, perceptions of reality, language, notions about the proper way to
live, beliefs about how females and males should interact, ideas about how the world works and so forth.
We call this cultural knowledge.

II. Culture’s Role in Moral Behavior

A culture is a “way of life” of a group of people, and this so-called “way of life” actually includes moral
values and behaviors, along with knowledge, beliefs, symbols that they accept, generally without thinking
about them, and that are passed along by communication and imitation from one generation to the next.

In our society, we learn to distinguish objects such as cars, windows, houses, children, and food; recognize
attributes like sharp, hot, beautiful, and humid; classify and perform different kinds of acts; and even
evaluate what is [morally] good and bad and to judge when an unusual action is appropriate or
inappropriate (Manebog & Pena, 2016).

Many aspects of morality are taught. People learn moral and aspects of right or wrong from transmitters of
culture: respective parents, teachers, novels, films, and television. Observing or watching them, people
develop a set idea of what is right and wrong, and what is acceptable and what is not.

Even experientially, it is improbable, if not impossible, to live in a society without being affected by its
culture. It follows too that it is hard to grow up in a particular culture without being impacted by how it views

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 1 of 7
 GE1705

morality or what is ethically right or wrong. Anthropologically speaking, culture incudes moral values,
beliefs, and behavior is learned from other people while growing up in a particular society or group; is
widely shared by the members of that society or group; and so profoundly affects the thoughts, actions,
and feelings of people in that group that individuals are product of their culture and learning a culture is an
essential part of human development (De Guzman & Pena, 2016).

Social learning is the process by which individuals acquire knowledge from others in the groups to which
they belong, as a normal part of childhood. The process by which infants and children socially learn the
culture, including morality, of those around them is called enculturation or socialization.

III. Cultural Relativism in Ethics

Cultural relativism is perhaps the most famous form of moral relativism, a theory in ethics which holds that
ethical judgments have their origins either in individual or cultural standards. Moral relativism fundamentally
believes that no act is good or bad objectively, and there is no single objective universal standard through
which we can evaluate the truth of moral judgments.

Moral relativism submits that different moral principles apply to different persons or group of individuals.
Claiming that various cultures have distinct standards of right and wrong, it maintains too, that moral
standards change over time even in the same culture. Moral relativists view all moral norms as equally
true, and morals, as mere preferences.

When the recognized standard is a particular agent, the relativist theory is very much compatible with moral
subjectivism. If the considered basis is a given society, the relativist ideology is typically referred to as
cultural relativism.

Cultural relativism, the most dominant form of moral relativism, defines “moral” as what is “socially
approved” by the majority in a particular culture. It maintains that an act is ethical in a culture that approves
of it, but immoral in one that disapproves of it. Most cultural relativists place the notion of right in the
folkways and consider the tradition as morality's warrant.

Cultural relativists base their moral theory on the observation that societies fundamentally disagree about
ethical issues. What is deemed moral within one group may be totally despicable to the members of
another group, and vice versa. It is thus concluded that morality differs in every society as concepts of right
and wrong vary from the culture.

Advocates, moreover, believe that we cannot resolve the ethical differences among cultures using some
independent standard of evaluation. According to theory, there is no "universal truth" in ethics; that is, there
are no moral truths that hold for all peoples at all times. Various cultural codes or customs are all that exist,
and nothing more. Allegedly, there is no unconventional yardstick in ethics because every standard is
culture-bound.

Defining morality as a product of culture, the theory submits that no objective values and ethics is merely
a matter of societal convention. Advocates see themselves as open-minded as they consider other
cultures, not as “wrong”, but simply as “different.” For them, the moral code of the society has no special
status; it is merely one among many.

For instance, concerning fixed marriage, male circumcision, and excision, cultural relativism would say that
it is mere arrogance for people to try to judge the conduct of others practicing them. Relativists thus suggest
that we should adopt instead an attitude of tolerance toward any of the practices of other cultures.

IV. Filipino Moral Character: Strengths and Weaknesses

Filipino cultural morality, especially that which concerns social ethics, centers on ideally having a “smooth
interpersonal relationship” (SIR) with others. The definition of SIR in Philippine culture is principally

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 2 of 7
 GE1705

supported by and anchored on at least six (6) basic Filipino values: the concepts of (1) pakikisama, (2)
hiya, (3) amor propio, (4) utang na loob, (5) Filipino hospitality, and (6) respect for elders.

Pakikisama is having and maintaining 'good public relations.' This is usually being practiced to avoid clash
with other people or a certain group. It characterizes both a value and a goal that involves keeping good
feelings in all personal interactions and getting along with others, oftentimes, at all costs.

Just like other Filipino values, however, “pakikisama” can work either positively or destructively. To elude
open displays of conflicts, clashes, and confrontations, Filipinos, because of “pakikisama,” may submit to
group opinion, overgenerous praise on one another, using metaphorical language rather than candid
terms, concealing negative feelings or unhappy spirits underneath a pleasant demeanor, smiling even
when things go wrong, avoiding to say 'no,' and refraining from venting anger or losing temper. Filipinos
believe that attaining SIR is much important that we may give up clear but offending communications.

Hiya is described as a feeling of lowliness, shame or embarrassment, and inhibition or shyness which is
experienced as somewhat distressing. Integrally, it is related to the concept of 'face' and a concern with
how one appears in the eyes of others.

This unique Filipino concept encompasses fear to do bad things as it may damage one's reputation in the
sight of other people. A person's capacity for proper behavior with authority figures is a reflection of his/her
family upbringing and this fear of losing face. Too much “hiya,” nonetheless, may lead to having inferiority
complex and losing self-confidence.

Like “hiya,” the Filipino value of amor propio is derived from the concept 'face.' Although commonly
translated as 'self-respect' or 'self-esteem,' it has been characterized as the high degree of sensitivity that
makes a person intolerant to criticism and causes him/her to have an easily wounded pride. Concerning
this Filipino value, some observe that Filipinos learn to withstand a 'loss of face' in some situations,
particularly when they perceive themselves to be at fault but it is devastating to be publicly criticized,
insulted, belittled, or humiliated, or to lose one's self-respect".

The so-called utang na loob (debt of gratitude) is likewise a fundamental aspect of upholding group
harmony and relationships that demand the balancing of obligations and debt. This involves the concept
'reciprocity' or returning the received favor. The inability to repay the "utang na loob" usually makes a
person "walang uta na loob" or "walang-hiya." To avoid being dubbed as this, some Filipinos sometimes
do things that may be bad like voting for unworthy candidates just to receive a favor in return.

Filipino hospitality refers to the innate ability and trait of Filipinos to be courteous and entertaining to their
guests. Generally speaking, Filipinos are indeed hospitable as they are internationally known to be warm,
welcoming, and accommodating. This trait, however, makes Filipinos prone to being abused or maltreated.

Concerning respect to elders, Filipinos are not only respectful to elders, but also have unique ways of
expressing this respect. These include the use of “po” and “opo” when talking to elders and “pagmamano”
or the putting of the elder's hand to one's forehead. When excessive, nonetheless, respect to elders make
one dependent or irrationally obedient to parents or elders.

These Filipino social values are important to maintain harmony in Filipino relationships in social institutions
such as family, school, and community. The SIR, together with Filipino “pakikipagkapwa-tao,” have been
deemed as a central core of essential cultural traits that form and define an almost stereotypic Filipino
character and moral behavior.

V. Universal Values

Universal values are formed by implied behavioral standards that are necessary to live in a harmonious
and peaceful society. Values are associated with morality and ethics, which is difficult to transpose or refer
to the level of the group. In other words, all people have certain values that come from their interior and

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 3 of 7
 GE1705

guide their actions. Values can vary from one person to the another because humans do not think all the
same way. Universal values, however, have the particularity to be socially shared.

Universal values are acquired with family education and school because the process of socialization
involves that new generations internalize timeless concepts.

Basic Universal Human Values

The function of most of these basic values is to make it possible for every human to realize or maintain the
very highest or most basic universal core values of life, love, and happiness. The following are some of
the basic universal human values:

1. Happiness – In the ancient past, the founders of the big religions in the world have already taught
about the reward for a religious life by an afterlife in Paradise, Heaven, Nirvana, etc., to enjoy there an
ultimate and eternal happiness. And from this, we can understand that eternal happiness is the ultimate
value of all religious people, for nobody would like to go to any dull or miserable Paradise or so.
2. Peace – This has to be seen as a basic condition for freedom and happiness, for without peace there
cannot be real freedom. Wherever there is fight, thereat or hostility, our freedom and happiness are
inhibited or totally prevented.
3. Love – Love in a general sense can be best defined as feelings, or an experience or deep
connectedness or oneness with any other human being, and animal, plant, tree, thing, or unnamable.
Love can also be experienced as something far beyond any comprehension, and totally indescribable.
Love may happen to us when we are able to be open to the beauty and nature of other people, or to
the beauty and mystery of nature in general, or even beautiful things.
4. Freedom – This means the experience of unrestricted, and to be as much as possible independent of
the social pressure of others. A basic condition for happiness if however, the experience of an inner,
or mental freedom; freedom from all kinds of stress, worry, anxiety, problems, obligations and fears,
often directly or indirectly caused by the respectless egocentric or power-oriented mentality of many
others in our society.
5. Safety – This means free of threat, fear and survival-stress. Without safety, people tend to live out of
their individual survival instinct, and long term insecurity creates an egocentric survival-mentality. Also,
without safety, people in a society are burdened by emotional fear, helplessness, and anxiety.
6. Intelligence – This has been defined in many different ways to include the capacity for logic,
understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, reasoning, planning, creativity, and
problem solving. It can be more generally described as the ability to perceive or infer information, and
to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.
7. Human resect – The most basic principle of any social community is feelings of connectedness which
come out of our perception, empathy and awareness that the other human is basically as we are
ourselves. This creates trust and a friendly attitude towards the other.
8. Equality – This originated from old French/Latin words “aequalis”, “aequus”, and “aequalitas”, which
mean even, level, and equal. Thus the meaning of the word ‘equality’ used in political science
corresponds to the meaning from which it originates.
9. Justice – It is the proper administration of the law; the fair and equitable treatment of all individuals
under the law. In general, justice is needed to realize and maintain our highest human values of
freedom, peace, life, love, and happiness; and it can prevent or inhibit these highest human values.
10. Nature – Understanding our physical dependence of nature, and our awareness of being part of it are
needed to see the basic value of nature. Man is part of nature, and our very human existence is
dependent of nature and its ecology. Hence, our highest human values of life itself and freedom, safety,
peace love and happiness can only be realized in harmony with nature.
11. Health – World Health Organization (WHO) defined health as being “a state of complete physical,
mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence disease or infirmity.” In 1986, WHO also
said that health is a “resource of everyday life, not the objective of living. Health is a “positive concept
emphasizing social and personal resources, as well as physical capacities”. Also, there is a term known
as “mental health” and it describes either a level of cognitive or emotional well-being or an absence of
mental disorder.

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 4 of 7
 GE1705

Developing Virtue as Habit

Moral character refers to the existence or lack of virtues such as integrity, courage, fortitude, honesty, and
loyalty. To say that a certain person has a good moral character means that he/she is a good person and a
good citizen with a sound moral compass.

I. Moral Character and Virtues

The term "character" is derived from the Greek word “charakter,” which was initially used as a mark
impressed upon a coin. The word "character” later came to mean a distinct mark by which one thing was
distinguished from others, and then chiefly to mean the assemblage of qualities that distinguish one person
from another. This stress on distinctiveness or individuality tends to merge “character” with personality" in
modern usage. For instance, when thinking of a person's idiosyncratic mannerisms, social gestures, or
habits of dress, we might say that "he has personality" or that “he’s quite a character.”

The use in ethics of the word "character,” however, has a different linguistic history. At the beginning of
Book II of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle tells us that there are two (2) distinct of human excellence,
(1) excellence of thought and (2) excellence of character. His phrase for excellence of (mortal) character,
“ethikai aretai,” is often translated as "moral virtue(s)” and "moral excellence(s)." The Greek “ethikos”
(ethical) is the adjective cognate with “ethos” (character). So when we speak of a 'virtue' or an excellence
of moral character, the highlighting is not on mere distinctiveness or individuality, but on the blend of
qualities that make a person the ethically admirable individual he/she is.

Moral character, therefore, in a philosophical sense, refers to having or lacking moral virtue. If one lacks
virtue, he/she may have any of the moral vices or may be marked by a condition somewhere in between
virtue and vice, such as continence or incontinence.

Moreover, philosophers usually think that moral character traits, unlike other personality or psychological
traits, have an irreducibly evaluative dimension; that is, they involve a normative judgment. The agent is
morally responsible for having the moral character trait itself or for the outcome of that trait. Hence, a
certain moral character trait is a trait for which the agent is morally responsible.

II. The Circular Relation of Acts and Character

In the process of moral development, there is the circular relation between acts that build character and
moral character itself. Not all acts help to build moral character, but those acts which emanate from moral
characters certainly matter in moral development. Hence, there appears the apparent circular relationship
between individual acts and moral character. A person's actions determine his/her moral character, but
moral character itself develops acts that help in achieving either virtue or vice.

This goes to show that moral development should also be understood in the sense of human flourishing.
This flourishing is attained by the habitual practice of moral and intellectual excellence, or virtues. In the
context of developing morally which also brings about self-realization and happiness, acting in line with
virtues is acting by reason. Indeed, philosophers like Aristotle hold that the function of a human being
consists of activities which manifest the best states of his/her rational aspect, that is, the virtues.

Virtuous traits of character ought to be stable and enduring and are not mere products of fortune, but of
learning, constant practice, and cultivation. But we have to add that virtuous traits of character are called
excellence of the human being because they are the best exercise of reason, which is the activity
characteristic of human beings. In this sense, the Greek moralists believe that virtuous acts complete or
perfect human life.

Nonetheless, the Greek philosophers think that. It takes someone of good moral character to determine
with regularity and reliability what individual acts are appropriate and reasonable in certain situations and
that it takes someone of good moral character to decide with regularity and reliability how and when to
secure goods and resources for himself/herself and others. Aristotle thus states that, it is not easy to define

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 5 of 7
 GE1705

in rules which acts deserve moral praise and blame, and that, these matters require the judgment of the
virtuous person, that is, someone with good moral character.

III. Six (6) Stages of Moral Development

The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg is best known for his theory of stages of moral
development. In principle, he agreed with the Swiss clinical psychologist Jean Piaget's theory of moral
development but wanted to develop his ideas further.

Kohlberg employed Piaget's storytelling technique to tell stories involving moral dilemmas. In each case,
Kohlberg offered an option to be considered, for example, between the rights of some authority and the
needs of some deserving person who is being unfairly treated.

Kohlberg pinpointed three (3) distinct levels of moral reasoning each with two (2) sub-stages composing
his so-called Six (6) Stages of Moral Development. He believed that people could only pass through these
levels in the order listed. Each new stage replaces the kind of reasoning typical of the previous stage.
Some do not achieve all the stages.
Level Age Range Stage Nature of Moral Reasoning
Level 1: Pre- Seen in preschool Stage 1: People make decisions based
conventional Morality children, most Punishment on what is best for themselves,
elementary school Avoidance and without regard for others' needs
students, some junior Obedience or feelings. They obey rules
high school students, only if established by more
and a few high school powerful individuals; they may
students disobey if they aren't likely to
get caught. "Wrong" behaviors
are those that will be punished.
Stage 2: People recognize that others
Exchange of also have needs. They may try
Favors to satisfy others' needs if their
own needs are also met ("you
scratch my back, I’ll scratch
yours"). They continue to define
right and wrong primarily in
terms of consequences to
themselves.
Level II: Conventional Seen in a few older Stage 3: Good People make decisions based
Morality elementary school Boy/Girl on what actions will please
students, some junior others, especially authority
high school students, figures and other individuals
and many high school with high status (e.g., teachers,
students (Stage 4 popular peers). They are
typically does not concerned about maintaining
appear until the high relationships through sharing,
school years) trust, and loyalty, and they take
other people's perspectives and
intentions into account when
making decisions.
Stage 4: Law People look to society as a
and Order whole for guidelines about right
or wrong. They know rules are
necessary for keeping society
running smoothly and believe it
is their "duty" to obey them.
However, they perceive rules to
be inflexible; they don't

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 6 of 7
 GE1705

necessarily recognize that as

society's needs change, rules
should change as well.
Level III: Post- Rarely seen before Stage 5:Social People recognize that rules
conventional Morality college (Stage 6 is Contract represent agreements among
extremely rare even in many individuals about
adults) appropriate behavior. Rules are
seen as potentially useful
mechanisms that can maintain
the general social order and
protect individual rights, rather
than as absolute dictates that
must be obeyed simply because
they are "the law." People also
recognize the flexibility of rules;
rules that no longer serve
society's best interests can and
should be changed.
Stage 6: Stage 6 is a hypothetical, "ideal"
Universal stage that few people ever
Ethical reach. People in this stage
Principle adhere to a few abstract,
universal principles (e.g.,
equality of all people, respect
for human dignity, commitment
to justice) that transcend
specific norms and rules. They
answer to a strong inner
conscience and willingly
disobey laws that violate their
own ethical principles.

References
Bulaong, O., Calano. M., & Lagliva, A. (2018). Ethics: Foundations of moral valuation. Sampaloc, Manila: Rex
Book Store, Inc.
Cariño, J. (2018). Fundamentals of ethics. Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc.
De Guzman, J. (2017). Ethics: Principles of ethical behavior in modern society. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing
Houze, Inc.
Leaña, R. & Gubia A. (2018). Ethics for college students: CHED curriculum compliant. Intramuros, Manila:
Mindshapers Co., Inc.
Ocampo, M. (2018). Ethics primer: A young person’s guide to moral reasoning. Quezon City: Abiva Publishing
House, Inc.

02 Handout 1 *Property of STI

 [email protected] Page 7 of 7