ROMBLON STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTANCY

ODIONGAN, ROMBLON

LEARNING MODULE

in

(GE 8)

By: Marimie C. Arreza

ROMBLON STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ACCOUNTANCY
ODIONGAN, ROMBLON

_______________________________________________________
STUDENT LEARNING MODULE
________________________________________________________
Course Title : Ethics
Course Code : GE 8
Credit Units : 3
Pre-requisite : None
Instructor : MARIMIE C. ARREZA
Contact Number : 09618133977
Email Add : [email protected]
______________________________________________________________________
______________

INTRODUCTION

Ethics deals with the principles of ethical behavior in modern society at the level
of the person, society, and in interaction with the environment and other shared
resources. Morality pertains to the standards of right and wrong that an individual
originally picks up from the community. The course discusses the context and principles
of ethical behavior in modern society at the level of individual, society and in interaction
with the environment and other shared resources. The course also teaches students to
make moral decisions by using dominant moral experience: [a] agent including context-
cultural communal and environment [b] the act, [c] reason or framework [for the act].
The course includes the mandatory topics on taxation.

The world has changed rapidly. This course seeks to provide students a
fundamental understanding of the major issues in ethics. It will try to shed light on
answering some of the hard questions such as:

 What kind of person am I? Good or bad? Right or wrong? Honest or

dishonest? Virtues or vices? Heaven or hell?
 Who really am I? Can I cope to change? Can I keep the world safe for
future generation? How the social environment today influences my
decision making for being just.
 What constitutes any person or action being good, bad, right or wrong and
how do I know it?
 Should we use principles, or laws or rules, or should we let each situation
decide our morality?
 What I ought to do? How I ought to live my life?

Some of the topics in this subject include the following:

o Introduction
o Difference between Moral and Non-moral standards
o The Filipino Way
o Universal Values
 o How is moral character developed?
o The 7 step of moral reasoning model
o The difference between reason and will
o Moral theories and mental frames and why they are important
o Utilitarianism
o Justice and Fairness: mandated topic: taxation
o Globalization and ethical challenges
o Mellinials and Fillinials: ethical challenges and responses

Module 1 (Introduction)
Learning Outcomes:
By the end of this module, the students will be able to:
 know the relevance of ethics in today’s education, and the place of ethics in the
life of the contemporary man;
 understand the different meaning of ethics and its difference from morality; and
 Compare ethics with other sciences that deal with man.

TO DO LIST:
Read lectures:
Please watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x23T-ovydIY

What is the place of ethics in the life of the contemporary man?

If ethics is a philosophy of action, how can it affect the life of man of today?
It is a backbone of human existence
It serves as vertebrae that gives support to the whole life direction of man
Without ethics-There will be a total collapse of the whole human person and entire
human society.
Kant It is man’s rational duty
Mill and Bentham Because of pleasure and happiness
Fletcher It depends upon the situation
Lawrence Kohlberg Because of our fear of punishment
Saint Augustine and Aquinas Because there is God
Aristotle, Plato and Socrates Because of happiness
Mohammed Because of Allah

Life itself will become a stinking mess.

Friedrich Nietzsche an atheist philosopher believes that God has nothing to do with
man’s quest for goodness. For Nietzsche, man could do good even without God.
Why really do we want to be moral?
Because we want to win the good opinion or impression.

Because we want to refrain from troubles, or consequently punishment

that would result from immortality.
Because we are persons who exist in the collectivity of persons.

Etymologically, ethics derived from the Greek word “ethicos” or that which
pertains to “ethos”, the English translation of which is “custom” or “character”. From this
ethics is taken to mean as philosophical science that deals with the morality of human
conduct or human acts.

There are four divisions or disciplines in philosophy

Descriptive or speculative Discipline in philosophy that posits the question:
what is the nature (essence) of reality.
(metaphysics- philosophical)
Normative Discipline of philosophy that posits the question:
what is good and what is bad. (moral philosophy)
Practical Discipline in philosophy which reflects upon truth in
relation to action. (logic)
Critical Discipline in philosophy that posits the questions:
what is truth? (epistemology)

With this we can now say that ethics is a normative philosophical science that
deals with the goodness or badness, the rightness or the wrongness of human acts.
 Ethics- from Greek word “ethos” which means custom.
Ethics as normative philosophical science, is a theoretical science of good and bad,
rights or wrong actions.
Morality- From Latin word “mos or moris” which means custom. Morality actualizes the
theory.(doing ethics)
This means that ethics does not actually guarantee that man will be moral or
good. One can only become moral (good human person) when one applies ethics.
Ethics versus Morals comparison chart
ETHICS MORALS
What they are? The rules of conduct Principles or habits with
recognized in respect to a respect to right or wrong
particular class of human conduct. While morals also
actions or a particular group or prescribe dos and don'ts,
culture morality is ultimately a
personal compass of right
and wrong.
Where do they Social system - External Individual-internal
come from?
Why we do it? Because society says it is the Because we believe in
right thing to do. something being right or
wrong.
Flexibility Ethics are dependent on Usually consistent, although
others for definition. They tend can change if an individual’s
to be consistent within a beliefs change.
certain context, but can vary
between contexts.
The Gray A person strictly following A Moral Person although
Ethical Principles may not perhaps bound by a higher
have any Morals at all. covenant, may choose to
Likewise, one could violate follow a code of ethics as it
Ethical Principles within a would apply to a system.
given system of rules in order "Make it fit"
 to maintain Moral integrity.
Origin Greek word "ethos" Latin word "mos" meaning
meaning"character" "custom"
Acceptability Ethics are governed by Morality transcends cultural
professional and legal norms
guidelines within a particular
time and place

Postulates of Ethics
Postulates are proven facts that need to be presupposed.
Ethics need not prove them; instead it takes them as they are because they are
already proven by other science. In moral philosophy, there are 3 basic postulate:
The existence of God
The existence of intellect and free will; and
The spirituality and the immorality of the soul
MAN IN THE CONTEXT OF HIS NATURE
Man is basically a being, a creature, whose destiny is to live in two world.
 the spiritual and
 the physical or material world.

Man is destined to live in spiritual world because he is summoned by God

to live with Him in his Kingdom; and man is destined to live in the world since he
is a part of the world and besides, he lives among entities in this world., viz.
plant. Animals, minerals ,etc.

Man is the only recipients of a substantial unity of a material body and

spiritual soul.
Human = refers to anything exclusively pertinent to man. • Nature = from Latin
word “natus” means “born ‘ or “nature” which means “to be born” or “being born”.
Nature- is the ultimate operation of reality.
Human Nature – refers to anything exclusively human which man
intrinsically possesses right at his birth. Human can be characterized as
universal and static. Universal pertains to all born humans and static because it
remains as it is in every man from birth(womb) to death (tomb).

. Three fold-level of Human Nature

Somatic level – refers to the body substance, constitution, or stuff of man and
secondarily to the bodily structure and color of man which are conditioned by
man’s culture and environment.
 Behavioral level – refers to the mode of acting of every man.

Attitudinal Level – refers to the mental reaction of man to a given stimulus.

Attitudes can grow or stunted. Lies at the heart of every man’s uniqueness, this
level caters to individual attitudes toward life. Human nature changes only in
terms of its accidental constituents, i.e. the growth of the human body, the
change or development of one’s attitude, and the change of behavior which
appropriate to the human milieu.

Ethics compared with other Sciences that deal with Man

Psychology and Ethics
Psychology is a descriptive philosophy that treat of man’s intellect, free will and
conduct. (How does man behave?) Ethics guides man’s intellect to know moral truths
and man’s will to translate his intellectual knowledge of moral truths and actions. (“Why
does man ought to behave”)
Ethics and Sociology
Sociology deals with human relations. Human relations however, presuppose
proper setup or order in society. These proper laws postulate the moral values or order
of right and wrong action which is ethics.
Ethics and Logic
Logic is a branch of philosophy that deals with man’s correct thinking. Ethics
deals with man’s correct doing and correct living.
Ethics and Anthropology
Anthropology deals with man’s origin and the behaviour or primeval man. Ethics
deals with the principles of right conduct as applied to all men at all times.
Ethics and Moral Theology
Moral philosophy (ethics) and moral theology presuppose God’s existence; they
too have the same end: i.e., the attainment of man’s ultimate goal: GOD. They differ in
their bases. Moral philosophy bases its principles on reason, while moral theology
bases its principles on Faith or Divine Revelation and reason.
Morality and Human Existence
1. Man is the only moral being by virtue of the following reasons:
 Man is being of action
Man has intellect
Man has will
2. Man as animal (and rational being)
As an animal
Knowledge : Senses
Appetency : Instinct
As Rational
knowledge : sense and intellect
Appetency : instinct and will
Human Person- Exists in this world as a physical and intellectual being.
It means that a human soul comes before the human body. This is
explained in Plato's doctrine of collection. This doctrine states three essential
themes:

1.) That eternal and absolute ideas existed before we were born.
2.) That these ideas were continually reflected or recollected with a human
soul.
3.) That the human soul therefore existed before we were born

Makes us the highest of all existing beings. This is an ability of a human

person that needs to be developed. Because the human person at birth is not
equipped with skills necessary for survival, he needs various skills including the
training of the human mind in order to continually exchange dialogue with his
environment and to cope with the different challenges of life.

3. Man as a rational animal

It is his being rational that makes man man. It is only in this context that man is
to be understood as a moral being or moral agent. It is man’s being rational that makes
him a unique grade of animal. Being rational, man’s knowledge does not stop in the
senses since his sensual knowledge (perception) is further “processed” by his intellect
in the form of abstraction. Man therefor does not just perceive things but also analyses,
assess, criticizes and intellectualizes things.
4. Intellect Compare with will
INTELLECT WILL
Wisdom Highest Goal Virtue
Truth Goal Good
Thinking Function Doing
Knowing Purpose Choosing

The Gifts of Intellect and Free Will

God has implanted in our souls the gift of “intellect” and the gift of a “free
will,” – that is, the gift of intelligence, and the gift of making choices – and God
wants us to use these gifts in his service. God desires that our intellects should
be truly enlightened and instructed so that it will have a clear knowledge of who
God is. God desires that we continually grow in the knowledge of his love,
power, goodness, justice, and mercy. And when we have attained the knowledge
of these things, the Christian will know how to adore God, how to trust God, how
to follow God’s instructions, and how to thank God for all things and in all
circumstances. We demonstrate and prove that we believe by what we choose to
do. We proclaim God’s revealed truth to others not only by our words, but also by
our actions. Our acts of love toward others imitate God in certain ways because
he not only told us that he loved us, but his Son died on the cross to prove it.
(Deacon Gary Nelson Major Sources: Father James M. Sullivan, O.P. and
the Venerable Louis of Granada, Magnificat Year of Faith)

5. Concrete Basis of Morality

Morality is applied ethics. Therefore it is real and concrete. It become real
through the following:
When one encounters a moral experience
Moral experience could ensue when one encounters a moral problem; and
A person encounters a moral problem when the problem injuncts him of moral
obligation.In reality moral obligation is of three degrees namely:
“should”
“must”
“ought”
Any of these degrees singles out to be responsible for his actions but since man
has freedom, it is “ought: that fits in morality. Therefore, when one is caught up in a
moral problem one should face his obligation:
What ought I do?
What must I do?
What should I do?

ACTIONS ACTIONS
Good Bad
Right MAN Wrong
Good (better?) Good (best?)
 Bad (less) Bad (Worse, worst)

As Christians, all basis of morality is dictated by God and His Word. When
rejecting God, we make ourselves the final authority in matters of morality, and there is
no basis for consistent morality applied to everyone. (This is not to say that people who
do not believe the Bible are all criminals; most are not, but they have no basis for their
morality—no real justification for why people should be moral.)
But following the moral guidelines the Bible gives is not done solely out of fear—
though, certainly, there is a recognition of God’s judgement. Rather, people can act
morally when they understand why morals exist, have a relationship with the Foundation
behind them, and realize that morality exists to protect us, not to restrict us. We do not
avoid murder just because we fear God’s judgement, but also because the Bible shows
us why all human lives are valuable, and why murder is truly wrong (and not just
“undesirable”).

ACTIVITIES:
 Online discussion
 Brainstorming on the different topics regarding morality and its existence.
 Written assignments (for submission upon the end of lesson 1. (Maximum 5
sentences only)
Question: Discuss man as the rational animal.
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________.

Short essay for submission upon the end of lesson 1. (Maximum of 5 sentences only)
Question: Why ethics is a part of our daily life?
Answer:
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
_________________________________.

Assessment
 Test
Supplemental Content:
 Online references

Name___________________________________________
Course/Year/Block_________________________________
Date___________________________________________
Chapter 2
Difference between Moral and Non-Moral Standards

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of this module, the students should be able to:
 be able to differentiate between moral and non-moral standards;
 know the meaning of dilemma and identify its three levels; and
 explain why only human beings can be ethical.
Moral Standards versus Non-moral Ones
Why the need to distinguish moral standards from non-moral ones?

It is important to note that different societies have different moral beliefs and that
our beliefs are deeply influenced by our own culture and context. For this reason, some
values do have moral implications, while others don’t. Let us consider, for example, the
wearing of hijab. For sure, in traditional Muslim communities, the wearing of hijab is the
most appropriate act that women have to do in terms of dressing up. In fact, for some
Muslims, showing parts of the woman’s body, such as the face and legs, is despicable.
However, in many parts of the world, especially in Western societies, most people don’t
mind if women barely cover their bodies. As a matter of fact, the Hollywood canon of
beauty glorifies a sexy and slim body and the wearing of extremely daring dress. The
point here is that people in the West may have pitied the Muslim women who wear
hijab, while some Muslims may find women who dress up daringly despicable.
Again, this clearly shows that different cultures have different moral standards.
What is a matter of moral indifference, that is, a matter of taste (hence, non-moral
value) in one culture may be a matter of moral significance in another.

According to many scholars, moral standards have the following characteristics,

namely:
1) moral standards deal with matters we think can seriously injure or benefit humans,
animals, and the environment, such as child abuse, rape, and murder;
2) moral standards are not established or changed by the decisions of authoritative
individuals or bodies. Indeed, moral standards rest on the adequacy of the reasons that
are taken to support and justify them. For sure, we don’t need a law to back up our
moral conviction that killing innocent people is absolutely wrong;
3) moral standards are overriding, that is, they take precedence over other standards
and considerations, especially of self-interest;
4) moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Hence, moral standards are
fair and just; and
5) moral standards are associated with special emotions (such as guilt and shame) and
vocabulary (such as right, wrong, good, and bad).
What is Ethics?
Morality understood in an everyday sense broadly means having some
kind of systems of values, deciding what is right or wrong for oneself. Ethics
however takes a much more systematic and critical approach to the question.
The focus of ethics is indeed the notion of right and wrong, but what it attempts to
explain is why people make certain moral decisions, how we create moral
systems which tell us how to act; some ethical theories also aim to tell us what
moral standards we should choose and how we could achieve the good life.

The difference between a moral issue and a non-moral one.

One of the first tasks of moral philosophy is to be clear on what makes an action
moral and differentiate between moral and non-moral judgments. Clearly, telling a friend
that she should buy the red coat I have just seen in a shop is not a moral judgment,
whereas telling her that she shouldn’t buy a red coat made by child slaves in India is.
But how can we explain the difference between the two?
Moral standards involve the rules people have about the kinds of actions they
believe are morally right and wrong, as well as the values they place on the kinds of
objects they believe are morally good and morally bad.
Non-moral standards refer to rules that are unrelated
to moral or ethical considerations.
Do you think the following examples are moral issues?
 We shouldn’t litter the street.
 You shouldn’t tell white lies.
 We should watch tv.
 We shouldn’t experiment on animals.
 I should get 3 a-levels.

Most people would argue that telling white lies and experimenting on animals are
moral issues whereas getting good grades or watching tv aren’t. However, the same
key term, which has some moral dimension “should” is used in all cases. “Should” has a
prudential use, which means that it is based on careful consideration, something that
has been thought about, but also a moral use, in so far as it makes implicit reference to
some kind of guideline of behaviour or principle. A non-moral action doesn’t involve the
consideration of principles.
The main difference thus, between moral and non-moral issues is that moral issues
are based on values.

A fact is a descriptive statement about the world, but could also be what the law
says, what religions say or what takes place in nature: for example, it is illegal to have
abortions in Ireland, or people are banned from smoking in public places in England. A
value, however, is never intended to be descriptive: it is a judgment about the world and
implies the acceptance or rejection of norms of behavior, and the understanding of
terms such as right or wrong. Philosophers investigate the relationship between facts
and values, which means how we view the world and the moral principles we adopt.
This has led philosophers to make a distinction between moral, immoral and amoral
actions.
An immoral action is that is considered morally wrong.
 A moral action is an action which is considered morally right or good.
A morally neutral action is one that is independent from moral judgment; for
example the prudential use of the verb should when we say you should eat more
fruits.
An amoral action is one performed by someone who is not morally aware, that
is doesn’t have any concepts or understanding of right and wrong.

Are the following actions moral, immoral, amoral ?

a) a lion killing a zebra.
b) A toddler hitting a baby.
c) A 19 year old man stealing from a shop
d) A child accidently firing a gun and injuring a relative.
e) A 40 year old woman hitting her child.
We would probably consider the action of the lion and of the baby as amoral; in
the case of a lion, we would argue that it is not capable of thinking morally, whereas a
baby, a toddler and even a child do not yet under the moral implications of their actions.
What we need to think about, therefore, is the criteria for moral responsibility.
We need to be free to make choices (moral philosophers presume free will).
We need to be rational (that means being able to look at the pros and cons of
decisions, and weigh up consequences, for example);
We need to be self-aware and conscious (in so far as we understand that we
are the ones performing the action)
The act must be intentional.
The act has an effect on others, in so far as it can benefit them or harm them.
The core problem in ethics is however who we define by others. Are the beings in our
moral sphere moral agents like us, or could they be beings incapable of moral choice,
such as animals, people in a coma or newborn babies?
What is considered a moral dilemma?
A moral dilemma is a conflict in which you have to choose between two
or more actions and have moral reasons for choosing each action.
An ethical dilemma is a decision making problem between two
possible moral imperatives, neither of which is unambiguously acceptable or preferable.
It's sometimes called an ethical paradox in moral philosophy.

Moral Dilemma in Action

Imagine you are walking to a store with your friend Gia. She tells you that Kayla,
a student at your school, stole money from the cafeteria and blamed Gia for it. As a
result, Gia was suspended for two weeks and had to pay the money back.
As you and Gia walk into the store, you see Kayla. Gia pushes Kayla slightly and
drops a pair of earrings into Kayla's purse. The alarm sounds once Kayla tries to walk
out of the store. She is pulled aside by security for shoplifting, and they call the police.
Kayla tells them that she is innocent and that Gia dropped the earrings in her purse. Gia
calls Kayla a liar and asks you to back her up.
If you tell the truth, Gia will get in trouble again and will face consequences from
the law and her parents. Kayla will go unpunished for originally stealing money from the
cafeteria. If you do not tell the truth, Kayla will finally be punished for stealing, and Gia
will have her revenge. However, you may be committing a crime by lying to the police
officers, and Kayla's punishment will be more severe than it would have been for
stealing money in the cafeteria.
The police arrive and ask for your version of the story. What do you say?
What is a Moral Dilemma?
In the situation with Gia and Kayla, you have a moral dilemma. By moral, I am
referring to our standards for judging right and wrong. A moral dilemma is a situation
where:
You are presented with two or more actions, all of which you have the ability to
perform.
There are moral reasons for you to choose each of the actions.
What are the 3 level of moral dilemma?
Kohlberg defined three levels of moral development
Preconventional
conventional, and
postconventional.
Story about a man named Heinz
Heinz’s wife had a form of rare cancer and was dying. A doctor told Heinz that a
local chemist had invented a new drug that might save his wife. Heinz was very happy
to hear this and went to talk to the chemist. When Heinz saw the price tag of the new
drug, he was devastated because there was no way he could afford the drug. Heinz
also knew that the price was ten times of the cost of the drug so the chemist s making a
big buck from his drug.
Heinz tried his best to borrow money from his friends and family, but the money
was still not enough. He went back to the chemist and begged the chemist to lower the
price. The chemist refused to do that. Heinz knew that this wife would die without this
new drug, so he broke into the chemist’s office that night and stole the drug.
After telling Heinz’s story to children in various age groups. Kohlberg asked them
what Heinz should do. Based on the children’s responses, Kohlberg classified their
moral reasoning into three levels, each of which contains two distinct sub stages:
A. Pre- conventional level
Obedience
Self interest
At this level, children are only interested in securing their own benefits.
This is their idea of morality. They begin by avoiding punishment and quickly
learn that they may secure other benefits by pleasing others. No other concepts
are available to children this young.

When being asked what Heinz should do, children at this level of moral
development may answer:
 He shouldn’t steal the drug because it’s bad to steal
 He should steal the drug because the chemist is charging too
much.
 He should steal the drug because he’ll feel good that he saves his
wife.
 He shouldn’t steal the drug because he’ll end up in prison.

B. Conventional Level
Conformity
Law and order
This is the stage at which children learn about rules and authority. They
learn that there are certain conventions that govern how they should and should
not behave and learn to obey them.
 When asked what Heinz should do, children at this level of moral development
may answer:
 He should steal the drug because he is a good husband and a
good husband would do anything to save his wife.
 He should not steal the drug because he’s not a criminal.
 He should steal the drug because It’s illegal to steal,
 He should steal the drug to save his wife and after that he should
go to prison for the crime.

C. Post- conventional level

Social contract orientation
Universal human ethics
At this level children have learned that there is a difference between what
is right and what is wrong from a moral perspective, and what is right and what is
wrong to rules. Although they often overlap, there are still times when breaking a
rule is the right thing to do.
When asked what Heinz should do, children at this level of moral development
may answer:
 He should steal the drug because everyone has a right to live
regardless of the law.
 He shouldn’t steal the drug because the chemist deserves to get
paid for his effort to develop the drug.

Please try to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwOQ7ZqDWN4

There are several types of moral dilemmas, but the most common of them
are categorized into the following: 1) epistemic and ontological dilemmas, 2) self-
imposed and world-imposed dilemmas, 3) obligation dilemmas and prohibition
dilemmas, and 4) single agent and multi-person dilemmas.

STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Level/Stage Age Range Description

I.Obedience/punishment infancy No difference between doing the
right thing and avoiding the
punishment
1.a self-interest Pre-school Interest shifts to rewards rather
than punishment effort is made
to secure greatest benefit for
oneself
II. Conformity and School age The “good boy/girl” level. Efforts
Interpersonal Accord is made to secure approval and
maintain friendly relations with
others
II. authority and social School age Orientation toward fixed rules.
order The purpose of morality is
maintaining social order
III. Social Contact Teens Mutual benefit, reciprocity.
Morally right and legally right are
not better for everyone
III.a Universal principle Adulthood Morality is based on principle
that transcend mutual benefit

Criticism of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development.

Critiques argue that Kohlberg’s stages of moral development are Kohlberg

attempt to make his own moral beliefs appear to be psychological facts. It also
seems to have a troubling normative aspect that is seems to suggest that certain
kinds of moral reasoning are better than others.
Maybe Kohlberg stages of moral development describe not a one way
process of psychological growth for an individual but categorization of different
types of moral values. Which may be developed and prioritized differently for
different individuals and moral values.

Foundations of Morality (Sanche)

Care
Liberty
Fairness
Loyalty
Authority
Sanctity
Care- protect others from harm. This foundation underlies virtues of
kindness, gentleness, and nurturance.

Liberty- overcome tyranny and oppression

Fairness- exchanges are reciprocal and proportional, don’t cheat. These

foundation generates, ideas of justice, rights and autonomy.
Loyalty- support our team and our tribe. This foundation underlies virtues
of patriotism and self -sacrifice for the group. (one for all, all for one).
 Authority- respect those above you in hierarchy. This foundation
underlies virtues of leadership and followership including deference to legitimate
authority and respect for traditions.

Sanctity- noble things are good, disgusting things are bad. This
foundation underlies religious notions of striving to live in an elevated, less
carnal, more noble way.

Requirements of Moral Judgement

1. Moral judgements should be logical.
To say that moral judgements should be logical implies several things.
Our moral judgment should follow logically from their premises:
a. the standard
b. the conduct or policy
c. the moral judgement should be such that a and b
logically entail.

Our goal is to be able to support our moral judgments with reasons and
evidence, rather than basing them solely on emotion, sentiment or social or
personal preference
2. Moral judgments should be based on facts.
Adequate moral judgments cannot be made in vacuum. We must gather
as much relevant information as possible before making them.

3. Moral judgments should be based on acceptable moral principles.

We know that moral judgments are based on moral standards. At the
highest level of moral reasoning, these standards embody and express very
general moral principles. Reliable moral judgments must be based on sound
moral principles- principles that can withstand critical scrutiny and rational
criticism.

After knowing that moral judgment should be logical, should be based on

facts, and should appeal to valid moral principles, bearing this in mind can often
help especially when various people are discussing an issue and proposing rival
answers.
In any moral discussion, make sure participants agree about the relevant facts.
Once there is general agreement on factual matters, try to spell out the
moral principles to which people are at least implicitly, appealing. Seeking to
 determine these principles will often help people clarify their own thinking enough
to reach a solution.
Keep the following rough guidelines in mind when handling cases of
conflicting obligations, ideals and effects:
 When two or more moral obligations conflict, choose the stronger one.

 When two or more ideals conflict, or when ideals conflict with

obligations honor the more important one.
 When rival actions will have different results, choose the action that
produces the greater good or the lesser harm.

Written Assignment: (for submission upon the end of the chapter. Maximum of 5
sentences only.)

Question:
Discuss how are values related to morality, and give an example.
Chapter III
The Filipino Way
The students should:
 be able to analyze crucial qualities of the Filipino moral identity in their
own moral experiences; and
 be able to evaluate elements that need to be change.

A nation empowers itself depending on the beliefs, goals, ideals, aspirations, and
values of its citizens. In order to achieve national unity and progress, it needs the full
cooperation of its people. Values as a people and as a nation gives the identity that
differentiates one race from the others. These values may improve or hinder
development and progress but nonetheless, with unity of diversity, development and
progress are achievable.
Every country has its differing values and stereotypes, and the Philippines is no
exception.
We Filipinos firmly believe that our country has the best values in the world.
Filipino value system or Filipino values refers to the set of values or the value
system that a majority of the Filipino have historically held important in their lives. This
Philippine value system includes their own unique assemblage of consistent ideologies,
moral codes, ethical practices, etiquette and cultural and personal values that are
promoted by their society.
Models of the Filipino Values (F. Landa Jocano)
Exogenous model or foreign model- described to be a “legal and formal
model.
Indigenous model or traditional model- described as traditional and non-
formal model” and deeply embedded in the subconscious of the Filipinos.

Elements and composition of Filipino values

Surface values – values readily seen and observed,values exhibited and
esteemed by many Filipinos. The surface values are as follows: hiya (propriety/dignity)
pakikisama (companionship/esteem) and utang na loob (gratitude/solidarity)
 Core values- surface values are considered branches from a single origin- the
actual core value of the Filipino personality- kapwa
Kapwa means “togetherness” and refers to community, or not doing things alone.
Categories of kapwa
1. ibang tao (other people)
2. hindi ibang tao ( not other people)

POSITIVE TRAITS/STRENGHT

1. Hospitality- the Filipino community are very warm and hospitable. They even
give “pasalubong” (welcome gifts) and “pabaon” (farewell gifts) to guests.

2. Respect- the use of po and opo in conversing with older people.

3. Strong family ties/ family orientation- results to the family still being intact
regardless that the children are old and with families of their own.

4. Generosity and Helpfulness- Filipinos are generous people. Even when we

have very little, we always share with those around us.

5. Strong work ethic- Filipinos are hardworking people. They always find
creative ways to earn a living.

6. Love and caring- Filipinos are sweet and most loving people in the world

7. Strong faith in God - their faith in God keeps them united to overcome all the
problems and challenges of life.

8. Flexibility, adaptability and creativity

Studies show that Filipinos often have an aversion to a set of standardized

rules or procedures; they are known to follow a “natural clock” or organic sense
of time- doing things in the time they feel is right. They are present-oriented;
which means that one attends to a task or requirement at the time it is needed
and does not worry much about future engagement.

9. Kagandahang loob

Kagandahang-loób is literally translated as ‘beauty-of-will’and is

synonymous with another term kabutihang-loób or ‘goodness-of-will’. According
to Virgilio Enriquez:
10. Joy and humor
This famous trait is the ability of Filipinos to find humor in everything. It
sheds light on the optimism and positivity of Filipinos in whatever situation they
are in so as to remain determined in going through struggles of challenges. It
serves as a coping technique, the same way a child who has fallen laughs at
himself/herself to hide his/her embarrassment.

NEGATIVE TRAITS/WEAKNESSES
1. Fatalism/ come what may-
This is also synonymous to the phrase “Que sera sera” (Whatever will be,
will be)or “Hakuna Matata” (No Worries). It leaves everything to chance or just let
the circumstances take care of themselves, embracing luck over good reason.
When the Filipino says ‘Bahala na’, several things are implied:
(a)he does not know at that point how things will turn out,
(b)he assumes responsibility nonetheless to try and do something to influence
events,
(c) he assumes such responsibility knowing well that the case looks hopeless,
and
(d) he hopes that luck will help when other things fail. (Miranda,1992,p.218)

2. “Ningas Kugon”
“kugon” is a kind of grass that burns easily when dry but extinguished easily
as well. Like the cogon grass, Filipinos start things with great enthusiasm but
at the first sign of difficulty, the enthusiasm is consumed as fast as it has
ignited.

3. Colonial Mentality
Filipinos prefer foreign-made products instead of patronizing Philippine-made
ones. This result to higher gains for foreign businessmen than local
businessmen. Thus, it motivates Filipino businessmen to improve the quality
of their products to make it more competitive against foreign ones.

4. “Mamaya Na” or “Bukas Na Lang” Habit

A poor habit, a sign of laziness, of leaving for a later time what can be done at
 the moment or today. Thus resulting to stacked workload to be done and then
complain about it.

5. Crab Mentality – a troublesome trait evident in a Filipino where when one

sees the progress of a comrade, the other becomes resentful rather than
happy for the achievement. Rather than to praise, he would highlight
everything negative about that person in an effort to bring him down or
destroy his reputation. They would focus on other’s own faults rather their
own inadequacies.

6. “Patigasan” – most Filipinos find it hard to say “I’m sorry” or “pasensya na”.
Their precious pride always gets the best of them.

7. “Kanya kanya”
– a trait which shows self-centeredness and lack of regard for others. There
are Filipinos who give priority to what they and their families could have,
rather than what they can do to share their wealth and serve others better.
This trait shows poor signs of patriotism, loyalty to community, and concern
for the needs of others.

8. "Fatalism“
An attitude of "what goes around, comes around" or "come what may." We
have a tendency to surrender our future to fate. We often accept bad news or
circumstances without trying to stop or change them.

9. lack of discipline- manifests in casual and relaxed attitude towards time and
space.

10. Kanya-kanya syndrome- Filipinos have a selfish, self-serving attitude, a

feeling of envy and competitiveness toward others.

Passivity (submission to others or to outside influences)

1. Indebtedness “Utang Na Loob” – Filipinos are fond of asking for personal
favors from others. It is ingrained for them to acknowledge the person who
had helped them in times of need. This is a good act but if forced to repay
with something bad to show gratitude then it becomes a problem. “Utang na
loob” must not be paid with unlawful acts.

2. Interpersonal Relationships “Pakikisama”

 – every person wants to belong to a group where they can share ideas, jokes
and feelings but sometimes it becomes a negative thing when the group is the
one that influences the person to do unlawful or foolish things in order to belong
or to gain approval. This is usually evident in the Filipino youth where peer
pressure challenges someone’s morality.
3. Lack of Self-confidence “Hiya” – the Filipinos are shy to boast their
achievements because they might be regarded as show-offs. They prefer to
just hide those achievements and call the idea “being humble”. This is
actually a sign of lack of self-confidence.

These characteristics are a challenge for every Filipino. In order to attain

development and progress, they must value and prioritize their strengths
rather than hide under the clutches of their weaknesses. Embracing the
strengths and conquering their weaknesses will truly help the Filipino nation
go forward in attaining its plans and aspirations for a richer and more fun
Philippines where most foreign countries will be jealous of.
Ways to know you are a Filipino
 You point our lips
 You eat with your hand and have it down as a technique
 You nod your head upwards to greet someone
 You put your foot up on the chair and rest your elbows on your knees while
you eat
 You use a rock to scrub yourself in the shower
 You kiss relatives on the cheek when you enter the room
 You collect items from hotels or restaurants as souvenirs
 Your house has a distinctive aroma
 You smile for no reason
 You go to department stores and try to bargain with th eprice
 you play pusoy or majong
 You prefer to sit in the shade instead of basking in the sun
 You add an unwanted ‘H” to your name: Jhun, Bhoy, Rhon
 You put your hands together in front of you as if to make a path and say
excuse, excuse when you pass in between people or in front of the TV
 You consistently arrive 30 minutes late for events
 You always offer food to your visitors
 You draw a rectangle in the air when asking for a bill which never fails to
baffle the restaurant staff

Vocabulary
 You open and close the lights
  You ask for “colgate” instead of tootpaste
 You ask for “pentel pen” instead of a ballpen or pen
 You refer to refrigerator as ref, frigidare or pridyider
 You say kodakan instead of take a picture
 You say “ha? Instead of what?
 You say “hoy” to get someone’s attention
 You turn around when you hear “ psst”
 You say “cutex” instead of nail polish
 You say “ for a while ‘instead of please hold on the telephone

Written Assignment: (to be submitted upon the end of chapter III.)

Question:
Choose which positive traits of the Filipino that valued you the most and
explain why?

Chapter IV

UNIVERSAL VALUES

The student should be able to:

• be able to Identify universal values; and
• explain why universal values are necessary for human survival.

A value is a universal value if it has the same value or worth for all, or almost all,
people spheres of human value encompass morality, aesthetic preference, human traits
human endeavour, and social order.
Values have major influence on a person’s behaviour and attitude and serve as
broad guidelines on all situations.

The claim for universal values can be understood in two different ways:

First, it could be that something has a universal value when everybody finds it
valuable. According to Isaiah Berlin,…universal values…are values that a great many
human beings in the vast majority of places and situations, at almost all times, do in fact
hold in common, whether consciously and explicitly or as expressed in their behaviour.

Second, something could have universal values when all people have reason to
believe it has value. Amartya Sen interprets the term in this way pointing out that when
Mahatma Gandhi argued non-violence is a universal value, he was arguing that all
people have reason to value non-violence, not that all people currently value non-
violence.
Four Major Categories and more Specific Values

1. Commitment to something greater than itself

To recognize the existence of and be committed to the Supreme Being the

higher principle, transcendent purpose or meaning to one’s existence.
To seek truth, (truths}
To seek justice

From Christianity
You will know the truth and the truth shall set you free. John 8:32
From Judaism
To love the Lord you God and walk in all His ways and to keep His
commandments, and to hold fast to Him, and to serve Him with all your heart
and soul. Joshua 22:5
From Islam
Adore you Lord who created you, as He did those before you. Koran 2:21
From Taoism
Hold to the truth. Tao Te Ching 8

2. Self-respect with humility, self-discipline and acceptance to responsibility

To respect and care for oneself

To not exalt oneself or overindulge, to show humility and avoid gluttony,
greed or other forms of selfishness or self- centeredness
To act in accordance with one’s conscience and to accept responsibility to
one’s behaviour.

From Christianity
Whoever exalts himself will be humbled and whoever humbles himself will be
exalted. Matthew 23:12
From Islam
If you give alms openly, it is well, but if you do it secretly and give o the poor
that is better. Koran 2: 271
From Hinduism
The immature ran after pleasures. Katha Upanishad 11:2
From Taoism
Live for your enter, not your senses. Tao Te Ching 12

CONTENTMENT
It is a state of being happy and satisfied. It’s being satisfied with what you
have, whatever that is.

6 practices that can increase your contentment

  Express gratitude. Intentionally identifying things to be grateful for helps
us recognize just how blessed we are.
 Keep a thankfulness journal
 Be generous/ practice gratitude
 Stay away from what makes you discontent
 Take care of yourself

3. Respect and caring for others. (golden rule)

To recognize the connectedness between all people

To serve humankind and to be helpful to an individual.
To be caring respectful, compassionate, tolerant and forgiving of others
To not hurt others (do not murder, abuse, steal from, cheat or lie to others)

From Christianity
Always treat others as you would have them to treat you. Matthew
7:12
From Judaism
Love your fellow as yourself. Leviticus 19:18
From Islam
Do not take life which God has forbidden except in a just cause. Koran 17:33
From Hinduism
Do not kill. Bhagavad Gita 16:2

4. Caring for other living things and the environment

From Christianity
What man shall there be among you that have one sheep and if it falls unto pit on
the Sabbath day will not lay hold it and let it out. Matthew 12:11
From Judaism
The Lord took the man and placed him into the Garden of Eden to till it and tend
it. Genesis 2:15
From Islam
His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth and the preservation of
them both tires Him not. Koran 2:255
From Taoism
Love the world as yourself and you will be able to care for it properly. Tao
TE Ching 13
From Buddhism
One who is harmless to all living things is noble. Dhammapada 19:15
From Humanism
The planet earth must be considered a single ecosystem. The cultivation and
conservation of nature as a moral value we should perceive as ourselves as
integral to the source of our being in nature. Humanist Manifesto II p6
 S.H. Schwartz, along with a number of psychology colleagues, has carried
out empirical research investigating whether there are universal values and what
those values are. Schwartz defined “values” as conceptions of the desirable that
influence the way people select action and evaluate events. He hypothesised
that universal values would relate to three different types of human needs:

 Biological needs
 Social coordination needs
 Needs related to the welfare and survival of groups

Schwartz’s results from a series of studies that included surveys of more

than 25,000 people in 44 countries with a wide range of different cultural types
suggest that there are 56 specific universal values and 10 types of universal
value.

10 universal values
 Power
 Achievement
 Hedonism
 Stimulation
 Self-direction
 Universalism
 Benevolence
 Tradition
 Conformity
 Security

Below are each of the value types, with the specific related values alongside:

Value Types Specific Values

Power Authority; leadership; dominance; social power; wealth
Achievement Success, capability, ambition, influence, intelligence, self-
respect
Hedonism Pleasure, enjoying life
Stimulation Daring activities; varied life; exciting life
Self-direction Creativity; freedom; independence; curiosity; choosing
own goals
Universalism Broadmindedness; wisdom; social justice; equality; world
at peace; a world of beauty
Benevolence Helpfulness; honesty; forgiveness; loyalty; responsibility ;
friendship
tradition Accepting one’s portion in life; humility devoutness;
respect for tradition
Conformity Self-discipline; obedience
Security Cleanliness; family security; national security; stability for
social order

Written Assignment:( for submission upon the end of this chapter. Maximum of 5
sentences only.)

Question:
Why universal values are necessary for human survival?

Chapter 5
How is Moral Character Developed? & Stages of Moral Development
The students should:
 be able to recall defining moments in their moral formation;
  explain the relationship between individual acts and character; and
 identify and articulate each stage of moral development.

When a person is said to have character, it usually implies they have

distinguishing moral qualities, moral virtues, and moral reasoning abilities. Less
frequently used terms include morality, virtue, and ethics.
A moral person understands right and wrong and willfully chooses what is right; a
virtuous person engages in good behavior intentionally, predictably, and habitually; an
ethical person figures out what is right or good when this is not obvious.

Moral character is an evaluation of an individual’s stable moral qualities. Moral

character begins to develop from birth of a person up to the end of the person’s
existence. As humans gets older, they will continuously learn and adapt different traits
and characteristics that will prove and attest their morality. It is much easier to develop
a person’s moral character in his early childhood as long as a child is still needed to be
educated, guided and enlightened.

Confucius is another prominent figure that has been relative to the modern
development of a moral character. Confucius spends many years thinking about the
concept to human kindness and the development of a character. His teachings were
basically full of ethics on human behavior. He spoke more on the kindness of human
rather than spiritual concepts. He argued that things must be clear to one’s mind in
order to function properly in an environment.

COMPONENTS OF MORAL CHARACTER

Moral behavior Pro social, sharing, donating to charity, telling the
truth
Moral values Believe in moral goods
Moral emotion Guilt, empathy, compassion
Moral reasoning About right and wrong
Moral identity Morality as an aspect of self-image
Moral personality Enduring tendency to act with honesty, altruism,
responsibility
Metamoral Characteristics meaning they make morality
possible even though they are not inherently
moral
Three philosophers who studied moral development:

1. --Nicomachean Ethics is a remarkable work written in 350 B.C by Aristotle.

His work was focused on the importance of development and behavior among
virtuous characters. Aristotle clarified the importance of ethnical behavior, and
how actions play a role in which an individual performs. “Eudaimonia,” is
relative to the how a moral character develops. It is an end in itself. Aristotle
argued that it was known as a goal of a healthy life.

He state “ Excellence of Character” then is a state concerned with choice

lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way
which the man depends on excess and that which depend on defect.

A character is a state, whereas, the actions determine the way the person
acts. A virtuous character is not a feeling or mere tendency to behave in a certain
way. Aristotle makes an argument about different virtues. Virtues relate to the
feelings and actions from each individual.

2. Confucius is another prominent figure that has been relative to the modern
development of a moral character. His teachings were basically full of ethnics
on human behaviors. He spoke more on the kindness of human rather than
spiritual concepts.

Confucius argued that things must be clear to one’s mind in order to

function properly in an environment. Confucius argues that the life of an
individual is to protect one’s virtue. The acts of that individual must be preserved
to act to the good. Another saying that substantiate Confucius argument is IV.25
(Eastern), it states, “Virtue is not left to stand alone. He who practices it will have
neighbors.”

3. Lastly, another prominent figure in the world of philosophy is Plato. Plato’s

writings such as Apology demonstrate dramatic accounts of the events leading to
his death, as well as illustrating matters of concerns, ethical living, and clarity of
thought and expression.

“Apology” means “legal defense of trial.” Plato offers to discuss about the
defense of philosophy as a way of life. A soul is part of a life, whereas, the soul
determines the things we do everyday. In Phaedo, Plato argued that the soul is
“something”, rather than a sense of “harmony.” Unlike harmony, the soul exists,
which is more active than others. Souls are more virtuous, which harmony does
not pertain to. Soul pre-exists which harmony does not.

To sum it up, Philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle argued that the
cognitive and affective states were important. .These philosophers agree that
happiness links to virtue. They suggested everyone who is happy is one who is
brave, restraint, and understanding. However, it is difficult to understand. Plato
and Aristotle both agree that a positive moral character involves more than a
Socrates’ understanding of the superior. Both agree that it is important to have
harmony between the cognitive and the affective materials from a person.

SIX FACTORS INFLUENCING MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Family The first influencer on children’s moral
development
School The relationships children develop in schools
become critical to their positive development
(Skiner, 1964). The way they feel towards peers,
teachers, staffs and leaders at school will affect
their moral life.
Peer groups Peer interaction and aggression behaviors that
children do will affect their moral developments.
Society and Culture Moral development prevents people from acting
on unchecked urges, instead considering what is
right for society and good for others.
Age Children develop a sense of morality as they
grow.
Sex The relation of sex, gender and personality,
influences moral development.

Based on Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development, American

psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) developed his own theory of moral
development in children. According to Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development,
there are 6 stages of moral development, known as Kohlberg’s stages of moral
development.
 STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Pre conventional
Conventional
Post conventional
Critiques of Kohlberg’s Theory

Kohlberg has been criticized for his assertion that women seem to be
deficient in their moral reasoning abilities when compared to men. Carol Gilligan
(1982), a research assistant of Kohlberg, criticized her former mentor’s theory
because it was based so narrowly on research using white, upper-class men and
boys. She argued that women are not deficient in their moral reasoning and
instead proposed that males and females reason differently: girls and women
focus more on staying connected and maintaining interpersonal relationships.

Kohlberg’s theory has been criticized for emphasizing justice to the

exclusion of other values, with the result that it may not adequately address the
arguments of those who value other moral aspects of actions. Similarly, critics
argue that Kohlberg’s stages are culturally biased—that the highest stages in
particular reflect a westernized ideal of justice based on individualistic thought.
This is biased against those that live in non-Western societies that place less
emphasis on individualism.

Another criticism of Kohlberg’s theory is that people frequently

demonstrate significant inconsistency in their moral judgements. This often
occurs in moral dilemmas involving drinking and driving or business situations
where participants have been shown to reason at a lower developmental stage,
typically using more self-interest driven reasoning (i.e., stage two) than authority
and social order obedience driven reasoning (i.e., stage four). Critics argue that
Kohlberg’s theory cannot account for such inconsistencies.

Problems with Kohlberg's Methods

1. The dilemmas are artificial (i.e., they lack ecological validity).Most of the
dilemmas are unfamiliar to most people (Rosen, 1980).

However, Kohlberg’s subjects were aged between 10 and 16. They have
never been married, and never been placed in a situation remotely like the one in
the story. How should they know whether Heinz should steal the drug?

2. The sample is biased.

According to Gilligan (1977), because Kohlberg’s theory was based on an all-

male sample, the stages reflect a male definition of morality (it’s androcentric).
Mens' morality is based on abstract principles of law and justice, while womens'
is based on principles of compassion and care.

3. The dilemmas are hypothetical (i.e., they are not real)

 In a real situation, what course of action a person takes will have real
consequences – and sometimes very unpleasant ones for themselves. Would
subjects reason in the same way if they were placed in a real situation? We just
don’t know.

The fact that Kohlberg’s theory is heavily dependent on an individual’s

response to an artificial dilemma brings a question to the validity of the results
obtained through this research. People may respond very differently to real life
situations that they find themselves in than they do with an artificial dilemma
presented to them in the comfort of a research environment.

4. Poor research design

The way in which Kohlberg carried out his research when constructing this
theory may not have been the best way to test whether all children follow the
same sequence of stage progression. His research was cross-sectional, meaning
that he interviewed children of different ages to see what level of moral
development they were at.

A better way to see if all children follow the same order through the stages
would have been to carry out longitudinal research on the same children.

Problems with Kohlberg's Theory

1. Are there distinct stages of moral development?
Kohlberg claims that there are, but the evidence does not always support
this conclusion. For example, a person who justified a decision on the basis of
principled reasoning in one situation (post-conventional morality stage 5 or 6)
would frequently fall back on conventional reasoning (stage 3 or 4) with another
story. In practice, it seems that reasoning about right and wrong depends more
upon the situation than upon general rules.

2. Does moral judgment match moral behavior?

Kohlberg never claimed that there would be a one to one correspondence

between thinking and acting (what we say and what we do) but he does suggest
that the two are linked. However, Bee (1994) suggests that we also need to take
account of:
a) Habits that people have developed over time.
b) Whether people see situations as demanding their participation.
c) The costs and benefits of behaving in a particular way.
d) Competing motive such as peer pressure, self-interest and so on.
3. Is justice the most fundamental moral principle?
 This is Kohlberg’s view. However, Gilligan (1977) suggests that the
principle of caring for others is equally important. Furthermore, Kohlberg claims
that the moral reasoning of males has been often in advance of that of females.

Written Assignment (for submission upon the end of this chapter.)

Question:
Explain the relationship between individual acts and character.

The 7 steps of moral reasoning model

The students should:

 be able to check real-life cases against the 7-step model, a model that
uses reason and impartiality.

Seven Steps of moral reasoning model

1. Gather the facts
 Don’t jump to conclusions without the facts
 Questions to ask: who, what, where, when, how and why.
 However, facts may be difficult to find because of the uncertainty often
found around ethical issues.
 Some facts are not available
 Assemble as many facts as possible before proceeding
 Clarify what assumptions you are making

2. Define the ethical issue(s)

 Don’t jump to solutions without first identifying the ethical issue(s) in the
situation.
 Define the ethical basis for the issue you want to focus on.
 There may be multiple ethical issues-focus on one major at a time.
3. Identify the affected parties
Identify all of the stakeholders
 Who are the primary or direct stakeholders?
 Who are the secondary or indirect stakeholders?
Why are they stakeholders for the issue?
 Perspective-taking- try to see things through the eyes of those individuals
affected.
4. Identify the consequences
 Think about potential positive and negative consequences for affected
parties by the decision (focus on primary stakeholders to simplify analysis
until you become comfortable with the process.
  What are the magnitude of the consequences and the probability that the
consequences will happen.
 Short term vs. long term consequences- will decision be valid over time.
 Broader systemic consequences- tied to symbolic and secrecy
 Symbolic consequences- each decision sends a message
 Secrecy consequences- what are the consequences if the decision or
action become public?
 Did you consider relevant cognitive barriers/biases?
 Consider what your decision would be based only on consequences- then
move on and see if it is similar given other considerations.
5. Identify the relevant principles, rights and justice issues
 Obligations should be thought of in terms of principles and rights involved.
A. What obligations are created because of particular ethical principles
you might use in the situation?
examples: do no harm; do unto others as you would have them do
unto you; do what would have anyone in your shoes do in the given
context.
B. What obligations are created because of specific rights of the
stakeholders?
 What rights are more basic vs. secondary in nature? Which
help protect individual’s basic autonomy?
 What types of rights are involved- negative or positive?

C. What concepts of justice (fairness are relevant- distributive or

procedural justice?
 Did you consider any relevant cognitive barriers/biases?
 Formulate the appropriate decision or action based solely on
the above analysis of these obligations.
6. Consider your character and integrity
 Consider what your relevant community members would consider to be the kind
of decision that an individual of integrity would make in this situation.
 What specific virtues are relevant in the situation?
 Disclosure rule- what would you do if the New YORK Times reported your action
and everyone was to read it.
7. Monitor and modify
 Ethical decision-makers monitor the effects of their choices. If they are
not producing the intended results, or are causing additional unintended and
undesirable results, they re-assess the situation and make new decisions.